namenotnecessary Reviews

Leonie (2010)

EXCELLENT Film. Must Watch ORIGINAL Japanese CUT!

[10/10 · 15 February 2016]

This is an EXCELLENT movie, the acting is incredible, Emily Mortimer is wonderful to watch as are all the other actors. This is set at the turn of the 20th Century, based on the TRUE STORY of Leonie, mother of sculptor and artist Isamu Noguchi. This film is a beautiful depiction of a richly varied life across borders, and how childhood shapes personality.

The crew on this movie include many high profile names such as the Oscar winning composer Jan A. P. Kaczmarek (Finding Neverland) and Director of Photography Tetsuo Nagata from "La Vie en Rose".

The original version that was released in Japan to rave reviews and ranked high in their top 10 box office during it's opening, is like a David Lean style epic. Set in the early 1900s, the production design and locations across the USA and Japan are nostalgically wonderful and the amount of effort put the production of this film shows clearly through the amazing footage and photography. Cinematographers take note. The American cut is unfortunately a subpar edited version of this really great Japanese original; they cut 40 mins of footage out for reasons such as "impatient US audiences" and difficulty getting a longer movie into art-house theatres under limited theatrical release. Ironically, the pacing and editing of the longer version far surpass the USA cut. In fact the longer cut seems to last less time because of the way the story is told through the editing. They sadly changed from a standard chronological movie to an unnecessary flashback style edit which makes it perhaps difficult to follow.

Without further ado, I can only say if you can, watch the Japan original cut as this is how the director intended the movie to be made and with the additional 40 minutes of relevant footage, based on true events, this charming story is a beautiful film, full of life, philosophy and feeling.

Blue Valentine (2010)

Decline of a former romance

[6/10 · 25 April 2010]

Aptly titled, Blue Valentine is a present-day American marriage drama charting the all too familiar decline of a once romantic relationship. Cindy (Michelle Williams) is adrift in her own feelings for her devoted husband Dean (Ryan Gosling) who through their inadvertent creation of a family together has discovered his true vocation is no less innocent and precise than that itself; but alas this is a virtue too primitive for her ambitiousness to handle.

Expressing the nascent romance of the relationship in flashback scenes, the film effectively displays an authentic study about the emerging difficulties of a particular marriage and our underlying impression of the child Frankie sustaining her parents' connection is preserved well throughout the drama. Acted well, the film is an engaging, worthwhile watch. Although at times a little amiss under the presupposition of our knowledge of the characters' history, the flashbacks ultimately succeed as a method for this narrative and the film manages to maintain a consistent, enjoyable pace.

Perhaps the most poignant aspect of contemporary director Derek Cianfrance's film is its simplicity; a simplicity that does not drown in monotony but rather leaves one thirsty for a little more – double entendre nevertheless intended. This austerity builds a wholesome relationship between its protagonists, and Cianfrance's endeavour to create equality about them is brilliant but not flawless. One yearns for them both as individuals and as a couple to end their battle for the contentment they want to find for themselves within each other but I questioned the physical actions of the female protagonist to a greater extent than those of the male. Indeed it would be reasonable to question his behaviour and thus equality would again prevail.

A good character study, less symbolic than Revolutionary Road, it meets resolve in its entirety. Like piecing together a puzzle whilst uncertain of the intended result, it stumbles forth to a conclusion that nonetheless renders it intact and entertaining.

Rating 3/5

The Dark Knight (2008)

Dark and compelling, but left me cold

[7/10 · 22 July 2008]

Okay, I came out the cinema literally ten minutes ago. Yes the movie was tremendous, yes Heath Ledger gave a fine performance; but it is far from a work of originality in the art of film-making.

The Story... Put very briefly: Bruce Wayne/Batman (Christian Bale) has hopes of becoming obsolete; not least to reunite with darling Rachel Dawes (Maggie Gyllenhaal). A man named Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart) takes charge of bringing justice to the streets, eager to prove to society that they don't need the help of Batman. Enter the Joker (Heath Ledger), an unrelenting villain who just "wants to watch the world burn"; a man who wallows in anarchy. Batman reluctantly assumes personal responsibility for his elimination. The snag is that the Joker generates a conflict between our repentant desire for his disposal and our abhorrence in his retention. Conversely, said friction is nevertheless ambiguous as this is principally a product of Ledger's well-integrated alluring, dark humour.

The Review... Nothing about Christopher Nolan's film is candidly provocative: it is doubtless far in merit from the present cinematic cultural phenomenon it seems to be stirring; the death of its star has unquestionably fuelled the effect it is having on audiences. When Ledger's face first appears on screen, it is impossible to distract oneself from his recent passing; so this morally justified praise is surely transient.

The biggest displeasure was that the emotional impact lasted only for the film's duration: as I left the theatre, the automatic doors opened for me onto a busy street and everything that had just affected me on the other side of them, dissipated into the noise of the traffic. I wasn't disturbed or introspective; I wasn't concerned or upset: in fact, I felt pretty good. But I don't think I should have. Films should induce a lasting response. So whilst making an attempt to inject a syringe-full of emotive contemporary issues and examining the current state of this planet, the liquid sentiment that fell from the needle was only enough to drug me for the two-and-a-half-hours that is lasted: in consequence, feelings are left sullied and detached. And movie nostalgia should incontestably recall more than just the action – which, on the other hand was positively impressive.

Arguably, reality through fantasy only truly works when one can fully connect with the vision's subject. Nolan has done great wonders with the comic book adaptations and to criticize his creativity would be unjust and excessive. Batman appears real enough but the inflexible artificiality of his being is sufficient for our imagination to keep him from fruition, and is instead rather a constant reminder that Gotham really is another world: Batman is the Verfremdungseffekt. Some films bring you inside the world they encompass, whereas to its own disappointment, The Dark Knight predominantly holds you afar: a bystander's view of a distressed planet; I didn't have an intimate enough connection to believe that this could be our own. I was indeed so close, but that is always just too far. Nonetheless, there were moments when its scrutiny of human relationships and societal conduct did besiege me – and well at that. Thankfully too, the CGI and stunts were primarily kept to an appropriate, watchable, sensible level; consequently they were more intense and convincing.

Along with the fantastic pulsating score, the acting is what keeps the film alive. Ledger is especially brilliant and he markedly surpasses the other cast members, who in contrast give engaging yet run of the mill performances. Is Heath's performance Oscar-worthy? Debatably so but I remain hesitant.

To conclude, I certainly give out a recommendation to see this movie but, like most others, it is rich with content appealing purely to a mindset that whilst common, is still particular and genre-associated.

Walk the Line (2005)

''Ray'' with white people? Not at all.

[10/10 · 9 July 2006]

If you haven't already, I think you should see this film. Incredible acting; great music; true story. Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspoon are astoundingly good; they ARE Johnny Cash and June Carter.

I've read reviews where they say this is "'Ray' with white people"; I wholly disagree. The obvious similarity between "Walk The Line" and "Ray" is the fact that both films focus on the life story of a musician. Yes, there is the rise and fall from fame, but both are true stories: thus similarity should not be considered during comparison.

You should know if you are musically inclined enough to watch this film; even if you are not, I can't see how it will fail to at least entertain.

I could keep writing but there's no point – just see it. For me, it's 10/10 and not many films get that.

Match Point (2005)

A different sort of Woody Allen...

[8/10 · 18 May 2006]

"It's amazing how much of our lives depend on luck." Fatalist or not, by the end of the film you will definitely be contemplating that line from the opening scene. In fact, the idea that luck defines our lack of control only emphasises the definition of fate.

Powerful in many respects, Woody Allen's intimate, depiction of everyday life gets woven into the thick canvas of Dostoyevsky's 'Crime and Punishment'.

There are hints to his previous films but Match Point is a completely new style. I would like to say, if you are a fan of Woody Allen, watch this; be warned though: this is no comic portrayal of a neurotic man; this is the examination of a mind torn between love and lust, symbolised by a tennis game.

I believe that it starts off on a bad foot; too slow and unconcerned with story, but then again, is this the way Woody Allen builds up a relationship between these externally-simple characters and the viewer?

The cast give satisfying performances: Scarlett Johansson proves that she is a competent and sexy actress, but there are some frustrating aspects of Jonathan Rhys Meyers' persona; his accent and manner nauseatingly overshadow the important history of his character. Nonetheless, you do grow accustomed to it and in the respect of consistency, he does give a good performance as the man torn between Johansson and his soon-to-be-wife, Emily Mortimer. I am not going to summarise the story; it may have more of an impact if you don't have any presumptions.

If you haven't yet, I do recommend you watch this film. Arguably, one other glitch is that it's the sort of film, when you know the ending, the initial power is lost for further viewings.

Marnie (1964)

Not exactly a Hitchcock classic...

[5/10 · 17 May 2006]

An interesting film though hardly what I expected from Hitchcock. The story: A kleptomaniac woman Marnie, (Tippi Hedren), is haunted by her past. A man whom she steals from, (Sean Connery), tries to help her.

The story itself is quite simple; it is the characters that are complex. Hitchcock does succeed in portraying these complex characters, yet during the film I felt more like an observer of these two human minds rather than an involved viewer of the story. Some comments on this film mention Brechtian influences; I would hardly say that this is the case though it did feel like there was a line between me and the film. This is a shame because the acting is rather good and the story is told with elegance. I would be lying to myself if I were to suggest that his use of the colour red as symbolism still has the ability to attract the same amount of enthusiastic 'thrill' which may have been present when it was first released.

To be honest, if you are a fan of Hitchcock and love films like "North by Northwest" and "To Catch a Thief", this film may disappoint. By all means watch this film, but don't expect to be thrilled by a twist at the end; it's just a story told by a great filmmaker. At times it does seem a little bit dated, and at some stages a little too dragged out.

On the whole, this is not a bad film, just not quite a Hitchcock classic; hence my rating 5/10.