divadrummer Reviews

The Dark Knight (2008)

Industrial Fantasy and Dark Horse Heroes

[9/10 · 21 July 2008]

Dark Knight is the first movie I've seen in about 10 years where no one's cellphone went off during the movie. In a theatre of nearly 350 people, the din of conversation through the previews was constant, but when the opening credits started to roll, the crowd was eerily hushed. The hype, the money, the postmortem lookie-loos are really irrelevant to the film and it's quality. Dark Knight has few flaws for the nitpickers, and follows Batman Begin's tradition of industrial fantasy and dark horse heroes. Dark Knight is a landmark in what is fast becoming a cinema trend of the new millennium, one that specifically caters to web-savvy Gen-Xers.

In Dark Knight, Bruce Wayne (Bale) laments his ex-girl Rachel's (Gyllenhaal) relationship with the new DA, Harvey Dent (Eckhart). Dent cuts broadly into organized crime, enraging the bosses who are left. New villain Joker (Ledger) advises the mob that the real problem is Batman - the caped crusader emboldens the law while making even the most seasoned criminal think twice about going out at night. Joker proposes to eliminate the Batman, and becomes obsessed with revealing his true identity. His maniacal plans rattle every level of Gotham government as Joker gets closer and closer to unmasking Batman. Bruce Wayne continues his tango with vigilante justice, hoping Dent will take over the role of city protector, but is ultimately unable to (or forced to) don the cloak and shuriken once again.

Oscar buzz is already underway for Heath Ledger's posthumous performance as the Joker, but he's not the only star of Dark Knight. In fact, Christian Bale's Batman might have the weakest performance in the movie, as events force his hand, move around him, but his loved ones face the worst danger and have the opportunity to be more dynamic. Gyllenhaal's earthy Rachel is a welcome update from Katie "scheduling conflict" Holmes'. Michael Caine is eternally Michael Caine. Morgan Freeman plays a more active role this time around, stepping outside of James-Bondian Outfitter status to assist Bruce Wayne with right-hand-matters.

Ledger's performance is a must-see. He's quippy and a self-professed "agent of chaos". It's easy to laugh when he deals wit, even at the most inappropriate times. Joker has at least two different stories for how he got his scars, and each story is equally convincing. His plans are devious, and usually end with his minions betraying each other for a larger share of the pot. He's deeply disturbed: mutilating or torturing for kicks, tongue darting like a lizard's, turning friends against friends in perverted games of paradox. The most chilling scenes are the Joker's video manifestos, off-kilter, too close up, and full of annoying-yet-creepy microphone clicks. One of Joker's stunts made everyone in the audience leap with shock, another made them squirm for two minutes before the situation resolved. Joker's a true character, and it's very hard to believe that's Heath Ledger beneath the cracking makeup and stringy hair.

Most surprising is Eckhart's performance as Harvey Dent. Dent's downfall is foreshadowed lightly and chronicled carefully. We want to trust Harvey Dent for his good-natured attitude and boyish good looks, but simultaneously distrust any brand-name politician or lawyer. He's set up to be Batman's legal alternative and a possible means for Bruce Wayne's retirement, but this is ultimately not meant to be. The two become very close, and then shatter apart in an instant. Scarier than a psychotic clownster in makeup, Dent is the everyman gone wrong.

With all of these characters, it shouldn't surprise you that Dark Knight is 2.5 hours long. The story progresses nicely through most of this time, up to the end, where you realize your butt is sore and the film starts playing fast and loose with the moral message. Stances are changed, villains are dispatched, and resolutions are offered, but they're decidedly fluffy ones. Thankfully, they're the kind of slightly-inelegant fluffy that wraps up a long film and sets up a sequel.

Artistically, the movie doesn't miss a beat in picking up the tone and style from Batman Begins. There's a certain dark-tech aesthetic blended with martial arts that was popularized by The Matrix and continues to permeate the action genre. More than style, the themes are hyper-relevant: cynicism and love of the underdog. Baby Boomers may claim influence over their offspring, and certainly the disillusionment with a government's effectiveness is a common complaint among this age group and their children alike. But there's a certain love of the underdog, paired with angst and acidic sarcasm, that is found only in the now 30-somethings, contemporaries of most of Dark Knight's cast. These underdogs are championed from reality TV to elections, and Batman is certainly their hero.

It's no wonder that the film is breaking records and resonating with fans of all ages. Beyond the kick-ass action and stainless steel style, Dark Knight plays on issues of the age. Believe the hype: this is an excellent companion to Batman Begins, and sets up the franchise for another stellar movie, if and when Joker's enormous shoes are filled.

The Forbidden Kingdom (2008)

Pointlessly Enthusiastic

[5/10 · 24 April 2008]

If you're not a 13 year-old boy, Forbidden Kingdom was not really made for you. I understand the appeal of Jet Li and Jackie Chan, together at last, and everyone's hopes for a harmonious combination like peanut butter and chocolate. I shared this hope, but was served something more like canned cheese with crackers. It's not that this combination is bad, just that their pairing is framed within a feeble, pointlessly enthusiastic action film.

Forbidden Kingdom follows the story of Jason (Michael Angarano), a die-hard kungfu fan and his concussion-induced journey back in time to a mythical China. Jason must return a golden staff to the Monkey King (Jet Li), who is imprisoned in stone under the evil gaze of the immortal Jade Warlord (Collin Chou). Jason meets a silent monk (Jet Li), drunken master Lu Yan (Jackie Chan), and musical assassin Golden Sparrow (Yifei Liu) who all have a vested interest in the Monkey King or the demise of the Jade Warlord. They accompany Jason on his quest and give him the skills he needs to repel his foes.

The characters are interesting but completely shallow. We're introduced to them as stock. There's an assumed level of familiarity with martial arts movies, which they're directly inspired by, but little more is given than this stereotype. Lu Yan and the Silent Monk profess death threats, engage in playful antics, and display some unknown kinship, sometimes all within the same scene. We like Golden Sparrow because she's beautiful and she's the same age as our protagonist. Beyond an obvious romantic setup, a briefly uttered revenge quest, and a catfight, she's completely pointless. It's interesting that Li and Chan both play secondary characters in this movie, and in roles that are not their traditional typecast fare. Jackie Chan is terribly sympathetic, but by his own undeniable Jackie Chan charm, not on any strength of the movie.

My biggest problem with this movie lies in Jason's story. He's sent to mythical China with more stereotypes than skills, and through truly excessive use of montage, becomes a warrior who can help the Monkey King. I suspend disbelief for fantasy films, but the montages are as repetitive and annoying as the whiny Jason. Since we're so interested in Jet Li and Jackie Chan, why make them secondary characters and give the focus to a coming-of-age quest? My rhetorical question is answered for you in the first sentence of the review. But I think this also skirts the issue of trying to give equal screen time and top billing to the two biggest martial arts stars of our age.

As repugnant as the writing and editing may be, Forbidden Kingdom makes up for this in a good dose of fight scenes. This has some of the best story-to-action ratios of any martial arts movie, hearkening back to the heyday of kung fu, where the story is minimized to make room for more action. Nothing wrong with that! It's still entertaining as always to watch Chan and Li fight. There is one very long sparring sequence and while it's nothing terribly flashy, you do get a sense that the two are very well matched. Some of the editing is sketchy, relying heavily on reaction shots rather than allowing us to see maneuvers connect. Some of the fighting is extremely theatrical and extended, in true wushu style, and beautiful to see.

The visuals have that nearly animated quality, with emphasis on glow and gold, that we've seen so often in fantasy movies lately. Combined with the cutout characters, it gives the impression that you're watching more of a video game than a movie. I like video games, but this is not necessarily a boon. I'd like to see something more original, or maybe something that draws more heavily on Chinese cinema, since the movie already borrows so liberally from those films.

Forbidden Kingdom has all of the good components of a classic action film, but together, these elements work against each other in a big way. The narrative is short, but not short enough. The general tone is more like a poor comic book movie than a kung fu fantasy. This may appeal to some, but dressing up in silks doesn't make this tired thing new again.

4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days (2007)

Realism, not Melodrama

[9/10 · 29 March 2008]

4 Months, 3 Weeks, 2 Days entices you with a Golden Palm from Cannes, a thriller-style trailer, and a question that the movie's summary answers for you. What are these women doing that's so dangerous? They're arranging an illegal abortion in 1980s communist Romania. 4 Months fits so firmly into a realist style that it's impossible to derive the message of the movie. If abortion is a sensitive subject for you, 4 Months will rile you regardless of where you place yourself on the socio-political spectrum. If you're able to stomach the grit, read on and consider the film.

Otilia helps her college roommate and best friend Gabriela arrange an abortion. For 1987 Romania, both abortion and contraception are illegal, along with plenty of other things. The girls live a life furnished with contraband, and Otilia's able to obtain this dangerous procedure by way of her finely honed skills in manipulation. Gabriela is highly irresponsible: her bad memory, white lies, and apprehension jeopardize the whole arrangement. Otilia and Gabriela must re-negotiate with the abortionist when he discovers Gabriela's already into her second trimester.

4 Months is told from Otilia's point of view. Gabriela may be having the abortion, but the procedure is Otilia's burden to bear. We see her arrange everything in secret, dodge questions from her boyfriend and his family, and assist Gabriela with the horrific outcomes. We don't gain insight on how Gabriela and Otilia became close friends, or what happens to their friendship after this ordeal, but we know the extent of Otilia's fierce loyalty. Her actions may even be unrealistic - there are always limits to what friends will do for each other. I don't think any of the other characters can be criticized this way. The abortionist is a devilish man in the guise of a strict doctor. Gabriela is stupid and frightened but determined and strong.

The movie is squarely realistic. This will seem initially slow due to the long takes and minimal editing. The entire film looks like it's been shot with a hand-held camera, but this won't make you sick, since most of the scenes involve casual dialog in homes and hotel rooms. There is a bit of excitement in the movie, when we follow Otilia in a thrilling "chase" scene, but most of the dramatic elements are brought by the content.

There's nothing glamorous or romanticized about 4 Months - the content is dramatic, but the settings is run down and desperate, the characters ruthlessly pragmatic. The soundscapes of the city are beautiful and strange at day, terrifying by night, and completely void of music. The editing and writing are superb for the style: the events are not spelled out for you, but every scene has importance to the story or characters.

The elephant in the room is the pro life/choice question. There is one clear message for the audience: illegal abortions are terrible. You can take this message in a few different ways. All abortions are horrible and should be banned. Illegal abortion is horrible, so safe and legal abortions should be made available. The characters are complex and not very sympathetic, so the value judgments are left wide open.

You would expect to see some appalling imagery, but the movie purposefully leaves these depictions out with the exception of one final scene, tightly packed with anticipation. Oh yes, it goes there, it does that, and you know I kept my eyes shut through it.

I can see why 4 Months is so widely acclaimed. It's an emotionally charged powder-keg that deserves a permanent spot on your list of heavy-hitters. It's unique in its attempt to remain neutral on the social issues. It's realistic without falling into any of the trappings of melodramas posing as realism. It's engaging, but probably not destined to be anyone's favorite movie. Is there such a thing as too real?

The Other Boleyn Girl (2008)

Sometimes the Truth is Stranger Than Fiction

[7/10 · 16 March 2008]

A quick glimpse at the Tudor family line on Wikipedia will yield hundreds of years of made-for-movie material, but none quite as compelling as the story of Anne Boleyn. Pair a classic story with airy language, beautiful sets and costumes, and some A-list names and you have Oscar magic in the making. Right? Well, not always. We've seen it before and we're not necessarily impressed with royalty anymore. The Other Boleyn Girl offers new perspectives and dramatic angles on the saga of wives that is Henry VIII's legacy, but nearly drowns in melodrama.

And it's not entirely the movie's fault. Boleyn Girl follows the story of both Anne (Natalie Portman) and Mary (Scarlett Johansson) Boleyn and their relationship with the English court. King Henry VIII (Eric Bana) has trouble producing a male heir, so the Boleyn family offers their daughter Anne to bed. When Henry has a hunting accident due to Anne's carelessness, he is nursed and subsequently charmed by innocent Mary. But Mary is already married, so the King promotes her husband and sends the couple to court where he can meet with Mary whenever he pleases. Mary falls in love with Henry and becomes his mistress. Anne, the elder sister, is scorned by what she believes is her sister's ultimate betrayal, and plots revenge. The two continue on in these roles for some time, swapping places in bed with Henry and spurting out babies while their relatives egg them on. This isn't quite how things went down in reality, but the changes are minor and seem necessary to condense the timeline and create at least one sympathetic character.

The Other Boleyn Girl fares best when it's exploring the relationship between Anne and Mary. This isn't the first story of sister rivalry, but the dynamic between Anne and Mary is extraordinarily well-played. Their previous roles and their public images make Portman and Johansson perfect fits. We believe Portman to be intelligent and coy, and Johansson to be naive and desired. More - we believe these roles might be easily reversed. As sisters, their relationship is deeply disturbing: they love each other, they hate each other, they're unable to escape the expectations placed upon them by their family. As an older sister (with an admittedly not-as-screwed-up relationship), I found this portrayal very realistic - rich with emotion and complex meaning.

I wish I could say the rest of the movie was as artful. There's constant allusion and foreshadowing to the Boleyn demise through use of visual and editing metaphors. If some details were twisted, other details might have been cut out - too many tear-filled scenes means that this eventually feels like a soap opera. At one point in the movie, Anne is sent off to France and comes back wearing a very distracting "B" charm, which she sports until the end of the movie. When I finally finished inventing what else "B" might stand for (besides Boleyn, there are plenty of other fits), I wondered about Anne's character. She's now praised as being changed and thus back in play, but I don't see it - she was smart and ambitious before, and only gained a bit of wit during her trip to France - certainly not the drastic change everyone seemed to be making it out to be. There are some very poorly done scenes where supporting cast spell out the politics of the situation for you. This is a little condescending and probably unnecessary, if not repetitive. The costumes are beautiful, but the matching dresses become unbelievable and even plain in places. PETA must have a field day with this movie and its use of fur and meat. You won't get to see Scarlett Johansson naked in this movie, in case you were wondering - just lots of fuzzy sex montages, weirdly full of backlit hair and fur. Katherine of Aragon (Henry VIII's first wife) is given some of the most powerful lines in the movie, but they're delivered with such woodenness that my disappointment must be made known.

The Other Boleyn Girl could be so much more. As a hyper-dramatic costume flick, it does stand out. There's more than meets your eye, and the costarring performances are not to be missed. There's a lot of material to cover in this story, but a simplified script would have helped keep this film farther away from melodrama. Especially with a true story as wild as this, there's not a lot that needs to be changed or added to grip the viewer. Any embellishments verge on destroying believability and creating situations we can't relate to.

Atonement (2007)

An overblown rose

[8/10 · 20 January 2008]

War-torn romance is almost its own subgenre of drama. Though we feel we've seen it all, Atonement still has some fresh ideas to deliver. The film is a bouquet of imagery, and gathers three interesting stories into something of a twisted love triangle. Atonement's narrative may be too familiar, and often rushes past the point of empathy, but the movie is so beautiful that we can forgive some of these faults.

Briony (Saoirse Ronan) is a serious storyteller on the cusp of ladyhood. She lives with her uninhibited older sister Cecilia (Knightley) on a large estate in the English country. Cecilia is in academic competition with a servant's son, Robbie (McAvoy), as both are attending medical school with support from Cecilia's father. Briony's imagination runs wild when she thinks she sees Robbie commit a horrible crime. Her testimony condemns Robbie to prison, and leads to his involvement in WWII.

Atonement is most interesting when Briony's story is explored. She's a very smart girl, but not altogether perfect - a little too prim and prone to jealousy. But Briony is also fiercely loyal and protective of her friends. We can't completely love her, but we admire her complexity. Hers is a story of the confusion and dark dawn of adolescence, and her actions drive the rest of the film.

Cecilia is something of a rebel - proud and sharp-tongued. I'm not a Kiera fan, but I enjoy her feisty, nonchalant performance through most of the movie. Robbie is cocky but highly sentimental. They're practically made for each other, and as you can guess from the posters, they fall in love before Robbie is sent to jail and war. This is where the movie starts to lose us.

When the lovers are apart, we experience their generalized pain and longing, but it all feels like an outline instead of a heart-felt exploration. So much attention is given to the images of war and suffering, the costumes and despairing gazes, that we can't fully sympathize. This is complicated by how quickly their relationship develops, only to be torn and kept separate through most of the movie. We can't reminisce and sigh about the times they had together - there weren't many. We don't feel what they're going through, because it's mostly done in silence against highly glorified images of war. Their actions aren't especially telling. The misty looks to the horizon speak for themselves, but say little more than "this sucks, I want to go home." There are several parts of this film that lead me to believe that it's severely abridged from the novel. The secondary characters are nearly perfunctory, and one even pops on screen for a meaningful conversation with seemingly no context. Briony and Cecilia's parents are mostly absent. The lovers meet during the war, but how they found each other or why they're separated again isn't entirely clear. Five important years of Briony's life vanish. We don't have much trouble connecting the past to the present, but it's nowhere near as developed as it should be.

However, the art of the film is very well established. All of the pre-war scenes glow white and are rich with pastels and florals. Briony always appears in white and is backlit through the movie for an ethereal innocence. The shots are all highly composed and symmetrical, with careful attention to the beautiful architecture and room design. When passion is introduced, twilight falls, colors become richer and deeper, and images are blurred. Montage is so prevalent, it's almost overused. There's a tracking shot of Robbie on the French beach with thousands of English soldiers waiting for boats to retreat home - the chaos and comedy of war is explored in this lengthly, dense footage bathed in brown and gold. Beyond the costumes and colors, the sound plays a pleasantly important part in the film. Briony's scenes are accompanied by the calculated clacks of percussion and typewriters. Scenes across oceans are connected by a thread of melody. Montage music dissolves into sounds of the next scene. These techniques may be considered too overt, but the were a joy for me.

Atonement has its flaws, and I can see why some would spurn it completely. There are romantic clichés. There is not enough time given to building the romance. The ending is completely unsatisfying and gimmicky. But we're so cynical and well-versed as an audience that it's difficult to please, and nearly impossible to show us anything new without us assuming it's a trick to gain our favor. The primary focus of the film seems to be the art - I'm happy enough to hear a story that doesn't overshadow or detract from that stunning cinema.

I Am Legend (2007)

Myth and Legend

[7/10 · 18 January 2008]

Will Smith is the last man on Earth (probably?), living in a New York city turned wild. We know there's more from the trailers - "Nighttime: survive." So who or what is this mysterious force that opposes Robert Neville as he ekes out a lonely life from society's dusty leftovers? I Am Legend artfully ropes you in with the premise, but it's like a clumsy teenager trying to make love from that point on. Some people will be disappointed by the way things wrap up, but I appreciated the sentiment and obvious affection for how the film was crafted.

This is one of those films where the setting is its own character, it's so well-developed and omnipresent. The movie's appeal lies mostly there, and with Will Smith being almost impossible to dislike. Plus there's a dog. Who doesn't love smart dogs in movies? I enjoy survival stories that don't highlight any serious physical pain. Robinson Crusoe, Lost, the Boxcar Children from my youth. You get to see everyone revert to a much simpler life as hunter/gatherers. I Am Legend is full of tiny, well-thought out details for how man might survive in a post-apocalyptic city. Neville keeps a hydroponic garden in his kitchen and harvests corn in the park. Even with a fancy rifle, hunting deer is difficult and best done on foot. Drugs, TVs, and money are useless, but bacon is priceless. Robert is strong, but painfully lonely, and talks to mannequins to maintain some sort of social normalcy. Daily exercise must be rigorous if Robert wishes to compete with the wild and survive the monsters.

And the monsters are where I start to get lost. It wouldn't be enough to have Robert Neville wandering around for two hours, so there must be a direct conflict. That's well built up when we see Neville revert to hysterics when Sam the dog runs off, or when his daily routine is timed to sunset. Why does Robert freak out when the dog disappears into darkness? Why is it important that Robert returns to his home by sunset? Why must he bar the windows and doors to his own home and pour some unknown liquid over his tracks on the doorstep? The monsters, of course, are us. By playing God and finding a viral cure for cancer, the punishment handed down was death and vampirism to all. Neville is immune to the vampire virus, but still has to worry about surviving their mindless aggression. This could have been very poignant if we'd never seen a monster, or if the monsters had retained at least some of their humanity.

Halfway through the movie, it stops becoming a survival story and starts morphing into a survival of the fittest story. Neville gets into violent battles with hordes of CGI vampires. It's not very realistic, though the irony of being immune to a virus and dying from the secondary effects anyway is not lost on me. As with Signs and nearly every survival horror story before it, the suspense vanishes completely when the horror stops being psychological and starts being primal. It's appealing to a lot of people - enough that survival horror is its own genre - but I seem to loose my connection to the hero as soon as he enters a dark hallway. I'd never do that, after all! And the monsters never frighten me when I can see them. Pyramid Head is a pushover.

The movie ends abruptly and unnecessarily, and for that, a lot of people won't like it. But I enjoyed the ride. I Am Legend really delivers through the first half of the movie, where the build is immensely interesting and suspenseful. But the conflict and resolution just isn't scary or satisfying.

PS: leave the children at home, please. CGI vampires are not for younglings (usually).

The Kite Runner (2007)

Gliding neatly between a true heart-wrencher and an overly-affecting drama.

[7/10 · 13 January 2008]

You've probably heard that The Kite Runner is a very sad movie. We feel it keenly, especially since the main characters are children. There are good tear jerkers and bad ones - I don't believe that just because I'm moved to tears, a movie deserves the highest praise. The Kite Runner glides between the good and bad to deliver heart-wrenching moments and some very transparent messages.

Amir is the son of a wealthy businessman, and Hassan is the Hazara son of one of the servants in Amir's household. Amir and Hassan are great friends as children, and race kites in tournaments. Because the Hazara are an ethnic minority, Hassan is constantly harassed, and Amir along with him. The political situation with the Soviet Union gets bad enough that Amir and his father must flee the country, leaving Hassan behind. Year later, Amir is a successful novelist living in California. He gets a call to come back to Afghanistan and help Hassan's child.

This story is very neatly constructed and heavily foreshadowed. Things that go right are too convenient and achieved almost effortlessly. Anything that *can* go wrong *does* go wrong, which eventually winds up being more disappointing than depressing. Three conflicts arise in Amir's life, and his inaction drive the outcome of the first two - as an adult, Amir must learn courage and finally confront the third. Relationships spring up and entwine, such that no minor character is ever left behind, and no relationship is as simple as it initially appears.

I do appreciate the portrayal of a less-than-perfect protagonist, and the intricacies of boyhood friendships. The characters are well done in their dimensions, if lacking backstory. The first half of the movie - where the friendship is explored and Kabul is alive - is charming and horribly bittersweet. There are cultural details abound, both overt and hidden, for any who wish to be immersed in this foreign land.

The second half of the movie descends into clichés. You can see everything that's about to happen a good half-hour in advance. Amir's final conflict occurs in Afghanistan, and is very physical and action-oriented, in contrast to the rest of the story. This is all highlighted by a childish movie score that punctuates every dramatic moment with strangely dated instrumentation.

It's true that you cannot tell the story of a person without exploring their culture, where they come from. But it's a very tricky thing - western audiences leave the theatre thinking they know all about the culture, and while none of the stereotypes in The Kite Runner seem harmful, they are stereotypes. I'm particularly opposed to the way in which the Taliban was introduced into the story - not because I'm some weird pro-Taliban radical, but because I didn't see the necessity to tie it in so closely with the story. The Taliban receives the same treatment that the Nazis do in old WWII movies - they're an ever-present, one-dimensional black villain. I am by no means suggesting that either the Taliban or Nazis deserve anything but vilification, but this basic treatment is out of place, overly-affecting, and not very entertaining.

It's very possible that the inelegant conclusions in the movie are a result of having to pare down the book. I do enjoy the unconventional ways in which the characters behave: more in keeping with reality than nobility and idealized images of love. The Kite Runner has some moments that are truly heartbreaking, but continues to tug on those strings too often and with diminishing skill.

Lust, Caution (2007)

Proceed with Caution

[5/10 · 1 December 2007]

Lust, Caution is a polarizing film. I suspect some will see this and love it for the setting, intrigue, costumes, and subtle characterizations. Others will find it plodding, opaque, and full of unsympathetic characters. While I realize most drama deals with topics that are unsettling, Lust, Caution brought it to a new level for me: I was so uncomfortable I very nearly left.

Lust, Caution is a tale about a group of Shanghai college students turned assassin during WWII and the Japanese occupation of China. They plan on murdering Mr. Yee, a government official with ties to the Japanese presence. It's a classic Mata Hari-type tale with a new circumstance and a fresh setting. Wang Jiazhi is a young actress with manipulation and deceit skills that border on the supernatural. Despite the ineptitude of her classmates, she easily takes on an alias, infiltrates Mr. Yee's social circle, seduces him, and falls in love.

We can read Wang Jiazhi's character a few different ways. She can be a naive woman caught up in something much larger than herself, and highly sympathetic. While this isn't precisely wrong, I saw something more: Wang Jiazhi is an extremely twisted character; a devil in a blue dress, and a true femme fatale. She agrees to become a spy not just for acceptance among her peers, but to prove to herself and everyone that she can be a starlet. She's obsessed with movies, and learns to cry on cue. She takes on a life of lies as if it were her own, without hesitation, with seemingly little promise of reward or personal benefit, beyond being able to hobnob with the wealthy and dangerous. When Mr. Lee has sex with her for the first time, he's horribly violent, and she seems to enjoy every minute of it, smirking to herself once Mr. Lee's left her. She does protest to her friends, but I can't tell if she harbors a genuine hatred for her job, or is simply waffling. Eventually, Wang Jiazhi lets her selfish and materialistic ambitions completely overshadow her original goal, and endangers all her friends. Reprehensible.

Beyond having a heroine I hate, Lust, Caution has a paper-thin premise. None of the 6 students involved in the espionage seem to have any strong motivations, with the exception of Kuang Yu Min, whose family was killed by Mr. Yee. None of the supporting characters get much screen time, and their portrayals are callously one-dimensional and forgettable. The assassination group is woefully unequipped to deal with assassinating Mr. Yee, and they owe their success completely to the talents of Wong Jiazhi. Before she seduces Mr. Yee, the students convince Wong Jiazhi to do something unthinkable, which seems to have very little practical value in reality or in the story, except to introduce shock value into the movie - about an hour in, and it gets better (worse?) from there.

The sex in this movie is so explicit it's pornographic. Except instead of being turned on (because I do enjoy porn), I found myself burying my head into my husband's arm, which is a position I usually only reserve for horror scenes. These scenes are important, as they're some of the only scenes that establish the dynamics of the relationship between Mr. Yee and Wang Jiazhi. However, these graphic scenes are so frequent and so long, they're simply gratuitous. We're voyeurs looking in on an extremely unhealthy relationship - the sex appeal is gone and replaced with the grit of realism.

Some of the editing made the film hard to follow, particularly at the beginning, when events are explored non-chronologically, without any exposition. Through all the movie, there's an importance on significant glances, and if you're not clued into them, you might miss some of the story. The film achieves some success at noir, and I found the cultural portrayals to be interesting and accurate (from what I know).

Lust, Caution aims for high cinema and loses credibility in the loose story, shallow secondary characters, and shocking sex scenes. What could have been a coy romance is stripped of its charm when the covers come off and we realize how emotionally immature our heroine is. See this film if the concept captivates you. Anything less may leave you bored, confused, or nettled.

The Darjeeling Limited (2007)

Limited, truly.

[6/10 · 1 December 2007]

Wes Anderson films are required viewing for the hipster crowd, and regardless of whether or not the movie's any good, it'll make money from the cult following. But coming out of DL, I feel like I'm a victim of marketing. A film needs more than some critically-acclaimed actors, a cameo Bill Murray appearance, a retro soundtrack, and some bright colors to impress me.

Don't get me wrong - I'm a fan. But I'm seeing a disturbing trend. What made the original "indie" films so successful was a good juxtaposition of all of these elements, along with an ensemble cast of characters who were quirky and likable yet flawed. The characters in DL are flawed but not particularly likable, beyond possessing the faces of actors who we already know and love. None of their quirks are very enduring, none of their actions are very interesting, and their relationships are mystifying. While we do eventually get some insight into why they are the way they are, some of the details of their important relationships are never explored. Are we expected to take everything at face value? I think comedy is at its best when the characters are relatable, and I just can't relate.

I found most of the soundtrack - particularly the first "short" at the beginning of the movie - terribly annoying, as if the bottom of the barrel is being scraped for retro tunes, which I know can't be true. The movie mostly lacks any semblance of symbolism, except for one moving scene, which is fairly isolated from the rest of the story. Bill Murray is on screen for a good 2 minutes in a completely insignificant role, seemingly added for fanservice purposes only.

This movie's been done before, and better. Others may be captivated by style alone, but to establish longevity of the genre, substance will need to evolve as well.