What to say... Well, this movie simply did not do it for me. Yes the performances and the accolades for Natalie Portman and Mila Kunis are well deserved and all in high order: the dances, characters and the acting is spectacular and spot on. BUT the story + execution is what is at miss here and what really spoiled the movie for me. The whole movie you simply do not know what is reality and what is fiction of her imagination. So the whole movie you are stuck sitting there and thinking: "Is this for real or is this her mind- yes it must be her mind because it is just so simply messed up..." What is exciting about that? The art of the movies is to portray it in such a clever way that while you know something is a mind trip you still know who is having it and why, and you can still "pretend" or get into the role why they are having it - but in this movie there is nothing that the viewer can identify as reality vs the psychosis of her mind so everything becomes psychotic and fake. And that for me is a bad movie. Again, performances were spectacular but the storyline and especially the execution in my view was a huge flop and the reason for making this movie a sub far flick.
Reviews
36 Reviews
The Kids Are All Right
(2010)
OK but quite a few holes!
14 November 2010
Warning: Spoilers
The preview we saw was pretty funny and chill; unfortunately the best lines of the film were in the trailer so that was a but of a buzz kill: the rest of the film is less comical and more like a drama/ modern indie something. The movie itself and the premise is plausible and the performances by everyone are OK (more so by the kids than grownups actually) - BUT the 2 big holes end up almost swallowing the whole movie for me and take away much of its allure: #1= there was simply no serious chemistry between Jules and Paul and they seem to hook up rather randomly and this just makes no sense: there was really no indication that he was smitten by her to pursue something with such serious consequences (breaking up a family and losing touch with his kids), and same from her end. Again while it's understandable that she may find him attractive, her relationship with Nic wasn't going swimmingly and Paul is the father of her kids so there's maybe that mental attraction the movie does not really even explore these themes - if they did it would have made the cheating part more believable and the movie itself more smart/enjoyable. #2 = Jules and Nic's relationship seems mended so quickly and rather effortlessly: Jules just makes a speech and that's that - again, no deep heart-wrenching apologies and more of resistance from Nick - I guess we are to assume "Oh well, they're lesbians, they just kiss and make up!" Uhm, I don't think so.
Chloe
(2009)
a cold attempt at something sexy and intriguing
16 September 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Well, from the beginning you know the movie isn't going to end so well for the people involved; someone's gonna get hurt- real bad: the family and/or the escort - and that's just the first fault of this film: its storyline. It is very predictable and creates such a mess on purpose. Even the part where we are not sure if the husband is really cheating on her (in which case she is sabotaging a marriage) or if the husband is cheating she still loses is predictable and an easy way of setting up the fall. But just so not to leave anyone out, the whole family is scarred in the end while the prostitute (naturally) dies. Although, strangely in the closing shots of the film it would appear the family seems closer (not sure why or how - after all the wife and the son slept with a prostitute) but it looks like they will be OK - as if saying since she was really the cause of all the drama she deserved to die and all is absolved? Now the problem is also when they set up a film in such a way where the premise is forced: we are led to believe that the husband is cheating due to what we are given to see: very un-affectionate, slight flirting with those around him, vague cell messages from his female students (like who texts their profs?), no connection or attempt at closeness with his wife: we know these may all be incidental and he not be cheating but what else is the wife to think? Oh but yes, we are never to judge the book by its cover: well maybe those who design covers should think about designing them better!
At any point this suspense drama/erotic thriller really does not deliver: apart from few somewhat sexy scenes offered by the lead characters there is really no real connection, suspense (unless you count eagerness till the end of the film) or intrigue - it is a cold attempt at something sexy and exciting and probably serves as a good example that just because something was a successful book does not mean it can easily be a successful movie! What makes books so good is that our own imagination is almost always better than what the film-makers portray.
At any point this suspense drama/erotic thriller really does not deliver: apart from few somewhat sexy scenes offered by the lead characters there is really no real connection, suspense (unless you count eagerness till the end of the film) or intrigue - it is a cold attempt at something sexy and exciting and probably serves as a good example that just because something was a successful book does not mean it can easily be a successful movie! What makes books so good is that our own imagination is almost always better than what the film-makers portray.
Inception
(2010)
a tad too confusing?
25 July 2010
Warning: Spoilers
As a huge Matrix fan I felt Inception was stealing a few pages out of the Matrix script - the other times I felt either confused trying to follow the storyline. Mind you there were some really good special effects, the premise is decent (albeit predictable at times) but in general I think I expected a bit more from this flick. I mean the theory of illusion vs reality via sleep is pretty cool but the way they were presented lacked: some were a bit too far fetched and some simply hard to believe. It would have also helped if some concepts were explained more clearly and especially how the sleep machine really works. I feel there were too many holes left un-explained. Perhaps my I need to see it again to really appreciate it, but perhaps it simply needed more polishing out to be a masterpiece.
Burn After Reading
(2008)
Coen Bros back on track!
30 September 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I donno about others, but I loved this movie! It was kinda hard to guess what it was going to be about from the TV previews but being Coen Bros and Frances McDormand fan, and given that Brad Pitt rarely chooses bad movie roles I figured if nothing the movie should be somewhat entertaining. And true enough it was more than that! Malkovich and Tilda Swinton only add to the amazing talented star power and make this movie a one crazy adventure. I don't want to reveal too much about the movie because even those little tidbits of plot are exactly what makes it so much fun, but I will say that it has the following: this movie is funny, silly, honest and tho far-fetched curiously and realistically believable- which is what makes it that much satirical, tragic and comical. All of the characters have their own issues and quirks and carry the weight of the movie fantastically - you never feel there is only 1 or 2 main characters; there are at least 5 or 6. I seriously cannot say enough about the talented cast which made all those characters come to life.
The Promotion
(2008)
in the voice of Officer Barbrady: "move along, nothing to see here"
4 September 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Seriously, what a let-down. It started off great, story was OK (tho overdone it never gets boring cuz it's so real) and characters were decent -although John Reilly's character kept switching (I don't think the writer/director knew what he wanted exactly). But that basically is the problem with this movie: the two assistant managers compete for the main managerial spot at a new location opening soon BUT instead of quirky and witty games, tricks and etc to play on each other NEITHER of them are bad guys so neither of them are doing it... if there are some mix-ups it's by pure accident or slips of tongue. I guess it was to prove that there can still be competition without intentional malice which can be eventful and funny, but here's the thing: it wasn't funny! Not once did I laugh out loud, let alone thought: oh that's clever! The only way The Promotion could work is for the writer/director to get into a time machine and travel to mid 90s before Empire Records and Clerks came out, because guess what, they've already done it!
Boy A
(2007)
can he be seen without the crime?
4 September 2008
Warning: Spoilers
So when can an ex convict be forgiven for the committed crimes- if ever? What is the appropriate punishment- Does it depend how severe the crime was, or how young the person is, or a mix of both? And how do we determine if the person in question is really rehabilitated and has fully repented for their crimes and is ready to re-enter the society? And even if the sincerity of the repent is clear, can it ever make up for the pain and suffering caused and especially the life taken away by their actions? Most of all, can this person ever be forgiven and seen apart from the crime they did? "A Boy" makes audience think about all of these questions - but if this wasn't enough, it adds another element to the difficulty: the ex con was a child when he committed the crime, ie killed a girl with his friend. Now the movie is beautifully shot, there's plenty of character development and covers all of the right bases, but it clearly sets of from the pre-established parameter where the character in question (Jack) has clearly repented for his crime - thanks in large to his social worker/mentor. But as we watch this gentle, sincere young man re-enter society, shyly order from a restaurant for the first time, eagerly makes first friends, does noble/heroic deeds, and meets his first gf, we never for once forget that he killed a little girl and the whole time you wonder: how would I react if I knew...
People in his life do not know and accept him as a great guy, which I suppose he is, but once the truth comes out will they continue to? Will they be able to see him for the person he's become, will they think it was all an act/ charade, or will they simply not be able to see past his gruesome crime committed despite the new rehabilitated self? Well, suppose you'll have to watch the movie to find out, but best of all, it will also make you wonder and evaluate what you would do.
People in his life do not know and accept him as a great guy, which I suppose he is, but once the truth comes out will they continue to? Will they be able to see him for the person he's become, will they think it was all an act/ charade, or will they simply not be able to see past his gruesome crime committed despite the new rehabilitated self? Well, suppose you'll have to watch the movie to find out, but best of all, it will also make you wonder and evaluate what you would do.
Traitor
(2008)
not bad if you happen to come across it
3 September 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Summary above describes the movie to the core; Samir Horn (Don Cheadle) a devout Muslim and a Special Operations officer is caught in between an Islamic terrorist organization, his own religious beliefs/principles and the person he used to be. We follow the US anti-terrorist squad that tries to track him down, understand his past and what he's really up to- just like us the audience.
As the movie evolves it raises many important debate issues which I think is the real strength and appeal of the movie: they tackle the meaning of the word terrorist, the political/social history and aspects that make one join such an organization and obviously the use and misuse of religious terminology in the favor of one party against the other. While one character pointed out "America has bombs but we have Allah (God) on our side" I could not ignore that staples of America "in God we trust" and "God bless America" is practically identical to the Muslim ideals. In a different segment another character explains "Once upon time Americans were terrorists to the British" and you stop and think that terrorism is not something Bush invented in the aftermath of 9/11 (although he surely tried really hard to make it appear way) but it has been in use and practice since there were invaders and crusaders. Add religious fanatics to the mix, modern weapons arsenal, political gains and media sensationalism and you get a new breed of terrorism and our modern day reality. Overall, Traitor it is a good movie that makes you think about all of these.
As the movie evolves it raises many important debate issues which I think is the real strength and appeal of the movie: they tackle the meaning of the word terrorist, the political/social history and aspects that make one join such an organization and obviously the use and misuse of religious terminology in the favor of one party against the other. While one character pointed out "America has bombs but we have Allah (God) on our side" I could not ignore that staples of America "in God we trust" and "God bless America" is practically identical to the Muslim ideals. In a different segment another character explains "Once upon time Americans were terrorists to the British" and you stop and think that terrorism is not something Bush invented in the aftermath of 9/11 (although he surely tried really hard to make it appear way) but it has been in use and practice since there were invaders and crusaders. Add religious fanatics to the mix, modern weapons arsenal, political gains and media sensationalism and you get a new breed of terrorism and our modern day reality. Overall, Traitor it is a good movie that makes you think about all of these.
Street Kings
(2008)
don't waste your money.... simply re-watch the Training Day....
16 April 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I really liked Training Day and actually hoped Street Kings would be as half as decent. Too bad I also didn't know Street Kings was written/directed by the same guy as the Training Day making it a sure set up for a disaster. Why on earth would he even think he can pull off another cop thriller is beyond me (more money perhaps?) but there I was, unfortunately watching the consequences of it.
The story is more than predictable - tough cop Keanu with plenty of issues of his own gets involved with the big boys and the cover-up of something dirty within the LAPD. (Wow, what a creative plot, I'd drawn in already) On his side he has his Captain (Forest Whitaker) who also seems to be above the law and definitely overacting the remnants of his role in the Last King of Scotland (another annoying minus for the movie). Through series of unfortunate events and with his badge on the line, Keanu has a change of heart and goes after the hand that feeds him willing to uncover who was behind a murder of one of his old partners Det. Washington and why. The whole change of heart seemed rather unlikely and we never get to really know Keanu's character or how this twist happens. But for all intensive purposes of the plot it does, and within 45 min into the movie, we already know all the answers: why the murder and the cover-up (laundering of the dirty money aka operation cookie-jar) and we know who's behind it all (the only person who has all the power in the movie: Captain Forest Whitaker). The End.
But no, sadly you are forced to sit through another 50 minutes pretending something different might happen. But it doesn't. After bunch of silly twists and turns, lots of gun action and near-death experiences, Keanu finally learns what the audience already knew: the Captain is behind it all. He shoots the bad guy, cleans off his name and yes, gets to go back home to a sexy girl. Awww... if that's just not the perfect feel-good movie, then I dunno what is. Yeah Hollywood, you've done it again- another pointless movie for the masses!
The story is more than predictable - tough cop Keanu with plenty of issues of his own gets involved with the big boys and the cover-up of something dirty within the LAPD. (Wow, what a creative plot, I'd drawn in already) On his side he has his Captain (Forest Whitaker) who also seems to be above the law and definitely overacting the remnants of his role in the Last King of Scotland (another annoying minus for the movie). Through series of unfortunate events and with his badge on the line, Keanu has a change of heart and goes after the hand that feeds him willing to uncover who was behind a murder of one of his old partners Det. Washington and why. The whole change of heart seemed rather unlikely and we never get to really know Keanu's character or how this twist happens. But for all intensive purposes of the plot it does, and within 45 min into the movie, we already know all the answers: why the murder and the cover-up (laundering of the dirty money aka operation cookie-jar) and we know who's behind it all (the only person who has all the power in the movie: Captain Forest Whitaker). The End.
But no, sadly you are forced to sit through another 50 minutes pretending something different might happen. But it doesn't. After bunch of silly twists and turns, lots of gun action and near-death experiences, Keanu finally learns what the audience already knew: the Captain is behind it all. He shoots the bad guy, cleans off his name and yes, gets to go back home to a sexy girl. Awww... if that's just not the perfect feel-good movie, then I dunno what is. Yeah Hollywood, you've done it again- another pointless movie for the masses!
Black Eyed Dog
(2006)
not so bad
13 February 2008
Warning: Spoilers
If you get your hands on this Canadian production do not pass it- It is nothing spectacular, however, it has some mystery, drama and soul-searching that keeps you watching till the end. It tells the tale of a small town woman Betty and her mid-life crisis: crappy waitressing job, violent ex boyfriend, separated parents and a sister with issues of her own. Amidst of all of this, their small town is plagued by a series of murders with a serial killer on the loose.
Again, the movie could have been better executed in terms of plot and some other aspects of its storyline, however overall, it was quite original and the actors did a super good job portraying some very complex characters. And the message at the end of the movie is not so bad either- you may not conquer the world, but be true to yourself and do the best you can with what you have to work with.
Again, the movie could have been better executed in terms of plot and some other aspects of its storyline, however overall, it was quite original and the actors did a super good job portraying some very complex characters. And the message at the end of the movie is not so bad either- you may not conquer the world, but be true to yourself and do the best you can with what you have to work with.
Once
(I) (2007)
you need to see it to appreciate it
17 December 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Describing what this movie is about is not enough to draw an average person to see it: after all it is basically about a guy and a girl who are brought together through the power of music, and a little help of the hoover vacuum. Naturally there is more to the story- and that something is the chemistry, honesty and the beauty of music which people have to see and feel for themselves.
'Once' is set in Ireland and revolves around a busker/artist (Glen Hansard) and a slightly eccentric girl (Markéta Irglová) who while passing by is drawn by his heart-felt voice and song. The guy and the girl clearly share a connection and a crush, but we learn that both have a history/ issues that prevents them from starting a romance- He is still in love with his ex gf who lives in London, while she is actually married and has a daughter. Still they continue their friendship and musical collaboration which results in his debut album. In a way, the movie is very realistic: Sometimes love is not enough- and most times love is just too complicated. Still, love can be beautiful when true emotion is felt.
To say that Once is an independent movie is an over-statement: budget must have been under $200,000 but its shooting style and ambiance honestly made the experience that much more real and personal. The music was heartfelt and really beautiful- the two main characters are both actual musicians who wrote and sang all of their songs in the movie and on the album. Another tidbit of information I learned after watching the movie was that the guy and the girl fell in love during the shooting and ended up dating afterwards! That just makes the movie all the more special and realistic: real heart-felt music and real romance, what can be better? (Free popcorn perhaps ;)
'Once' is set in Ireland and revolves around a busker/artist (Glen Hansard) and a slightly eccentric girl (Markéta Irglová) who while passing by is drawn by his heart-felt voice and song. The guy and the girl clearly share a connection and a crush, but we learn that both have a history/ issues that prevents them from starting a romance- He is still in love with his ex gf who lives in London, while she is actually married and has a daughter. Still they continue their friendship and musical collaboration which results in his debut album. In a way, the movie is very realistic: Sometimes love is not enough- and most times love is just too complicated. Still, love can be beautiful when true emotion is felt.
To say that Once is an independent movie is an over-statement: budget must have been under $200,000 but its shooting style and ambiance honestly made the experience that much more real and personal. The music was heartfelt and really beautiful- the two main characters are both actual musicians who wrote and sang all of their songs in the movie and on the album. Another tidbit of information I learned after watching the movie was that the guy and the girl fell in love during the shooting and ended up dating afterwards! That just makes the movie all the more special and realistic: real heart-felt music and real romance, what can be better? (Free popcorn perhaps ;)
La Vie En Rose
(2007)
should have been better- Edith deserves so!
17 December 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This movie could have been and should have been much better executed, especially when the main character is Edith Piaf who led such a turbulent and eventful life. But that is the problem with biographical movies: they are either a hit or miss; but what makes them great is not only to portray events and characters accurately, but a) not to make it seem like a boring educational biography and b) to make it easy to follow for those who don't know much about the topic at hand while still making it exciting for those who do. And this unfortunately was not the case in La Vie en Rose.
I found that the chronological storyline and the timeline were awfully orchestrated; the movie kept switching to scenes from her childhood to old age, back to childhood and all over the place rather abruptly. Few times this was done very well, but others just destroyed the mood. For people that don't know her life story, the movie makes Edith look like a melodramatic, over-the-top alcoholic singer with penciled eyebrows- and this is hardly an accurate representation and only half of the story. Her rise from poverty to stardom was also overlooked- it came off as a simple switch without the true emotional impact it should leave on the viewers. The ending (last 15 min) on the other hand was superb, but it only made one realize how much better the rest of the movie should have been too. They could have explored her personal life more: even though he was her greatest love, she had more lovers and love affairs than just boxer Marcel Cerdan. The mood of the Paris, Europe and all the changes through the decades of her career (40s, 50s) should have been better captured- it felt like they were simply telling us a one dimensional version of her life with only half the story and even less emotion. Shame.
Needless to say, the acting hand was superb- Marion Cotillard deserves all the praise (and perhaps an Oscar too).
I found that the chronological storyline and the timeline were awfully orchestrated; the movie kept switching to scenes from her childhood to old age, back to childhood and all over the place rather abruptly. Few times this was done very well, but others just destroyed the mood. For people that don't know her life story, the movie makes Edith look like a melodramatic, over-the-top alcoholic singer with penciled eyebrows- and this is hardly an accurate representation and only half of the story. Her rise from poverty to stardom was also overlooked- it came off as a simple switch without the true emotional impact it should leave on the viewers. The ending (last 15 min) on the other hand was superb, but it only made one realize how much better the rest of the movie should have been too. They could have explored her personal life more: even though he was her greatest love, she had more lovers and love affairs than just boxer Marcel Cerdan. The mood of the Paris, Europe and all the changes through the decades of her career (40s, 50s) should have been better captured- it felt like they were simply telling us a one dimensional version of her life with only half the story and even less emotion. Shame.
Needless to say, the acting hand was superb- Marion Cotillard deserves all the praise (and perhaps an Oscar too).
Cat on a Hot Tin Roof
(1958)
a classic
13 December 2007
Warning: Spoilers
This is what movies from that era were truly about- great acting, splendid character development, and of course a strong plot to hold it all.
Brick (Paul Newman) is an ex football player/ sports announcer drinking heavily and refusing affections of his wife Maggie (Elizabeth Taylor) who is still very much in love with him. They seem to have a secret that is the key to his recent binge drinking as well as their marital problems.
They have come to the huge family gathering to celebrate Brick's father's (Big Daddy) 65th Birthday, but also to celebrate the good news about his cancer problems- or so everyone is told. Brick's brother is also there with his nosy wife and their 5 spoiled chubby children Maggie cleverly nicknames "no neck monsters".
With Brick's drinking escalating, Maggie's emotions overflowing, as well as the real news about Big Daddy's health, all the lies, secrets and the kniving reaches it's maximum and emotions spill out. Will the family and our main characters find peace? I guess you will just have to watch it to see it for yourself! Again, the acting is great- everyone does a splendid job to get into the characters and the story itself is also crucial- after all, every family has problems and everyone can in some way relate to the story.
The best line of the movie: Big Daddy talking to Brick "You're just feeling sorry for yourself. Self-pity! You're a thirty-year-old kid. Soon you'll be a fifty-year-old kid. Pretendin' you're hearin' cheers when there ain't any. Dreamin' and drinkin' your life away. Heroes in the real world live twenty-four hours a day, not just two hours in a game. Mendacity! You won't live with mendacity! Well, you're an expert at it. The truth is pain and sweat and payin' bills and makin' love to a woman you don't love any more. Truth is dreams that don't come true, and nobody prints your name in the paper till you die."
Brick (Paul Newman) is an ex football player/ sports announcer drinking heavily and refusing affections of his wife Maggie (Elizabeth Taylor) who is still very much in love with him. They seem to have a secret that is the key to his recent binge drinking as well as their marital problems.
They have come to the huge family gathering to celebrate Brick's father's (Big Daddy) 65th Birthday, but also to celebrate the good news about his cancer problems- or so everyone is told. Brick's brother is also there with his nosy wife and their 5 spoiled chubby children Maggie cleverly nicknames "no neck monsters".
With Brick's drinking escalating, Maggie's emotions overflowing, as well as the real news about Big Daddy's health, all the lies, secrets and the kniving reaches it's maximum and emotions spill out. Will the family and our main characters find peace? I guess you will just have to watch it to see it for yourself! Again, the acting is great- everyone does a splendid job to get into the characters and the story itself is also crucial- after all, every family has problems and everyone can in some way relate to the story.
The best line of the movie: Big Daddy talking to Brick "You're just feeling sorry for yourself. Self-pity! You're a thirty-year-old kid. Soon you'll be a fifty-year-old kid. Pretendin' you're hearin' cheers when there ain't any. Dreamin' and drinkin' your life away. Heroes in the real world live twenty-four hours a day, not just two hours in a game. Mendacity! You won't live with mendacity! Well, you're an expert at it. The truth is pain and sweat and payin' bills and makin' love to a woman you don't love any more. Truth is dreams that don't come true, and nobody prints your name in the paper till you die."
Enchanted
(2007)
great for kids- which is all that matters I suppose
3 December 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Enchanted is a movie that combines half animation and half real life- which was quite a neat concept striking many funny scenes: like when live rats and pigeons are helping Giselle make her dress and fix around the house (although I did not like numerous shots of cockroaches in the bathtub nor do I remember cockroaches ever helping Cindarella or Giselle in any animated Disney movie). At any rate the movie starts in animation with Giselle falling in love with her prince charming (Prince Edward) and after 5 minutes of knowing each other they are to be wed. However, Edward's evil stepmother Queen Narissa (Susan Sarandon) wants to remain on the throne and has other plans for Giselle mainly dispatching of her in some way- in this case pushing her into a deep well that leads to present day New York. The scenes of Giselle in New York were quite funny she barely survives the traffic, can't find anyone to help her and gets her tiara stolen by a homeless man. Eventually she is helped by Robert (Patrick Dempsey) and his little daughter Morgan, and even though Robert is little freaked out by her appearance and mannerism, (and rightly so) he helps her around New York as well as to find her the prince charming (Edward) who also arrives to New York looking for Giselle. Now to add to the complication- Robert has a long time girlfriend who suspects Robert is cheating on her with wacky Giselle, Prince Edward thinks Robert is stealing Giselle from him, Evil Witch's helper is in town trying to poison Giselle, and as she is getting to know Robert Giselle realizes that there is more to a price charming than being valiant and heroic chemistry is a big part of it.
I found Patrick Dempsey a bit dry (I could not shake off the McDreamy role), and Susan Surandon was practically useless (she has literally 5 minutes worth of dialogue). On the other hand Amy Adams was awesome as Giselle and she had most of the movie's memorable funny lines.
I found Patrick Dempsey a bit dry (I could not shake off the McDreamy role), and Susan Surandon was practically useless (she has literally 5 minutes worth of dialogue). On the other hand Amy Adams was awesome as Giselle and she had most of the movie's memorable funny lines.
Control
(2007)
Deep and Poetic
3 December 2007
Warning: Spoilers
There is really no other way to describe this movie but as that.
I really had no super high expectations going to see Control, seeing I only knew 2 of Joy Division's songs: Transmission and She's Lost Control (which was the inspiration for the title), and practically knew nothing about the band or Ian's turbulent life- let alone that he committed suicide. But suppose that's what made the movie even more enjoyable and surprisingly spectacular.
Sam Riley who portrays Ian Curtis was superb and spot on, and suppose so was Samantha Morton as his wife Debbie (even though her role was not as heroic and was actually quite annoying in some parts of the movie- but suppose that was her role so kudos for doing it so well).
I also loved the fact that the movie was shot in black and white which added to the poetic landscapes, enhanced the mood and the effects of the time it was set in. In a lot of autobiographical movies on music singing and performing scenes can be the demise of the film (either cuz the actor is not as good as portraying the performer or it doesn't feel real, or is simply comes of as out of place and forced), but in this movie the music scenes were perfectly collaborated and performed by everyone involved.
Once again, Sam Riley was spectacular at both Ian's impersonation of movements and voice, as well as his mannerism and the turbulent personal life- battling with responsibilities of family (leaving his loveless marriage with Debbie for another woman), the growing pressures of band and performances into which he pours all of himself, and of course the struggle with frequent seizures that threaten to take over his life completely.
Overall, I would recommend this movie not only to music fans but anyone looking for a deep, realistic and moving picture.
I really had no super high expectations going to see Control, seeing I only knew 2 of Joy Division's songs: Transmission and She's Lost Control (which was the inspiration for the title), and practically knew nothing about the band or Ian's turbulent life- let alone that he committed suicide. But suppose that's what made the movie even more enjoyable and surprisingly spectacular.
Sam Riley who portrays Ian Curtis was superb and spot on, and suppose so was Samantha Morton as his wife Debbie (even though her role was not as heroic and was actually quite annoying in some parts of the movie- but suppose that was her role so kudos for doing it so well).
I also loved the fact that the movie was shot in black and white which added to the poetic landscapes, enhanced the mood and the effects of the time it was set in. In a lot of autobiographical movies on music singing and performing scenes can be the demise of the film (either cuz the actor is not as good as portraying the performer or it doesn't feel real, or is simply comes of as out of place and forced), but in this movie the music scenes were perfectly collaborated and performed by everyone involved.
Once again, Sam Riley was spectacular at both Ian's impersonation of movements and voice, as well as his mannerism and the turbulent personal life- battling with responsibilities of family (leaving his loveless marriage with Debbie for another woman), the growing pressures of band and performances into which he pours all of himself, and of course the struggle with frequent seizures that threaten to take over his life completely.
Overall, I would recommend this movie not only to music fans but anyone looking for a deep, realistic and moving picture.
Atonement
(2007)
excellent story- great acting- superb ending!
3 December 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I went to the screening of Atonement with a friend happy enough to see a free movie and not expecting much- Actually I am also not a big Keira Knightley fan neither so clearly I was just happy to be out of the snow and watch whatever was being shown.
Atonement is set through 30s and 40s (mainly WWII) and revolves around the romance of the young Cecilia Tallis and the family up keeper Robbie Turner. Through a series of candid, naive and finally unfortunate events Robbie is accused of a heinous crime at the hands of the little Briory- Cecilia's little sister. The way this storyline and the plot are revealed and expressed was very original and effective in understanding what Briory sees and what actually happens. It is a perfect example how things aren't always what they seem, and makes one debate how much kids understand things and how reliable or guilty should they be of certain crimes.
At any rate, needless to say, Robbie and Cecilia are separated, Robbie is set to prison then war, families are torn apart and as Briory grows older she begins to realize not only the consequences of her actions, but also why she did what she did which is just as important. I do not want to reveal how the movie concludes and what happens to Cecilia, Robbie and Briory because the ending of the movie was for me the best part of this film- despite how tragic or unfavorable it may be, it was very original and moving.
The actress playing little Briory was very good compared to the one portraying the older one, and I was even more mesmerized by Keira Knightley whose performance is (do I dare to say it) truly Oscar worthy. She should stay away from Pirates of the Caribbean and silly movies like that and show her true talent in movies of a higher caliber. I was also very impressed with the visuals, the backtracking of the scenes and the storyline and the acting.
Overall, I highly recommend this movie!
Atonement is set through 30s and 40s (mainly WWII) and revolves around the romance of the young Cecilia Tallis and the family up keeper Robbie Turner. Through a series of candid, naive and finally unfortunate events Robbie is accused of a heinous crime at the hands of the little Briory- Cecilia's little sister. The way this storyline and the plot are revealed and expressed was very original and effective in understanding what Briory sees and what actually happens. It is a perfect example how things aren't always what they seem, and makes one debate how much kids understand things and how reliable or guilty should they be of certain crimes.
At any rate, needless to say, Robbie and Cecilia are separated, Robbie is set to prison then war, families are torn apart and as Briory grows older she begins to realize not only the consequences of her actions, but also why she did what she did which is just as important. I do not want to reveal how the movie concludes and what happens to Cecilia, Robbie and Briory because the ending of the movie was for me the best part of this film- despite how tragic or unfavorable it may be, it was very original and moving.
The actress playing little Briory was very good compared to the one portraying the older one, and I was even more mesmerized by Keira Knightley whose performance is (do I dare to say it) truly Oscar worthy. She should stay away from Pirates of the Caribbean and silly movies like that and show her true talent in movies of a higher caliber. I was also very impressed with the visuals, the backtracking of the scenes and the storyline and the acting.
Overall, I highly recommend this movie!
Be Cool
(2005)
Entertaining Parody of Music Bad-Ass Wannabes
18 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
It is not the comedy movie of the year nor is it some cinematic achievement for any of the stars that appear in this star packed flick: which includes Mr.Travolta, Uma, Robert Downey, Dani DeVito, The Rock, Vince Vaughn, Andre, Steven Tyler, live performance by Black Eyed Peas and even Cedric the Entertainer.
Be Cool is basically about an actor Chili Palmer (Travolta) who is sick of movies and embarks on the career in the music industry which involves series of funny mishaps and endeavors including Russian mob and black-mailing, a talented singer and her avenging manager and a widow who owns a record label (Thurman).
Like I said not the greatest movie ever, but it's funny- basically it is making fun of the music industry and its silly over-rated aspects of a life in the fast lane, and seeing Uma and Travolta team up brings back memories of the Pulp Fiction: there's even a dance scene where Uma and Travolta dance it up in a very similar way as in Pulp Fiction which was probably done on purpose as a spoof but feels rather out of place. It is not a bad flick but makes me wonder if this much star-power is necessarily a plus to the film- DeVito, Downy and Andre were quite useless- they draw too much attention because of their names but their characters are not memorable. On the other hand, Christina Milian as the up-and-coming songstress was amazing and the same goes for already mentioned Vince Vaughn, The Rock, Mrs.Thurman and Mr. Travolta.
Be Cool is basically about an actor Chili Palmer (Travolta) who is sick of movies and embarks on the career in the music industry which involves series of funny mishaps and endeavors including Russian mob and black-mailing, a talented singer and her avenging manager and a widow who owns a record label (Thurman).
Like I said not the greatest movie ever, but it's funny- basically it is making fun of the music industry and its silly over-rated aspects of a life in the fast lane, and seeing Uma and Travolta team up brings back memories of the Pulp Fiction: there's even a dance scene where Uma and Travolta dance it up in a very similar way as in Pulp Fiction which was probably done on purpose as a spoof but feels rather out of place. It is not a bad flick but makes me wonder if this much star-power is necessarily a plus to the film- DeVito, Downy and Andre were quite useless- they draw too much attention because of their names but their characters are not memorable. On the other hand, Christina Milian as the up-and-coming songstress was amazing and the same goes for already mentioned Vince Vaughn, The Rock, Mrs.Thurman and Mr. Travolta.
Hot Fuzz
(2007)
Ahhh the British Humor...
18 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I must say that this movie is not what it may look like from the cover: a serious cop gets stuck with fat Mr.Bean kind of a partner and they must learn to work together while catching bad guys. True, there is a serious cop (Sergeant Angel) and plenty of dumb/lazy/slow or simply crooked cops from a small town he gets transferred to, but it's not just a comedy movie- there's some mystery, action and the way the dark angles are shot, characters developed and sub-plot stories introduced, it all really adds a very interesting addition to what at first seemed as a silly comedy movie. There are some things that are perhaps a bit forced and far-fetched (especially when we learn who is behind the murders and all the shooting begins), but I guess this is where it is apparent that besides the mystery/action components, Hot Fuzz is first and foremost a comedy and then a bit of everything else mixed up in a fuzzy ball of Brit humor. Not bad.
300
(2006)
AWESOME! A Monster of a Movie!
18 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Most of my friends went to see this movie (much to my amazement) and I must say that my first preview impressions were rather flat- like come on, how many movies have there been with war, fighting, ancient soldiers, (Troy, the Gladiator) etc etc.... too many. But still, I went to see it on a cheap night and OH MY GOD was it ever good! First of all, I don't know why anyone would not like this movie: if you are a girl you get to watch all these Spartans prancing around flexing their perfect abs and thighs (wearing practically nothing) and get this: among all of their tradition and military-oriented way of life they actually treat their women with respect! Of course if you are a guy you get to see the Spartan war-machines in all their glory and might- and they don't fight to conquer or enslave= they just protect what's theirs. Now, Hollywood will embellish the story a liiiiiittle tiny bit (and add some super villains and monsters and special effects) but still, the account of their way of life and history was quite legit. But the best part of the movie is not the dialogue or perplexed storyline but the cinematography and the visuals! SO awesome and shot to perfection! At times unrealistic, but hey the emotion and acting was real (which is all that matters) and it is a movie after all.
I won't go too much into what it is about- let's just say that the Persians are coming and the Spartan King Leonidas must decide to stand up for his people and disobey the corrupt priests and out-dated tradition. The prophecy says if the army goes to war the King dies and if they don't clearly the Persians will enslave them and the cities will burn. Hmmm what the King decides is no brainer, but it's not the outcome that really matters but their passion and the road to their glory!
I won't go too much into what it is about- let's just say that the Persians are coming and the Spartan King Leonidas must decide to stand up for his people and disobey the corrupt priests and out-dated tradition. The prophecy says if the army goes to war the King dies and if they don't clearly the Persians will enslave them and the cities will burn. Hmmm what the King decides is no brainer, but it's not the outcome that really matters but their passion and the road to their glory!
Spider-Man 3
(2007)
Nothing Special....
18 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
At least not for me, but mind you I outgrew Spiderman long time ago (probably the same time as I did the Santa Claus), but there's something for everyone and I know there's plenty of comic books fans out-there so why not keep making the movies, right? I guess, but in that case you must face the consequences of making it fun and exciting especially when doing a 'trequel' of any kind of a movie, especially comic books. Perhaps the true comic book Spidey fans will always find something new and appealing in a movie like this, but (unfortunately) folks like me will come out of a movie theater shaking my head.
So what are my pet peeves: I'm really getting tired of seeing Tobey Maguire's face and Kirsten Dunst's grin- he is so not a superhero material and she is just.... annoying. And their break-up scene felt like a HS drama class presentation. In addition, watching Topher Grace as an arrogant/nosy geek was just like seeing Eric Forman's evil twin= both rather tedious. There were some cool special effects and funny bits, but nothing super great. And does the Spiderman have to be such a softy all the time? He can't even kill a guy who killed his uncle or whop anyone's ass without the help of the black evil force which makes him into a pompous ass prancing and dancing around. And making fun of the French is sooo last year, but I guess flying heroically around the American flag in his face is always in style- go figure. And just as Harry and Spidey become friends again Harry dies. Lame.
So what are my pet peeves: I'm really getting tired of seeing Tobey Maguire's face and Kirsten Dunst's grin- he is so not a superhero material and she is just.... annoying. And their break-up scene felt like a HS drama class presentation. In addition, watching Topher Grace as an arrogant/nosy geek was just like seeing Eric Forman's evil twin= both rather tedious. There were some cool special effects and funny bits, but nothing super great. And does the Spiderman have to be such a softy all the time? He can't even kill a guy who killed his uncle or whop anyone's ass without the help of the black evil force which makes him into a pompous ass prancing and dancing around. And making fun of the French is sooo last year, but I guess flying heroically around the American flag in his face is always in style- go figure. And just as Harry and Spidey become friends again Harry dies. Lame.
Ghost in the Shell
(1995)
Very Cool Anime
18 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I saw this movie last night I can understand why it's such a cult film in the realm of manga- first of all, the computer graphics and the animation is amazing: such attention to detail and really bringing scenes to life.
Then the binary sequence code at the opening scene strikes such resemblance to matrix, well vice-versa actually, including the connecting place through the back of the neck. Combined with that is the philosophy of self awareness: I am aware of my existence because I feel it, but how do I know I really exist and how do I define and prove it; can there be different forms of existence (especially when it comes to artificial intelligence) and how do we explain them and what complication can it bring.
The only thing is I wish it was a bit longer- it ends rather too quickly (it's only 80 min long), right after the Puppet Master and our heroine do "the merge" and create a so-called offspring, leaving us wondering what does its future hold. Also, I don't know if it was just my edition I was watching (it had a different cover than this one) but some of the characters including the lead character Motoko Kusanagi sounded like they were just reading their lines without actually giving emotion and real life voice- unlike other characters. I don't know if that was the point since she is a cyborg, but it sounded so off it almost killed the appeal of the character.
Other than that, I really enjoyed it, especially considering it came out in 1995... wow....
Then the binary sequence code at the opening scene strikes such resemblance to matrix, well vice-versa actually, including the connecting place through the back of the neck. Combined with that is the philosophy of self awareness: I am aware of my existence because I feel it, but how do I know I really exist and how do I define and prove it; can there be different forms of existence (especially when it comes to artificial intelligence) and how do we explain them and what complication can it bring.
The only thing is I wish it was a bit longer- it ends rather too quickly (it's only 80 min long), right after the Puppet Master and our heroine do "the merge" and create a so-called offspring, leaving us wondering what does its future hold. Also, I don't know if it was just my edition I was watching (it had a different cover than this one) but some of the characters including the lead character Motoko Kusanagi sounded like they were just reading their lines without actually giving emotion and real life voice- unlike other characters. I don't know if that was the point since she is a cyborg, but it sounded so off it almost killed the appeal of the character.
Other than that, I really enjoyed it, especially considering it came out in 1995... wow....
Shrek the Third
(2007)
Just Like Spider-Man 3 Shrek the Third Disappoints
18 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
And what else is to expect from a third installment of the all-too familiar story which in this case brings nothing new and exciting to the plot, but rather plays on the popularity and the edge of the first original release? A little originality- Humor? Effort to make something similarly funny and memorable as the first or even the second one? I guess it was too much to expect.
The first Shrek was awesome! All the characters had enough development time and we got to know their silliness and goofiness (the 3 piggies, gingerbread man, donkey and the puss)- but this time not only did these usual characters have limited (and rather blaah performance) we didn't get to see any new funny characters. Arthy (described as rebellious but seems more as a whimpy/skinny teenager) was as lame of a character as the eccentric poor ol' Merlin- not one funny line from either of them :( And the plot? When the King dies Shrek needs to take over the Kingdom but he doesn't feel fit- so he goes to search for Prince Arthur who is the second in line to the throne and convince him to take over the crown. In the meantime with the help of all rejected fairy tale characters Prince Charming decides to take over the Kingdom one last time (and succeeds). Shrek is back just in time and- yes you guessed it, restores the peace to the Kingdom. The End. Makes me wonder if the writers even put any effort into Shrek III or just pulled the screenplay out of their ass- probably the latter. After all, why bother when parents will still bring their children to see it based on the popularity and the warm fuzzy memories of the Shrek I. It's just sad that they clearly don't care to make a quality movie but rather money (surprise surprise).
The first Shrek was awesome! All the characters had enough development time and we got to know their silliness and goofiness (the 3 piggies, gingerbread man, donkey and the puss)- but this time not only did these usual characters have limited (and rather blaah performance) we didn't get to see any new funny characters. Arthy (described as rebellious but seems more as a whimpy/skinny teenager) was as lame of a character as the eccentric poor ol' Merlin- not one funny line from either of them :( And the plot? When the King dies Shrek needs to take over the Kingdom but he doesn't feel fit- so he goes to search for Prince Arthur who is the second in line to the throne and convince him to take over the crown. In the meantime with the help of all rejected fairy tale characters Prince Charming decides to take over the Kingdom one last time (and succeeds). Shrek is back just in time and- yes you guessed it, restores the peace to the Kingdom. The End. Makes me wonder if the writers even put any effort into Shrek III or just pulled the screenplay out of their ass- probably the latter. After all, why bother when parents will still bring their children to see it based on the popularity and the warm fuzzy memories of the Shrek I. It's just sad that they clearly don't care to make a quality movie but rather money (surprise surprise).
A Fitting Closure
18 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I must say I enjoyed this third installment - I can't say that it was better than the first one, or amazing by any standard, but I was glad that it was fun but also gave us an appropriate closure. The only problem with that of course is that it was a quite predictable closure: The Bad guys get what they deserve while The Good gang prevails- more or less since not everything can be so perfect for the winning side either. As expected poor Will Turner must be sacrificed in one way or another and severed from his lovely Elizabeth... I shed a tear here (almost).
BUT despite this predictable plot, I sincerely enjoyed the movie. It was a tad long (almost 3 hrs) but the cinematography was great and the screenplay developed in reasonable speed and manner which is something I look for in a movie. Now another reason why I enjoyed it so much could also be due to fact that it is supposed to be the last movie, as whether that will stand true remains to be seen, but I like it when movie-makers know when to stop instead butcher the story and drag in on for years with new sequels and triquels and whatevers coming on annually.
Recommended- even if only as a cheap movie night choice.
BUT despite this predictable plot, I sincerely enjoyed the movie. It was a tad long (almost 3 hrs) but the cinematography was great and the screenplay developed in reasonable speed and manner which is something I look for in a movie. Now another reason why I enjoyed it so much could also be due to fact that it is supposed to be the last movie, as whether that will stand true remains to be seen, but I like it when movie-makers know when to stop instead butcher the story and drag in on for years with new sequels and triquels and whatevers coming on annually.
Recommended- even if only as a cheap movie night choice.
Next
(2007)
Starts off decent but falls flat on its face
18 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
OK, so this is the lowdown: Nic Cage is this magician who can actually see 2 min into his own future- he has his little vegas show but mostly makes his money by gambling at the casinos (never too much just enough so he's not too suspicious). But eventually the security does wanna question him and he knows it- so what does he do? Prevents a robbery and then runs. Why? No-one knows. Like how would they prove he was cheating- now he really is a suspect. Anyways, he steals a car and commits even more felonies with his escape. Meanwhile a special agent (Moore) is after him too since she needs him to help them find some stolen nuclear weapons- but how did she hear about his powers and how can he help them since he can only see his own future within 2 min they don't quite explain. (later we see that it involves him strapped in a chair watching news and seeing the future through the news on TV).
Oh yeah, Jessica Biel is in there too as his love interest- somehow his tricks and weird talk of soul-mates doesn't freak her out and they'r on a road trip and 2 days later making out- yeah right... At any rate, the FBI still wants him to help them but he refuses fearing he will be a lab rat. Then they try to get him by telling Jessica that he's a psycho and wanted by FBI. Still, she for another unexplainable reason tells him all and he confides in her as a poor soul. Hmmmm. Oh yeah, the 'bad guys' with the nukes are after him too cuz now they feel he is a threat for their operation. So as FBI captures Cage, the bad guys take the girl as a hostage.
U can just sense the drama unfolding! Him not wanting to help the FBI catch the bad guys is just as irrational as most of the movie, including most of the special effects and the dialogue- unless by some weird chance that was their intent: to make a stupid movie. I just cannot believe Julianne Moore wasted her time on this movie... sniff sniff....
Oh yeah, Jessica Biel is in there too as his love interest- somehow his tricks and weird talk of soul-mates doesn't freak her out and they'r on a road trip and 2 days later making out- yeah right... At any rate, the FBI still wants him to help them but he refuses fearing he will be a lab rat. Then they try to get him by telling Jessica that he's a psycho and wanted by FBI. Still, she for another unexplainable reason tells him all and he confides in her as a poor soul. Hmmmm. Oh yeah, the 'bad guys' with the nukes are after him too cuz now they feel he is a threat for their operation. So as FBI captures Cage, the bad guys take the girl as a hostage.
U can just sense the drama unfolding! Him not wanting to help the FBI catch the bad guys is just as irrational as most of the movie, including most of the special effects and the dialogue- unless by some weird chance that was their intent: to make a stupid movie. I just cannot believe Julianne Moore wasted her time on this movie... sniff sniff....
The Man Who Wasn't There
(2001)
Definitely Recommend!
18 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Amazing cast- Frances McDormand, Billy Bob and James Gandolfini, and of course taking into the account this is the Coen's movie - it comes as no surprise I really enjoyed it. But I admit I was worried if I would like it when I read the rather basic description summary about some barber (Billy Bob) who gets in some sticky situation with his wife (McDormand) and wife's boss when some dude with dry-cleaning business comes looking for a business partner. Sounds as a pretty lame plot but this is a perfect example that it doesn't really matter what the movie is about if the cast is talented and if the movie takes time to show us lives and personalities in a different light- and adds some creativity to it. True it is quite reminiscent of Fargo with McDormand in it including black humor and murder mystery complication, but it's not like they'r exactly identical. If anything I wish more movies would be similar to it.
In addition, the fact that movie is shot in black and white fits it perfectly adding shades and wonderful light contrasts and fits into the sombre mood of the character in depth analysis which is what makes it such an enjoyable and memorable movie!
In addition, the fact that movie is shot in black and white fits it perfectly adding shades and wonderful light contrasts and fits into the sombre mood of the character in depth analysis which is what makes it such an enjoyable and memorable movie!
Tell Your Friends