Change Your Image
rossawilson01-1
Reviews
Slumdog Millionaire (2008)
Rough jewel
There are a lot of posts and comments about the Indian caste system and the way the movie depicts slum reality. Many feel it glosses over these subjects in order to fulfill its entertainment directive. Not true.
A movie about a slum that's positive and uplifting isn't necessarily feel good gloss, the reality about Hinduism, is that the whole point in the drama of life is to see through it to the beauty in life no matter where it may be. Hope then is a wonderful contrast to this environment, the sun, the colours, the people the adventure.. if these things can't give us a reason to go on what can.
That's the first part of the movie.
The second part, when the kids are older unfortunately finds itself drawn back to the mainstream motorway after the first half took an exciting adventurous turn off. The plot here becomes usual, cliché even, the drama is fairly superficial and you can't help thinking that there could have been a whole lot more depth.
That said it's probably this half of the movie that brought in more regular movie goers. I can't help that think if the movie had continued to explore and probe the boundaries of adventure in India, the masses would have given it a wider birth.
A tale of two halfs then; but as a whole, and even with the predictable soap opera like ending, it's a real achievement, the energy and euphoria Boyle creates is unique. It engages you start to finish and is very definitely an exciting worth while ride.. deserved of all the Oscars it has won in my humble opinion.
V for Vendetta (2005)
Standards have got so low it's not even funny.
I can't fathom it. Acting is bad, dialogue is really bad, directing is in your face bad, atmosphere is non-existent, plot/story very, very contrived, clunky and childish.
People getting excited about this movie can only have been swept away by their feelings for the Matrix brothers or have been blinded to all the films failures because they have just discovered their first taste of political comment. Either that or they all wish one day they will marry Natalie Portman and that some how by giving this film a good rating she'll find out and come around to their house and thank them.
One day people here will rate Barney the Dinosaur the movie highly, because it has an inkling of social commentary, a nice looking actress and well known creative duo behind it. All those who love this film will then lament the fact people could like Barney the Dinosaur the movie, saying how low standards have dropped. That's how I feel now about the fact this movie has achieved such a high rating.
Southland Tales (2006)
The birth, dreams of, failing and then abuse of an idea.
You'll have to forget why there are so many faces you recognise in this movie, there's no way to work it out. On the one hand they could have been cuing up to work with Kelly and Kelly just said yes to them all. On the other the studio could have seen the script and in order to claw back some revenue they put in a fail safe by covering a range of names so the largest demographic possible may be tempted into watching it.
There's a dreamy cool idea somewhere in the whole thing, it's probably coherent in Kelly's head, but a lot of us have those, it's the translation to script then screen that takes the effort and talent. Unfortunately it seems missing here. The script probably started well and a sense of something interesting comes across, but instead of ripping his hair out to carry on with and and persist to the very end it seems Kelly took an ego trip feeling nay a word could be written wrong. Oops.
Kelly seems to have been the lucky gambler with Darko, lead to believe that he has the talent of someone much bigger. Maybe that movie was just a lot simpler, I mean you have a standard event which is basically over complicated by time travel, interesting viewing and atmospheric all the same though.
With Southland Tales the yawning chasm of story craft is evident. Is Kelly a one trick pony that was lucky enough to have all the elements come together with Darko? Southland Tales would suggest it. Only time will tell however. If you want to know what an underdeveloped movie looks like where you just assume everyone will get your mood and feeling watch this movie. A damn shame? Or an inevitability?
The Mist (2007)
Bad in every way.
The mist is not good, in any way except maybe the premise. The dialogue is appalling and the characters are from another dimension let alone the monsters. Not their fault mind, the directing and editing and absolutely frustrating, the 1 dimensionality of the characters could bring anyone to tears. Christians (I am not one mind) are painted with such venom the writer is as evangelical against them as they are against non-believers in the film. I hoped this movie would at least be fun but it's so self conscious, contrived and badly made it'll just make you angry. Too many of Kings very, very poor opinions of society wrapped up in bad, bad movie making. It's like a bad 80's movie only with a few post 2000 computer graphics.
Go watch something else trashy and fun instead, this is just a poorly made tirade about how dumb King thinks people are, sure they are but these guys are like 2 year olds, can't act and are totally unbelievable.
The Departed (2006)
Simple
Put simply if someone else other than Scorsese had made this movie it would have been declared a high quality film worth watching but one that delivers nothing really new. And that's what it is. Because it is Scorsese however, it gets auto kudos because kids nail their egos to the Scorsese brand and buy everything regardless of quality. This is what modern marketing is all about, and it is what stifles creativity, cue the endless sequels, remakes and movie adoptions of TV ideas. And at a real stretch some people may even pull out a 3 page note from a dead directors vault and turn it into a wine commercial. Did someone say "Key to Reserva".
Stardust (2007)
Just 16 movie.
A great story poorly told. There's some funny moments and some heart felt ones yet the only reason they survive is because it would be impossible to totally destroy sucha story.
Don't waste your money on this movie in any way, not even if you're bored. If you're 15 and under and a girl maybe it's worth it. Then, that's the age range this movie is targeted it. Movie execs make millions from little girls and you have to be one to tolerate this utter puke.
Sorry, that might sound overly negative but this is a Just 16 movie.
READ THE BOOK!
Sicko (2007)
Moore facts
Great movie, although willing and prepared to present facts at times out of context and it is rather one sided which prevents it from being of any real use.
It should be pointed out that PRIVATE health care in Britain, France etc is ALSO available if you don't want to wait. Moore doesn't address this, I think it would have been useful to include this fact. A lot of people after watching the film think it's one thing or the other in Europe when there is both.
The collectivism slant in the movie could be described as propagandist, but its heart is in the right place, but then that's Moore's style. It's entertainment through anger, outrage or disbelief and for it reality gets distorted as in most movies.
It's difficult to know how much info is relative and what the real US health care situation is outside of the presented flaws in the system. However if you're European, or agree with collectivising health care, then this movie will bolster your belief, if not it will make you angry to change the system, or angry at Moore for being so good and being on the other side. Perhaps with Sicko the establishment in the US is getting a piece of its own medicine.
Children of Men (2006)
Entertaining but superficial
Make a movie about a subject everyone has an opinion, especially one that's in current news, and some will be blown away purely by relevance and others will gawk at it's ignorance of the depth of the matter.
Make no mistake, this is an entertainment flick that has little depth and merely uses bad news as the background, this is the spectacle everyone seems to be praising as insight. This is hardly the case however.
The movie at times has some poor acting, in your face explanation of what the audience should know (exposition) and half baked ideas about the premise. On the positive side the cinematography is great, and there's some electric action.
Don't mistake this movie as intelligent or insightful, it has the ring of a load of mates down the pub going what if this and what if that. Instead as usual, the sci-fi genre has been used as a vehicle for spectacle with the same level of sensation over content that goes on everywhere in the media today.
The Queen (2006)
A poor film
This is a poor film, with poor acting all round with the exception of Mirren. People will like and watch this film because of the event it centres around, and for the same inexplicable reason so many people felt her loss as if one of their own, they will stamp their ego on this movie and claim to love it. Self delusion I'm afraid, it's terrible. Diana's death illustrates the lengths people will go to in an apathetic and ideological direction-less world to feel something and unite. I believe this to be backward and insulting to countless other hard working heroes who go unsung everyday whilst helping the people of this world. This film possibly documents the UK's turning point to obsession rather than enamour with celebrity. It also documents the sad point in which Diana's mourners are not told to get it together and take stock of their own lives, but pandered to by political opportunists and a glutinous media. Ironically this film has the same air of apathy in its script and production that must have been sweeping the nation prior to the accident, for only apathy could incite the desperate and pathetic grief competition that arose after that inane night. If I seem to talk more about the event than the movie, that's because there's not much to talk about regarding the movie. It looks and feels like an 80's BBC production, no atmosphere, no sense of drama, no power, nothing.
Au hasard Balthazar (1966)
Stodggy, dull and painfully obvious
I've seen a lot of films from directors all over the world, films that I'm sure many would not either have the patience to watch or inclination to understand. I thought this would be another of those films, a small gem that is lost and misunderstood by the world at large. But no.
This is about a beast of burden getting kicked and being worked hard, while some vague, poorly though out subplots crawl along by questionable actors. Godard even thought this was life in 90 minutes, whilst I can see that, what I can't see is that it is good. It plods like a boring bible story, taught by someone who I can only imagine feels the need to teach about how sinful we all are. In fact this is like a dull vicar of a film. If indeed it is the world in 90 minutes, its not particularly insightful, it is pretentious, it does preach in a oh woe is the world manner and it isn't cinematic art.
I can only imagine the people who love this film, are also the same people who think pictures of poor people are art, are naturally self pitying, and appreciate obvious painful illustrations of life. And I mean illustrations, not stories, this film is an illustration of sinful small town life. It's not a story. I really think people are seeing the donkey as a metaphor for bearing sins and putting up and shutting up, of course they are its as obvious as a brick wall, but I think they're so proud of themselves for seeing this they actually think the film is great!
To finish off the film negates its message by actually being cruel to the animal for the sake of the film. Think of a film about a donkey, doesn't sound interesting right? No, and it isn't.
Kingdom of Heaven (2005)
Engaging Epic
Truly engaging and genuinely interesting movie, with a great moving story. The emotional bells however, don't toll quite so loudly as in the likes of Gladiator, but then this is a film with a bias towards external conflicts and concentrates on a larger headier, subject. I'm not sure quite why some reviewers in UK papers we're complaining about a lack of battle scenes. Maybe all the superficial, instant gratification rubbish they spew into society to sell rather than inform has taken it's toll, and dulled their minds. Or maybe they think their readers couldn't hack it, so alter their reviews. Either way they're missing the point. There's plenty of action, and plenty of story for those who care beyond their social schedule, TV programmes, and next fad. Completely fascinating, and socially relevant topic that perhaps in some way is a weight more than Orlando Bloom can carry, and for that some will scathe, but whilst his very subtle performance did not set the epic film world alight, it certainly didn't douse its flames either. A movie for watching, not looking at.