My Recent Reviews
digi_matrix has written 16 reviews.
Wow. What a unique movie. Dead Man's Shoes. Wow. What a unique movie. In terms of revenge movies, I can see this being one of the best. It's certainly the most realistic, most powerful, and shocking. After 30 minutes of this, I was thinking,...
[+] Read Full Review
[+] Read Full Review
Wow. What a unique movie. Dead Man's Shoes. Wow. What a unique movie. In terms of revenge movies, I can see this being one of the best. It's certainly the most realistic, most powerful, and shocking. After 30 minutes of this, I was thinking, "what am I actually watching?" Something between a gangster film and a documentary. The cinematography is bewildering, because it's not stylish, and maintains a degree of reality. It's not stylish camera angles, or all about guns and glorification of violence. There's a major payoff at the end, and you'll be surprised by the plot twist.
Paddy Considine's performance here is just groundbreaking. Certainly, one of the most under-rated actors in Britain. He deserves more credit. I could stare at his short, finely trimmed hair and beard, green overalls, and his mysterious face for days. It's all in the eyes. The gangsters give also very realistic roles, just normal yobs having fun and Sonny taking things too far.
What I don't understand is with critics not liking this. Maybe critics will never understand movies like this. It must've been a very personal project for Paddy Considine since it's dedicated to Martin Joseph Considine (not sure if that is his late father or his son) and that he has 2 of his family members in the film. This is essential viewing for anyone who loves British movies that are slightly 'out there'. It's a moody, brilliant film that might move you in the process.
Paddy Considine's performance here is just groundbreaking. Certainly, one of the most under-rated actors in Britain. He deserves more credit. I could stare at his short, finely trimmed hair and beard, green overalls, and his mysterious face for days. It's all in the eyes. The gangsters give also very realistic roles, just normal yobs having fun and Sonny taking things too far.
What I don't understand is with critics not liking this. Maybe critics will never understand movies like this. It must've been a very personal project for Paddy Considine since it's dedicated to Martin Joseph Considine (not sure if that is his late father or his son) and that he has 2 of his family members in the film. This is essential viewing for anyone who loves British movies that are slightly 'out there'. It's a moody, brilliant film that might move you in the process.
Posted mar 29, 2007 6:31 am pt
This is exactly the kind of movie I've been waiting for so long. Drop dead cinematography, slow-motion galore. Sweeping camera panning, low shots, epicness. This is the most beautiful epic movie to watch. The CGI crew have done extremely well on...
[+] Read Full Review
[+] Read Full Review
This is exactly the kind of movie I've been waiting for so long. Drop dead cinematography, slow-motion galore. Sweeping camera panning, low shots, epicness. This is the most beautiful epic movie to watch. The CGI crew have done extremely well on the backgrounds, they scream like paintings to life. When the Oscars come up, if anything this movie should get Best Visual Effects easily by a mile. Every shot of this movie is perfection.
(THIS IS NOT A REVIEW, JUST MY THOUGHTS ON IT)
We start with the culture of Spartans, where a baby is being held over a cliff, overseeing dozens of skeletons possibly deserted babies. The cruel culture of Spartans is shown, and while fascistic, it is necessary if you're to be in war. These Spartans live and breath battle; it's their life. The action scenes are brilliantly directed, with the best use of slow-motion to date. Every stab, hit, slice of a sword, impalement, is focused on. The best scene is where one of the main soldiers has a solo brawl against maybe ten Persians, it's a dance in motion. The blood is graphic and stylish, and sexy. You'll be going "ooh" and "aah" whenever some sorry Persian is speared right through. This is a man's movie, just violence and gore, and it's f'n awesome.
The rest of the movie has some politics, as the queen must decide how to deal with Sparta, while pathetic bureaucrats and lawmakers, and how to maintain the greatness of the Spartans gone to war. The actress is very good, and true to Spartan culture, she's a strong woman. It's satisfying when she gets her revenge on one very pesty antagonist, and revealing his treachery. But the movie doesn't bogged down as much into this, which is good, because frankly it's boring. It's not a detractor, but feels like padding compared to the rest of the action going on.
As an action movie freak, and also a fan of war strategy, Spartans are on true form here. The strategy of squeezing the Persian army through a narrow valley where numbers won't matter is iconic. Building a wall of rocks and humiliating Xerces by piling on Persian dead bodies is fitting. Nature also helps them in a highly important way, by crashing and sinking many Persian ships. Another great strategy is when the Spartans use the wall of dead bodies to pile on the Immortals. Spartans fight against 3 armies: the first are the normal Persians; then come the Chinese, or I think so because they use bombs as weapons; and then these ninja-like Immortals. The Spartans do indeed "put their name to the test". And then finally, there are the monsters. Elephants, a surprisingly instinctive Troll, a gigantic rhino, and an extremely grotesque, fat butcher with saws for arms. The fantasy aspect is an intriguing addition to an otherwise true event, and was probably heightened due to Miller and it being a comic book. It adds more mythology and mystery to the movie, rather than just built-up warriors battling it out against mortal persian soldiers. It adds some variety into the thick of battle. The violence aspect is done very stylistic, and is very unflinching when you see a headless man drop to the floor, sadly that of a very strong son Spartan.
The dialogue is another part of this movie. There's much less quantity in dialogue, and what there is, is delivered for dramatic effect. Sometimes this kinda falls flat, other times it's excelled by mostly King Leonidas. Leonidas' words are almost poetic, memorable and chosen well, all credit goes to Frank Miller. Again, whenever the movie shifts back to the sunny side of Sparta city, the dialogue here seems forcably Thespian and too dramatic. I'm not asking for modern English, but it could've been contextualised better by the screenwriters.
The acting is top-notch. It's quite obvious every single actor is British, and reasonably so. After all, most Roman dramas use English actors, so why not Greek. The dialogue and the acting from the Spartans is very theatrical, something you'd find in a play rather than in a movie. It plays well to the time that the true story is set in, and realistically speaking, it couldn't have been better. Gerald Butler is phenomenal as the King Leonidas, he's the major reason you should see this movie. The rest of the crew do a fine job, even the absolutely hateful antagonist council member. Another soldier is brilliant, who is Stelios. Stelios and Astinos (son of Captain) make a fine fighting duo, giving some comic relief. "You fight well...for a woman." He's the war-hungry, energetic guy who likes to "jump" a lot, which results in 2 fantastic scenes as he assaults the bullwhip messenger and a Persian commander.
One great scene of acting by someone other than Leonidas, is the battle-worn Captain who has a son Spartan. When his son meets an untimely headless end, it's very heart-breaking, and the actor gives a poignant performance in that one scene. The narrator, Dilios, is a character that I have to mention. His voice is perfect to explain as how the movie goes on. And then you realise he's actually a Spartan, thus he is detailing the events that transpired during this 3 day war.
There are some awkward moments in the film. The first of which is the Oracle. I have an idea of why the Oracle danced like that to the flow of swirling smoke, but she looks very dumb dancing like that. The only reason I can see is that she might be synchronising with the flow of time, and destiny, and that all that smoke was like the future? I don't know, but it's just that one scene that bugged me. Another scene that bugged me is, how did Leonidas get that apple?! I didn't see any trees nearby, it's just funny and weird. The only other thing that detracted was when shifting away from the war and to Queen Gorgo. The pacing slowed down, and I didn't want it to. I wanted more of the battle. Slower pacing was used when the Spartans took a break, which was done well. However, using slower pacing in the form of shifting away from the war was a bit disappointing. One major aspect of the movie that disappointed me was the score. It sounded too much like Gladiator in some spots, with straight rips like an opera-like woman howling. Near the final where Dilios sends the message to the Queen in those lush, corn meadows felt too similar to Gladiator's ending. Nonetheless, the score had some fantastic parts like when the King is ready to surrender to Xerces, with the rest of his Spartans burrowed under the phalanx formation. And in one part where there was some slight rock music was great, which shows rock music can be used for epic period war movies, mostly enhanced if effects are being used with guitars and drums.
Another frankly weird part is when Xerces is massaging Leonidas' shoulders o_O
But these are minor faults, and they don't detract too much from the overall impact of the film, and that is the 300's last stand against the Persian Empire.
It's a fantastic movie, the most epic movie ever. With an unmissable credit sequence, and most of the emotional scenes being about the war, it's only moving when Leonidas has to make the decision whether to surrender. This is really the only time the movie has an emotional impact, when what's going through your mind, is Leonidas can't do this. It's the best moment of the film. As the narrator clues us into what Leonidas is feeling, about how cramped his helmet is, or how heavy the shield hangs on his shoulder. It's all so poetic and elegant. The cinematography is so excellent in directing Dilios' words. Another recent movie that used cinematography to tell a story was Pan's Labyrinth, where I've previously mentioned about that fantasy thorny mountain scene in which you hear poetic words. It engrosses you into Leonidas' character that much more, and with the close-ups, you can't help but be imagining yourself in his place. He's thinking about the future of Sparta, his loved ones, and most importantly killing this SOB of a Xerces. Xerces is decidedly camp in his costume, and sometimes it can be distracting when I'm focusing on Spartans and his' cod pieces instead of the whole picture . But the costume design is amazing; it's brash and don't look like just movie props. A magnificent shot is when Leonidas and the rest of the 300 are defeated, but then he rises in honour to accept a sea of arrows heading towards him. I went "whoah!" at this moment, and was pleased, if slightly disturbed when he was shown again with the result of many arrows impaled into him and the rest of his "children". It was a soothing moment, which The movie has a very sad ending, but then you realise it hasn't ended, and then the happiest ending comes. The most epic shot of the whole film, as you see literally thousands of Spartans, and other soldiers being commanded by Dilios, the eye-patched narrator. It's a moving moment, and a brilliant way to end the film. Oh, and do not miss end sequence. It's to die for, seeing like a 3D version of a comic book, through clever use of silhouettes straight from the film, and loads of stylistic blood splattered across the screen. Dare I say, best ending sequence next to Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events?
(THIS IS NOT A REVIEW, JUST MY THOUGHTS ON IT)
We start with the culture of Spartans, where a baby is being held over a cliff, overseeing dozens of skeletons possibly deserted babies. The cruel culture of Spartans is shown, and while fascistic, it is necessary if you're to be in war. These Spartans live and breath battle; it's their life. The action scenes are brilliantly directed, with the best use of slow-motion to date. Every stab, hit, slice of a sword, impalement, is focused on. The best scene is where one of the main soldiers has a solo brawl against maybe ten Persians, it's a dance in motion. The blood is graphic and stylish, and sexy. You'll be going "ooh" and "aah" whenever some sorry Persian is speared right through. This is a man's movie, just violence and gore, and it's f'n awesome.
The rest of the movie has some politics, as the queen must decide how to deal with Sparta, while pathetic bureaucrats and lawmakers, and how to maintain the greatness of the Spartans gone to war. The actress is very good, and true to Spartan culture, she's a strong woman. It's satisfying when she gets her revenge on one very pesty antagonist, and revealing his treachery. But the movie doesn't bogged down as much into this, which is good, because frankly it's boring. It's not a detractor, but feels like padding compared to the rest of the action going on.
As an action movie freak, and also a fan of war strategy, Spartans are on true form here. The strategy of squeezing the Persian army through a narrow valley where numbers won't matter is iconic. Building a wall of rocks and humiliating Xerces by piling on Persian dead bodies is fitting. Nature also helps them in a highly important way, by crashing and sinking many Persian ships. Another great strategy is when the Spartans use the wall of dead bodies to pile on the Immortals. Spartans fight against 3 armies: the first are the normal Persians; then come the Chinese, or I think so because they use bombs as weapons; and then these ninja-like Immortals. The Spartans do indeed "put their name to the test". And then finally, there are the monsters. Elephants, a surprisingly instinctive Troll, a gigantic rhino, and an extremely grotesque, fat butcher with saws for arms. The fantasy aspect is an intriguing addition to an otherwise true event, and was probably heightened due to Miller and it being a comic book. It adds more mythology and mystery to the movie, rather than just built-up warriors battling it out against mortal persian soldiers. It adds some variety into the thick of battle. The violence aspect is done very stylistic, and is very unflinching when you see a headless man drop to the floor, sadly that of a very strong son Spartan.
The dialogue is another part of this movie. There's much less quantity in dialogue, and what there is, is delivered for dramatic effect. Sometimes this kinda falls flat, other times it's excelled by mostly King Leonidas. Leonidas' words are almost poetic, memorable and chosen well, all credit goes to Frank Miller. Again, whenever the movie shifts back to the sunny side of Sparta city, the dialogue here seems forcably Thespian and too dramatic. I'm not asking for modern English, but it could've been contextualised better by the screenwriters.
The acting is top-notch. It's quite obvious every single actor is British, and reasonably so. After all, most Roman dramas use English actors, so why not Greek. The dialogue and the acting from the Spartans is very theatrical, something you'd find in a play rather than in a movie. It plays well to the time that the true story is set in, and realistically speaking, it couldn't have been better. Gerald Butler is phenomenal as the King Leonidas, he's the major reason you should see this movie. The rest of the crew do a fine job, even the absolutely hateful antagonist council member. Another soldier is brilliant, who is Stelios. Stelios and Astinos (son of Captain) make a fine fighting duo, giving some comic relief. "You fight well...for a woman." He's the war-hungry, energetic guy who likes to "jump" a lot, which results in 2 fantastic scenes as he assaults the bullwhip messenger and a Persian commander.
One great scene of acting by someone other than Leonidas, is the battle-worn Captain who has a son Spartan. When his son meets an untimely headless end, it's very heart-breaking, and the actor gives a poignant performance in that one scene. The narrator, Dilios, is a character that I have to mention. His voice is perfect to explain as how the movie goes on. And then you realise he's actually a Spartan, thus he is detailing the events that transpired during this 3 day war.
There are some awkward moments in the film. The first of which is the Oracle. I have an idea of why the Oracle danced like that to the flow of swirling smoke, but she looks very dumb dancing like that. The only reason I can see is that she might be synchronising with the flow of time, and destiny, and that all that smoke was like the future? I don't know, but it's just that one scene that bugged me. Another scene that bugged me is, how did Leonidas get that apple?! I didn't see any trees nearby, it's just funny and weird. The only other thing that detracted was when shifting away from the war and to Queen Gorgo. The pacing slowed down, and I didn't want it to. I wanted more of the battle. Slower pacing was used when the Spartans took a break, which was done well. However, using slower pacing in the form of shifting away from the war was a bit disappointing. One major aspect of the movie that disappointed me was the score. It sounded too much like Gladiator in some spots, with straight rips like an opera-like woman howling. Near the final where Dilios sends the message to the Queen in those lush, corn meadows felt too similar to Gladiator's ending. Nonetheless, the score had some fantastic parts like when the King is ready to surrender to Xerces, with the rest of his Spartans burrowed under the phalanx formation. And in one part where there was some slight rock music was great, which shows rock music can be used for epic period war movies, mostly enhanced if effects are being used with guitars and drums.
Another frankly weird part is when Xerces is massaging Leonidas' shoulders o_O
But these are minor faults, and they don't detract too much from the overall impact of the film, and that is the 300's last stand against the Persian Empire.
It's a fantastic movie, the most epic movie ever. With an unmissable credit sequence, and most of the emotional scenes being about the war, it's only moving when Leonidas has to make the decision whether to surrender. This is really the only time the movie has an emotional impact, when what's going through your mind, is Leonidas can't do this. It's the best moment of the film. As the narrator clues us into what Leonidas is feeling, about how cramped his helmet is, or how heavy the shield hangs on his shoulder. It's all so poetic and elegant. The cinematography is so excellent in directing Dilios' words. Another recent movie that used cinematography to tell a story was Pan's Labyrinth, where I've previously mentioned about that fantasy thorny mountain scene in which you hear poetic words. It engrosses you into Leonidas' character that much more, and with the close-ups, you can't help but be imagining yourself in his place. He's thinking about the future of Sparta, his loved ones, and most importantly killing this SOB of a Xerces. Xerces is decidedly camp in his costume, and sometimes it can be distracting when I'm focusing on Spartans and his' cod pieces instead of the whole picture . But the costume design is amazing; it's brash and don't look like just movie props. A magnificent shot is when Leonidas and the rest of the 300 are defeated, but then he rises in honour to accept a sea of arrows heading towards him. I went "whoah!" at this moment, and was pleased, if slightly disturbed when he was shown again with the result of many arrows impaled into him and the rest of his "children". It was a soothing moment, which The movie has a very sad ending, but then you realise it hasn't ended, and then the happiest ending comes. The most epic shot of the whole film, as you see literally thousands of Spartans, and other soldiers being commanded by Dilios, the eye-patched narrator. It's a moving moment, and a brilliant way to end the film. Oh, and do not miss end sequence. It's to die for, seeing like a 3D version of a comic book, through clever use of silhouettes straight from the film, and loads of stylistic blood splattered across the screen. Dare I say, best ending sequence next to Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events?
Posted mar 23, 2007 9:03 am pt
Unmissable. The 2nd best movie of the year, behind Prestige. So much tension, jaw-dropping cinematography (how did they do all that on a plane?!), very heartwrenching and better yet on how realistic everything is set out to be. Greengrass has...
[+] Read Full Review
[+] Read Full Review
Unmissable. The 2nd best movie of the year, behind Prestige. So much tension, jaw-dropping cinematography (how did they do all that on a plane?!), very heartwrenching and better yet on how realistic everything is set out to be. Greengrass has another winner on his hands.
Posted feb 8, 2007 2:46 pm pt
A truly amazing movie, Wes Anderson's best work. Clearly unmissable and a cult classic to be. My second favourite indie comedy film next to American Splendor. Every scene is brilliant and there are some genuine funny moments with Max Fischer. He's...
[+] Read Full Review
[+] Read Full Review
A truly amazing movie, Wes Anderson's best work. Clearly unmissable and a cult classic to be. My second favourite indie comedy film next to American Splendor. Every scene is brilliant and there are some genuine funny moments with Max Fischer. He's one of the most oddball characters in recent movie history. Bill Murray is fantastic, and this movie starts his increasing love for roles as a down-and-out, depressed man who has a middle age crisis but just wants to have fun. No use explaining the story here, just check the synopsis at any site. I won't say enough things about this film to make you watch it. Just watch it for the ending battle scene, pure genius. Brilliant film, one of the best.
Posted feb 8, 2007 1:57 pm pt
Unmissable. Wholeheartedly recommendable as a great afternoon movie. The ending robbery scene is one of the funniest pieces of comedic genius I've seen in a while.
To be one of the first movies from Wes Anderson, it's a very offbeat...
[+] Read Full Review
To be one of the first movies from Wes Anderson, it's a very offbeat...
[+] Read Full Review
Unmissable. Wholeheartedly recommendable as a great afternoon movie. The ending robbery scene is one of the funniest pieces of comedic genius I've seen in a while.
To be one of the first movies from Wes Anderson, it's a very offbeat comedy that shines the more you get into it. Luke Wilson and Owen Wilson are a natural fit as Dignette and Anthony, who don't appear to be brothers (unlike in real life) but more as friends. Their banal attempts at making a living from thieving results in very funny moments. Owen plans way too much, a brilliant scene is where he concocts a 75 year plan for the both of them! He plans too much, but things never go as planned, or not how he envisions them. Anthony seems like a very nice guy, who doesn't really want to rob all the time, and has a moral dilemma. The movie almost becomes like a road trip movie in the middle.
At first, I wasn't liking the movie. It was different from Rushmore and Anderson's other movies, so off the bat I wasn't comfortable with the characters. However, the further I went into the film, the more I grew to it and then started loving the movie. The writing is great, with some funny lines and just plain quirkiness. Camerawork is beautiful and creative. It's a completely different film compared to Wes Anderson's other movies, but still has some great actors and comedic situations. One great scene is when Anthony is trying to talk to Inez through Rocky as a translator. It's a sweet relationship, but you know the language barrier may come in the way, yet Anthony never looks that phased until he reveals to Grace (his very young sister) that he regrets not having learned Spanish. The fireworks scenes are funny too (not in a "ha ha" way. You just know everyone was having a great time doing this movie. With such varied and memorable movies as Royal Tenenbaums, Rushmore, Life Aquatic, Wes Anderson has done very well for himself as a bright new talent who has his own original way of making movies. Quirky is the perfect word to describe his movies, although they can be very emotionally seriousat times, which gives more depth than just saying his forte is "quirky comedy" or "deadpan humor". The music selection on this film is the best out of the rest he's done, almost wants me to buy the soundtrack.
All in all, an amazing movie. I'll leave you with this:
Amount you get when stealing a store near the pump = a few $100 bucks.
The price of love for Inez = $500.
Seeing Dennis Hopper with a pony-tail = Priceless.
To be one of the first movies from Wes Anderson, it's a very offbeat comedy that shines the more you get into it. Luke Wilson and Owen Wilson are a natural fit as Dignette and Anthony, who don't appear to be brothers (unlike in real life) but more as friends. Their banal attempts at making a living from thieving results in very funny moments. Owen plans way too much, a brilliant scene is where he concocts a 75 year plan for the both of them! He plans too much, but things never go as planned, or not how he envisions them. Anthony seems like a very nice guy, who doesn't really want to rob all the time, and has a moral dilemma. The movie almost becomes like a road trip movie in the middle.
At first, I wasn't liking the movie. It was different from Rushmore and Anderson's other movies, so off the bat I wasn't comfortable with the characters. However, the further I went into the film, the more I grew to it and then started loving the movie. The writing is great, with some funny lines and just plain quirkiness. Camerawork is beautiful and creative. It's a completely different film compared to Wes Anderson's other movies, but still has some great actors and comedic situations. One great scene is when Anthony is trying to talk to Inez through Rocky as a translator. It's a sweet relationship, but you know the language barrier may come in the way, yet Anthony never looks that phased until he reveals to Grace (his very young sister) that he regrets not having learned Spanish. The fireworks scenes are funny too (not in a "ha ha" way. You just know everyone was having a great time doing this movie. With such varied and memorable movies as Royal Tenenbaums, Rushmore, Life Aquatic, Wes Anderson has done very well for himself as a bright new talent who has his own original way of making movies. Quirky is the perfect word to describe his movies, although they can be very emotionally seriousat times, which gives more depth than just saying his forte is "quirky comedy" or "deadpan humor". The music selection on this film is the best out of the rest he's done, almost wants me to buy the soundtrack.
All in all, an amazing movie. I'll leave you with this:
Amount you get when stealing a store near the pump = a few $100 bucks.
The price of love for Inez = $500.
Seeing Dennis Hopper with a pony-tail = Priceless.
Posted feb 8, 2007 1:54 pm pt
The most original film in years. The plain reason why films are made and how strong storytelling is told in this medium, better than other mediums.
Itâs extremely easy to write this movie off as the worst movie ever....
[+] Read Full Review
Itâs extremely easy to write this movie off as the worst movie ever....
[+] Read Full Review
The most original film in years. The plain reason why films are made and how strong storytelling is told in this medium, better than other mediums.
Itâs extremely easy to write this movie off as the worst movie ever. Itâs an arthouse film, it doesnât appeal to everyone. However, itâs a chilling account of post-9/11 fear USA propaganda and how quickly as people we are to judge. But for me, this hit hard and has forced to me to change some of my views on people. If you have zero expectations and only have seen the trailer, expect a completely unique ride. I can say Iâm glad I got to see this movie and donât regret any bit of it. Although, I shouldnât have convinced my mom to see it after telling it had Brad Pitt in it. Her expectations were blown out of the water! At the end of the movie, she was crying. Damn me, why couldnât I cry? Someone come up with an implant for me to have crying sensibilities akin to that of females!
Babel is a very daring film, to push the boundaries between real life and fiction. While Crash of last year is similar, it treated the issues of racism as a stereotypical cartoon and glossed over the deeper problems of modern life. Babel does the opposite and depicts life as it really is in different cultures, making each story as realistic as possible in this new age of fear and isolation. Every account should be in a documentary, itâs that realistic. There are no comforting scene transitions or âcoming out of waterâ moments where thereâs normalcy. Itâs this reason alone that the movie can be very exhausting emotionally. Scene upon scene, weâre shown how twisted the road of life can become, just due to a single event or action. Itâs the most moving film in years and one that drives the message of communication in such a way thatâs never been shown before. This is why I watch movies, and how one medium can tell a story unlike any other medium like books or music. This story canât be told in those ways, and this is why itâs one of the extremely few original movies out there. The fact that at the end of the credits you see the words âbased on an ideaâ confirm this is an art film out to prove why movies are defined as a separate medium, and is not just what the phrase âmoving pictureâ was coined for.
Babel is daring in terms of how the director treats the scenes. In the opening ten minutes or so, you barely hear any dialogue or music. Similar to 2001: A Space Odyssey, youâre left to watch the unmovable landscapes of the Moroccan deserts. I would be willing to force more movies to take this route of less music overlay and more imagery. There is so less dialogue in some scenes that it encourages the viewer to study the film and be completely engaged into the events. When you do hear the acoustic guitar music of Gustavo Santolalla (I hope I spelled that right, I remembered that name from the credits and tried to repeat it in my head the best I could before I got home!) which is minimalist yet beautifully layered, it fits and is not there just to heighten the emotion of the scene. Mostly, youâll hear acoustic guitar and the techno booming of a Tokyo night club, the one piece of music near the end is blistering and incredibly deep. Very fast guitar picking (typical of Mexican style) and arching complexity adds to the tension of the ending where every point of the plot is being wrapped up.
The plot of the film is very simple: the wife of an American couple in a tour bus gets shot and the rest of the movie weâre seeing how people of different cultures are connected and indirectly affected. Essentially, thereâs no plot to follow, just a journey of peoplesâ lives over five grueling days and nights. Just a very overlying message about the power of communication. There is the American couple (Brad Pitt as Richard and Cate Blanchett as Susan, the Moroccan arab brothers (Yussef and Ahmed), the Mexican carer and Gael Garcia Bernal as Santiago, and the Japanese deaf-mute teenager. All of these characters are interlinked, mostly down to a .270 Winchester rifle. The cast is astounding, Iâm surprised how such great actors would participate in such a movie where thereâs less flashiness and more substance. Brad Pitt does a very heartful performance as a husband whoâs slowly losing his wife and has to deal the most with communication breakdown between languages. Cate Blanchett does a fine, if underwhelming, job as sheâs wounded immediately but has a notable scene where a woman is offering her a pipe to calm herself and she accepts, no matter what drug is in it. However, the real breakthrough performances are the Japanese deaf girl and the Mexican carer (Adriana Barraza). Rightfully so, as both were nominated for SAG awards. Amelia goes through so much hardship, and her Adrianaâs acting is so immersive, you canât help but be part of her innocent start yet destroying conclusion. The ensemble international cast is brilliant, no fault at all.
Communication is the main theme of the movie. Keep this in mind, and youâll know why this movie is so unique. It tackles the idea that how different languages have barred human populations from one another. No wonder there are so many problems like racism, ignorance, or even medical help. If youâve seen the trailer (BTW this is the only movie I recommend seeing the trailer first as it gives a clear idea), the voiceover talks about the human language being uniform in the beginning but being split up, and hereâs where we are in the modern world: split away from each other just by tongue. The reason why the plot is so simple is because thereâs a message about this communication breakdown. The real reason why films are made are not to adapt to source material covered in other mediums, but to prove that one medium can do what another one canât. In such an advanced age, where everything is at our fingertips, we forget what it is to feel real emotion, to have the simple life of the arab kids who find pleasure by spreading their arms and fighting the wind. We all live in our own little bubbles, never interfering or minding our own business. This is what we have to show for; after 2000 years of advancing knowledge and technology, weâre left with sitting on computers and talking on mobile phones or better yet, the retarded notion of texting your mates.
Technically, this film is a stunner to look at. The cinematography is inspiring, the best Iâve ever seen. The montone sandy colours of Moroccan deserts contrast substantially from the neon-glazed Tokyo skyscraper cities and billboards. As the scene changes so fast, youâre thrust into different backdrops and the director picks the right parts to focus on, showing you those places in a different and pleasing light. The director uses the appropriate music for each city to depict the rhythm of the culture. The places themselves are a delightful contrast to the bleak events and characters. There is one shot I found bewildering is when [spoiler] a cop car is chasing the maid and Santiagoâs car, [/spoiler] all you see is a pitch black screen except for a collection of red dots following another collection of dots. Youâre left with no spatial awareness of there being a road, this shot just struck me as very creative. The cinematography is just awe-inspiring, only stuff Iâve dreamt of capturing but in motion. There is enough attention to detail in each scene, especially in Japan where you witness firsthand how being deaf must affect a teenage girlâs life and sociability. What we take for granted with our senses, the deaf girl canât even listen to music. Editing is masterful, even if the scene transitions donât always work and are almost jarring to jump from the desert to Tokyo. The final shot has to be seen to believed, Iâve never seen such an endeavor by a camera.
Different timelines are used from scene to scene but is never used forcefully. Itâs only used between the desert story and the Mexican maid taking the children over to Mexico for a wedding. [spoiler] There is only one scene that got me off-track is near the end where the dad is talking to his son and he tells the story of the crab biting him. I thought to myself, no way, the dad still doesnât know what happened with the border patrol and being left alone with the maid. But then, my sister pointed out that the father had decided not to press charges on having taken the children to Mexico, and so it was all ok. [/spoiler] Never underestimate your younger sister! But some stories arenât tied up as well like the Japanese girl who wants a normal life but is left in the end with her dad and the maid [spoiler] whoâs deported back to Mexico [/spoiler] . These stories are so saddening but very realistic because not everything is tied up in a pretty bow like in most Hollywood films.
The Japanese girl deserves my opinions on her situation. Iâve never known what life must be like for a deaf person, and clearly it must be horrible. In a world where sheâs treated as a âmonsterâ and only has the use of a pencil pad and hand signals to communicate with people, I wouldnât have been surprised if she decided to take her life. I can't imagine living my life as a deaf person any different from her. It's brutally realistic how much she has to go through every single day. Of course, that would be incredibly stereotypical for a Japanese teenager in this day and age where Tokyo has the highest suicide rate in the world. The actress is amazing and courageous, although her depravity for love through being fully naked is disturbing. [spoiler] I understand that when Haruko kissed the other deaf girl, she wouldâve wanted revenge, but never to such lengths as to seduce a lieutenant detective. Yet, with her mother dead from suicide and a father who barely is around, it wouldâve been easier to take the easy way out and jump off that balcony. This thought is teased through the use of a note that couldâve been suicidal (and purposefully not translated) but thankfully not followed. [/spoiler] This movie got me to thinking about several things: racism, judgement, and America. This is probably the most disturbing result of Americaâs campaign against terrorism. Any foreign incident where a US resident is shot/killed, almost immediately the idea of terrorists being to blame is raised. I previously lived in Saudi Arabia for 6 years, and I can honestly say it was the most peaceful part of my life. No crime, no burglary, no shootings, no killings, and a great community. This is clearly stressed in the Moroccan village of Tazarine where thereâs more a sense community compared to say, that of my own Epsom one here in England. A person is not a separate entity from another. Weâre all humans who are carbon-based and thereâs not a molecule of physiological difference. Iâm only different from you either mentally or due to my environment. Living such complicated lives where happiness takes a backseat to priorities and objectives, I forgot the pure pleasure of the simple desert farming lifestyle. I fondly remember climbing up a mountain there in the barren hills of Mecca, and then coming down again: one day where I foolishly ran down the steep hill and then couldnât stop myself as I crashed into the leveled ground and the rocks. My skin was scratched and bruised, but nothing major happened and it was an experience to remember.
All in all, a simply astonishing film and one of the most original, thought-provoking films Iâve seen in years. One of, if not the best, film of the year.
Itâs extremely easy to write this movie off as the worst movie ever. Itâs an arthouse film, it doesnât appeal to everyone. However, itâs a chilling account of post-9/11 fear USA propaganda and how quickly as people we are to judge. But for me, this hit hard and has forced to me to change some of my views on people. If you have zero expectations and only have seen the trailer, expect a completely unique ride. I can say Iâm glad I got to see this movie and donât regret any bit of it. Although, I shouldnât have convinced my mom to see it after telling it had Brad Pitt in it. Her expectations were blown out of the water! At the end of the movie, she was crying. Damn me, why couldnât I cry? Someone come up with an implant for me to have crying sensibilities akin to that of females!
Babel is a very daring film, to push the boundaries between real life and fiction. While Crash of last year is similar, it treated the issues of racism as a stereotypical cartoon and glossed over the deeper problems of modern life. Babel does the opposite and depicts life as it really is in different cultures, making each story as realistic as possible in this new age of fear and isolation. Every account should be in a documentary, itâs that realistic. There are no comforting scene transitions or âcoming out of waterâ moments where thereâs normalcy. Itâs this reason alone that the movie can be very exhausting emotionally. Scene upon scene, weâre shown how twisted the road of life can become, just due to a single event or action. Itâs the most moving film in years and one that drives the message of communication in such a way thatâs never been shown before. This is why I watch movies, and how one medium can tell a story unlike any other medium like books or music. This story canât be told in those ways, and this is why itâs one of the extremely few original movies out there. The fact that at the end of the credits you see the words âbased on an ideaâ confirm this is an art film out to prove why movies are defined as a separate medium, and is not just what the phrase âmoving pictureâ was coined for.
Babel is daring in terms of how the director treats the scenes. In the opening ten minutes or so, you barely hear any dialogue or music. Similar to 2001: A Space Odyssey, youâre left to watch the unmovable landscapes of the Moroccan deserts. I would be willing to force more movies to take this route of less music overlay and more imagery. There is so less dialogue in some scenes that it encourages the viewer to study the film and be completely engaged into the events. When you do hear the acoustic guitar music of Gustavo Santolalla (I hope I spelled that right, I remembered that name from the credits and tried to repeat it in my head the best I could before I got home!) which is minimalist yet beautifully layered, it fits and is not there just to heighten the emotion of the scene. Mostly, youâll hear acoustic guitar and the techno booming of a Tokyo night club, the one piece of music near the end is blistering and incredibly deep. Very fast guitar picking (typical of Mexican style) and arching complexity adds to the tension of the ending where every point of the plot is being wrapped up.
The plot of the film is very simple: the wife of an American couple in a tour bus gets shot and the rest of the movie weâre seeing how people of different cultures are connected and indirectly affected. Essentially, thereâs no plot to follow, just a journey of peoplesâ lives over five grueling days and nights. Just a very overlying message about the power of communication. There is the American couple (Brad Pitt as Richard and Cate Blanchett as Susan, the Moroccan arab brothers (Yussef and Ahmed), the Mexican carer and Gael Garcia Bernal as Santiago, and the Japanese deaf-mute teenager. All of these characters are interlinked, mostly down to a .270 Winchester rifle. The cast is astounding, Iâm surprised how such great actors would participate in such a movie where thereâs less flashiness and more substance. Brad Pitt does a very heartful performance as a husband whoâs slowly losing his wife and has to deal the most with communication breakdown between languages. Cate Blanchett does a fine, if underwhelming, job as sheâs wounded immediately but has a notable scene where a woman is offering her a pipe to calm herself and she accepts, no matter what drug is in it. However, the real breakthrough performances are the Japanese deaf girl and the Mexican carer (Adriana Barraza). Rightfully so, as both were nominated for SAG awards. Amelia goes through so much hardship, and her Adrianaâs acting is so immersive, you canât help but be part of her innocent start yet destroying conclusion. The ensemble international cast is brilliant, no fault at all.
Communication is the main theme of the movie. Keep this in mind, and youâll know why this movie is so unique. It tackles the idea that how different languages have barred human populations from one another. No wonder there are so many problems like racism, ignorance, or even medical help. If youâve seen the trailer (BTW this is the only movie I recommend seeing the trailer first as it gives a clear idea), the voiceover talks about the human language being uniform in the beginning but being split up, and hereâs where we are in the modern world: split away from each other just by tongue. The reason why the plot is so simple is because thereâs a message about this communication breakdown. The real reason why films are made are not to adapt to source material covered in other mediums, but to prove that one medium can do what another one canât. In such an advanced age, where everything is at our fingertips, we forget what it is to feel real emotion, to have the simple life of the arab kids who find pleasure by spreading their arms and fighting the wind. We all live in our own little bubbles, never interfering or minding our own business. This is what we have to show for; after 2000 years of advancing knowledge and technology, weâre left with sitting on computers and talking on mobile phones or better yet, the retarded notion of texting your mates.
Technically, this film is a stunner to look at. The cinematography is inspiring, the best Iâve ever seen. The montone sandy colours of Moroccan deserts contrast substantially from the neon-glazed Tokyo skyscraper cities and billboards. As the scene changes so fast, youâre thrust into different backdrops and the director picks the right parts to focus on, showing you those places in a different and pleasing light. The director uses the appropriate music for each city to depict the rhythm of the culture. The places themselves are a delightful contrast to the bleak events and characters. There is one shot I found bewildering is when [spoiler] a cop car is chasing the maid and Santiagoâs car, [/spoiler] all you see is a pitch black screen except for a collection of red dots following another collection of dots. Youâre left with no spatial awareness of there being a road, this shot just struck me as very creative. The cinematography is just awe-inspiring, only stuff Iâve dreamt of capturing but in motion. There is enough attention to detail in each scene, especially in Japan where you witness firsthand how being deaf must affect a teenage girlâs life and sociability. What we take for granted with our senses, the deaf girl canât even listen to music. Editing is masterful, even if the scene transitions donât always work and are almost jarring to jump from the desert to Tokyo. The final shot has to be seen to believed, Iâve never seen such an endeavor by a camera.
Different timelines are used from scene to scene but is never used forcefully. Itâs only used between the desert story and the Mexican maid taking the children over to Mexico for a wedding. [spoiler] There is only one scene that got me off-track is near the end where the dad is talking to his son and he tells the story of the crab biting him. I thought to myself, no way, the dad still doesnât know what happened with the border patrol and being left alone with the maid. But then, my sister pointed out that the father had decided not to press charges on having taken the children to Mexico, and so it was all ok. [/spoiler] Never underestimate your younger sister! But some stories arenât tied up as well like the Japanese girl who wants a normal life but is left in the end with her dad and the maid [spoiler] whoâs deported back to Mexico [/spoiler] . These stories are so saddening but very realistic because not everything is tied up in a pretty bow like in most Hollywood films.
The Japanese girl deserves my opinions on her situation. Iâve never known what life must be like for a deaf person, and clearly it must be horrible. In a world where sheâs treated as a âmonsterâ and only has the use of a pencil pad and hand signals to communicate with people, I wouldnât have been surprised if she decided to take her life. I can't imagine living my life as a deaf person any different from her. It's brutally realistic how much she has to go through every single day. Of course, that would be incredibly stereotypical for a Japanese teenager in this day and age where Tokyo has the highest suicide rate in the world. The actress is amazing and courageous, although her depravity for love through being fully naked is disturbing. [spoiler] I understand that when Haruko kissed the other deaf girl, she wouldâve wanted revenge, but never to such lengths as to seduce a lieutenant detective. Yet, with her mother dead from suicide and a father who barely is around, it wouldâve been easier to take the easy way out and jump off that balcony. This thought is teased through the use of a note that couldâve been suicidal (and purposefully not translated) but thankfully not followed. [/spoiler] This movie got me to thinking about several things: racism, judgement, and America. This is probably the most disturbing result of Americaâs campaign against terrorism. Any foreign incident where a US resident is shot/killed, almost immediately the idea of terrorists being to blame is raised. I previously lived in Saudi Arabia for 6 years, and I can honestly say it was the most peaceful part of my life. No crime, no burglary, no shootings, no killings, and a great community. This is clearly stressed in the Moroccan village of Tazarine where thereâs more a sense community compared to say, that of my own Epsom one here in England. A person is not a separate entity from another. Weâre all humans who are carbon-based and thereâs not a molecule of physiological difference. Iâm only different from you either mentally or due to my environment. Living such complicated lives where happiness takes a backseat to priorities and objectives, I forgot the pure pleasure of the simple desert farming lifestyle. I fondly remember climbing up a mountain there in the barren hills of Mecca, and then coming down again: one day where I foolishly ran down the steep hill and then couldnât stop myself as I crashed into the leveled ground and the rocks. My skin was scratched and bruised, but nothing major happened and it was an experience to remember.
All in all, a simply astonishing film and one of the most original, thought-provoking films Iâve seen in years. One of, if not the best, film of the year.
Posted feb 3, 2007 10:01 am pt
An amazing and very touching film. One of the best comic book movies in years. A classic indie movie, worth checking out for Thora Birch's standout performance, Steve Buscemi (one of my favourite actors) and as always the very good Scarlett...
[+] Read Full Review
[+] Read Full Review
An amazing and very touching film. One of the best comic book movies in years. A classic indie movie, worth checking out for Thora Birch's standout performance, Steve Buscemi (one of my favourite actors) and as always the very good Scarlett Johansson.
Best friends Enid and Rebecca graduate from high school and find themselves forced to enter the real world. Enid is the goth rebel, anti-conformist who loathes the fake world and because of this, can never keep a job. While Enid and Rebecca are huge friends, Rebecca also sharing some of the goth-like care-free attitude, she realises she's a pretty girl and knows how to get through in the real world. As she drifts away, Enid has to adjust to a world where she's actually alone but then eventually bumps into a lonely loser (Steve Buscemi) through a prank call. She starts feel sorry for him and gets into his interests with old jazzy music. Eventually, she starts have feelings for him and then there's this forbidden love where age difference matters. The movie works extremely well as a coming-of-age movie that is much more mature than most of the drought that has been coming these many years. The dialogue is tight but loose at the same time, and the script is engaging, written from the same hand who did the comic book, Daniel Clowes. You get emotionally involved and connect with each character, their honesty, their pain, and their trials. This movie is a must-see for anyone wanting a dark comedy. A very memorable film that has one of the best endings in years, a real tear-jerker. Be sure to check out Terry Zwigoff's other movie Crumb, which is based on Robert Crumb, a similar underground comic book writer to Daniel Clowes.
Best friends Enid and Rebecca graduate from high school and find themselves forced to enter the real world. Enid is the goth rebel, anti-conformist who loathes the fake world and because of this, can never keep a job. While Enid and Rebecca are huge friends, Rebecca also sharing some of the goth-like care-free attitude, she realises she's a pretty girl and knows how to get through in the real world. As she drifts away, Enid has to adjust to a world where she's actually alone but then eventually bumps into a lonely loser (Steve Buscemi) through a prank call. She starts feel sorry for him and gets into his interests with old jazzy music. Eventually, she starts have feelings for him and then there's this forbidden love where age difference matters. The movie works extremely well as a coming-of-age movie that is much more mature than most of the drought that has been coming these many years. The dialogue is tight but loose at the same time, and the script is engaging, written from the same hand who did the comic book, Daniel Clowes. You get emotionally involved and connect with each character, their honesty, their pain, and their trials. This movie is a must-see for anyone wanting a dark comedy. A very memorable film that has one of the best endings in years, a real tear-jerker. Be sure to check out Terry Zwigoff's other movie Crumb, which is based on Robert Crumb, a similar underground comic book writer to Daniel Clowes.
Posted jan 22, 2007 6:42 am pt
The most satisfying action movie of 2006
M: I 3 is the third installment in the Mission Impossible movie series. They were inspired by the tv show of the same name but have never really gotten the feel for spy movies and the action...
[+] Read Full Review
M: I 3 is the third installment in the Mission Impossible movie series. They were inspired by the tv show of the same name but have never really gotten the feel for spy movies and the action...
[+] Read Full Review
The most satisfying action movie of 2006
M: I 3 is the third installment in the Mission Impossible movie series. They were inspired by the tv show of the same name but have never really gotten the feel for spy movies and the action never amounted to anything. You could say they were the machines for Cruisedom. However, this movie being directed by J.J. Abrams (Lost, Alias) who has a panache for spy thrillers and great suspense. This is clearly shown by the opening in which Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) is apparently chained to a chair and is staring at his wife (Michelle Monaghan) who is held captive by an insane villain (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and is about to shoot her in 10 seconds. The audience is immediately thrust in this situation of nail-biting suspense and at one moment fear the worst. Here's the great spy agent at his most vulnerable which has never been seen before. The movie then goes into flashback and we find out how we came to this moment.
From here, you find out that Ethan has settled down with a woman (finally!) and works as a traffic operator. Ethan's then contacted by his team leader and receives the obligatory self-destruct message through a camera. Ethan is back on the mission and has to save a captured teammate who was also his student. Action scenes ensue with great sound, great camera work, but then you find out the female agent dies from the microchip shock to the head.
THe movie goes from location to exotic locations to find this Rabbit's Foot. There is a plot that the IMF leader is a bad guy and other conspiracy dealings with the main bad guy. Lots of action scenes that are blistering, and fast-paced with great stunts from Cruise himself. The set pieces especially for the car chase are spectacular and cunning. New gadgets are abound mostly relating with magnetic bombs.
THe cast is great and you feel these guys have always been mates and have good chemistry. I happened to be olging at the asian agent's legs a bit too much! The movie goes along at a great pace until the scenes with Cruise and his love. The chemistry is not as sharp and you see Cruise with his now standard smile, worried look, and predictable performance.
Don't go into too much detail about the plot and you'll like it a lot. THis is an action-packed spy thriller that has substance but never amounts to that one explosive action event where you should drop your jaws and feel stunned afterward. In this day and age of action blockbusters dropping like the dimes, to depict action that is suspenseful and heart-pounding is rare until this movie. Especially the now infamous scene where Cruise is trying to pry himself out of a car when a rocket is heading straight towards him and knocks him to the edge of another car.
A bit early for the summer blockbusters, but this fills the slot brilliantly abound with so many gaps of past years. The focus is not as much on Cruise as it was in the 2nd movie which is good and broadens characters and their development. You really feel like you want to beat up Hoffman's villain and the interrogation scenes with Cruise are certainly satisfying if not freakin' dangerous! All the actors perform their roles perfectly and there is not a single dud. You eventually find out the Rabbit's Foot was really nothing but just an excuse for all the action, but afterwards it doesn't make you think about the plot but more about the grandness of the action. A movie that even has terror, suspense, action of this magnitude, and caring characters is a pretty hefty demand but M:I III fits the niche admirably and should be definitely up for sequels from the same crew. Anyone and everyone will love this movie, simple as that.
M: I 3 is the third installment in the Mission Impossible movie series. They were inspired by the tv show of the same name but have never really gotten the feel for spy movies and the action never amounted to anything. You could say they were the machines for Cruisedom. However, this movie being directed by J.J. Abrams (Lost, Alias) who has a panache for spy thrillers and great suspense. This is clearly shown by the opening in which Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) is apparently chained to a chair and is staring at his wife (Michelle Monaghan) who is held captive by an insane villain (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and is about to shoot her in 10 seconds. The audience is immediately thrust in this situation of nail-biting suspense and at one moment fear the worst. Here's the great spy agent at his most vulnerable which has never been seen before. The movie then goes into flashback and we find out how we came to this moment.
From here, you find out that Ethan has settled down with a woman (finally!) and works as a traffic operator. Ethan's then contacted by his team leader and receives the obligatory self-destruct message through a camera. Ethan is back on the mission and has to save a captured teammate who was also his student. Action scenes ensue with great sound, great camera work, but then you find out the female agent dies from the microchip shock to the head.
THe movie goes from location to exotic locations to find this Rabbit's Foot. There is a plot that the IMF leader is a bad guy and other conspiracy dealings with the main bad guy. Lots of action scenes that are blistering, and fast-paced with great stunts from Cruise himself. The set pieces especially for the car chase are spectacular and cunning. New gadgets are abound mostly relating with magnetic bombs.
THe cast is great and you feel these guys have always been mates and have good chemistry. I happened to be olging at the asian agent's legs a bit too much! The movie goes along at a great pace until the scenes with Cruise and his love. The chemistry is not as sharp and you see Cruise with his now standard smile, worried look, and predictable performance.
Don't go into too much detail about the plot and you'll like it a lot. THis is an action-packed spy thriller that has substance but never amounts to that one explosive action event where you should drop your jaws and feel stunned afterward. In this day and age of action blockbusters dropping like the dimes, to depict action that is suspenseful and heart-pounding is rare until this movie. Especially the now infamous scene where Cruise is trying to pry himself out of a car when a rocket is heading straight towards him and knocks him to the edge of another car.
A bit early for the summer blockbusters, but this fills the slot brilliantly abound with so many gaps of past years. The focus is not as much on Cruise as it was in the 2nd movie which is good and broadens characters and their development. You really feel like you want to beat up Hoffman's villain and the interrogation scenes with Cruise are certainly satisfying if not freakin' dangerous! All the actors perform their roles perfectly and there is not a single dud. You eventually find out the Rabbit's Foot was really nothing but just an excuse for all the action, but afterwards it doesn't make you think about the plot but more about the grandness of the action. A movie that even has terror, suspense, action of this magnitude, and caring characters is a pretty hefty demand but M:I III fits the niche admirably and should be definitely up for sequels from the same crew. Anyone and everyone will love this movie, simple as that.
Posted jan 21, 2007 2:16 am pt
A definite must-see for anyone itching for a thriller this time round of the year that has a cunning twist to it.
You've probably heard of Spike Lee, the controversial filmmaker that has made movies centering on the black community...
[+] Read Full Review
You've probably heard of Spike Lee, the controversial filmmaker that has made movies centering on the black community...
[+] Read Full Review
A definite must-see for anyone itching for a thriller this time round of the year that has a cunning twist to it.
You've probably heard of Spike Lee, the controversial filmmaker that has made movies centering on the black community and racism and other hot subjects for social issues. Contrary to past movies, this is a definite change in subject matter. Here we have a crime thriller about a bank hostage situation that has nothing to do with the African-American community. You wouldn't notice this movie being done by Lee if it weren't for his social commentary and the fact that the lead actor is Denzel Washington.
The movie starts out with Bollywood music that anyone familiar with the Indian cinema should be dancing to right now but must be strangely foreign to the Western audience. The music sets it out in the movie as being different and quirky. You're not really sure how the music fits into the mood but after the first half it settles into more traditional suspense minimalist orchestra. You basically find out that Clive Owen's character with his crew have robbed a bank and a wandering police officer noticecs trouble is afoot. Denzel and his partner suit up as detectives and go into the crime scene. Denzel has a loving relationship with his wife and they are pretty active, apparent from their conversations.
THe rest of the movie has Denzel and his police pals in a van waiting and a hostage situation with bank people forced to wear white painter's outfits similar to the robbers. Owen acts as a highly intelligent person who happens to double up as a villain. He dishes out the hurt to any hostage that refuses to comply and is cold and calculationg. He pulls off the role brilliantly, making you sympathise with him and at the same time loathe him for his actions. Denzel as always is great and was meant for this role. His brash and witty humour come off as natural and is determined at stopping the baddie at all costs. But in comes a shady character in the form of Jodie Foster who is willing to help the owner of the bank in obtaining a certain parcel inside the bank that is pretty secretive and has mind-blowing info.
Each character you feel for and understand the circumstancees. There is Jodie with her wicked, creepy smile, Denzel with his mouth rattling off like a fast typewriter and Owen with his calm manner of handling every objective. You might notice Denzel's partner if you've seen Serenity (Firefly) in which he played a similar baddie to Owen but here he plays as an honest cop who is pretty orthodox.
The pace of the movie is quite like a rollercoaster. At one moment, Owen is threatening to kill a hostage and this results in very nail-biting moments of drama. Another moment you have Denzel relaxing in the van and chatting with his partner. Then there are flashbacks to hostages being interviewed. The pace might seem a little off and not standard. It's not necessarily as realistic as other crime dramas have been but in that sense is unique. The interviews here screw up the timeline because you don't know whether it occurs in real-time or in the future. This might throw off some people but anyone paying close attention might notice the chronology of events are jumbled.
The cinematography is one thing to mention here. As one who has seen NYC way too much on the telly or in movies, Spike Lee has always shown the little details of the neighbourhoods and the social status. Here, the shots are wide and meaningful. The social commentary is still there with an example of a Sikh hostage misidentified with an Arab terrorist. This little subplot is intriguing and will be familar to any Lee fans. The camera movements are calm and succint and one moment might have you thrown off in which Denzel is floating rapidly towards the bank but is pulled to good, if not great, effect for his mood.
THe interplay between Denzel and Owen is fantastic and is sure to entice the audience with them playing a game of cat and mouse. With Jodie's character jutting in all the time, you wish her character would just die away and is damn annoying. The story of the secret parcel reveals a secret that puts the audience into shock and opens up a new plot. Another quirky and funny plot is that of Owen asking what a little black kid is playing on his PSP. The game appears to be a GTA satire (not gameplay footage! )that goes into-fullscreen with great comedic if not, shocking results.
Once you find out the twist in the end, and how it's played cunningly by Owen you are thinking all the way. There are some twists that will definitely make your head spin but all is explained, but in no sense as spoon-feeding. I'm sure many of you will have different theories into Owen's purpose, his escape, and Denzel's real plan. The raid scene has great action that is usually not affiliated with Lee but is definitely heart-pounding, but obviously not satisfying. You'll find a lot to talk about after the movie but indefinitely, you'll come off thinking this was a very good film. It has all the ingredients of Spike Lee and drags him into new commercial ground where his work can be accepted by all the mainstream. The movie is not overly spectacular and is more like an indie film with the bells and whistles of a big-budget movie. Denzel and Lee succeed again and you'll find to become a convert for liking Clive Owen as a wide-ranging actor.
You've probably heard of Spike Lee, the controversial filmmaker that has made movies centering on the black community and racism and other hot subjects for social issues. Contrary to past movies, this is a definite change in subject matter. Here we have a crime thriller about a bank hostage situation that has nothing to do with the African-American community. You wouldn't notice this movie being done by Lee if it weren't for his social commentary and the fact that the lead actor is Denzel Washington.
The movie starts out with Bollywood music that anyone familiar with the Indian cinema should be dancing to right now but must be strangely foreign to the Western audience. The music sets it out in the movie as being different and quirky. You're not really sure how the music fits into the mood but after the first half it settles into more traditional suspense minimalist orchestra. You basically find out that Clive Owen's character with his crew have robbed a bank and a wandering police officer noticecs trouble is afoot. Denzel and his partner suit up as detectives and go into the crime scene. Denzel has a loving relationship with his wife and they are pretty active, apparent from their conversations.
THe rest of the movie has Denzel and his police pals in a van waiting and a hostage situation with bank people forced to wear white painter's outfits similar to the robbers. Owen acts as a highly intelligent person who happens to double up as a villain. He dishes out the hurt to any hostage that refuses to comply and is cold and calculationg. He pulls off the role brilliantly, making you sympathise with him and at the same time loathe him for his actions. Denzel as always is great and was meant for this role. His brash and witty humour come off as natural and is determined at stopping the baddie at all costs. But in comes a shady character in the form of Jodie Foster who is willing to help the owner of the bank in obtaining a certain parcel inside the bank that is pretty secretive and has mind-blowing info.
Each character you feel for and understand the circumstancees. There is Jodie with her wicked, creepy smile, Denzel with his mouth rattling off like a fast typewriter and Owen with his calm manner of handling every objective. You might notice Denzel's partner if you've seen Serenity (Firefly) in which he played a similar baddie to Owen but here he plays as an honest cop who is pretty orthodox.
The pace of the movie is quite like a rollercoaster. At one moment, Owen is threatening to kill a hostage and this results in very nail-biting moments of drama. Another moment you have Denzel relaxing in the van and chatting with his partner. Then there are flashbacks to hostages being interviewed. The pace might seem a little off and not standard. It's not necessarily as realistic as other crime dramas have been but in that sense is unique. The interviews here screw up the timeline because you don't know whether it occurs in real-time or in the future. This might throw off some people but anyone paying close attention might notice the chronology of events are jumbled.
The cinematography is one thing to mention here. As one who has seen NYC way too much on the telly or in movies, Spike Lee has always shown the little details of the neighbourhoods and the social status. Here, the shots are wide and meaningful. The social commentary is still there with an example of a Sikh hostage misidentified with an Arab terrorist. This little subplot is intriguing and will be familar to any Lee fans. The camera movements are calm and succint and one moment might have you thrown off in which Denzel is floating rapidly towards the bank but is pulled to good, if not great, effect for his mood.
THe interplay between Denzel and Owen is fantastic and is sure to entice the audience with them playing a game of cat and mouse. With Jodie's character jutting in all the time, you wish her character would just die away and is damn annoying. The story of the secret parcel reveals a secret that puts the audience into shock and opens up a new plot. Another quirky and funny plot is that of Owen asking what a little black kid is playing on his PSP. The game appears to be a GTA satire (not gameplay footage! )that goes into-fullscreen with great comedic if not, shocking results.
Once you find out the twist in the end, and how it's played cunningly by Owen you are thinking all the way. There are some twists that will definitely make your head spin but all is explained, but in no sense as spoon-feeding. I'm sure many of you will have different theories into Owen's purpose, his escape, and Denzel's real plan. The raid scene has great action that is usually not affiliated with Lee but is definitely heart-pounding, but obviously not satisfying. You'll find a lot to talk about after the movie but indefinitely, you'll come off thinking this was a very good film. It has all the ingredients of Spike Lee and drags him into new commercial ground where his work can be accepted by all the mainstream. The movie is not overly spectacular and is more like an indie film with the bells and whistles of a big-budget movie. Denzel and Lee succeed again and you'll find to become a convert for liking Clive Owen as a wide-ranging actor.
Posted jan 21, 2007 2:14 am pt
Unmissable
Should've reviewed this a long time ago when I actually saw it, but I still remember it so clearly. Which goes to show how much of an impact it had.
Definite must-see for anyone who loved the graphic novel and...
[+] Read Full Review
Should've reviewed this a long time ago when I actually saw it, but I still remember it so clearly. Which goes to show how much of an impact it had.
Definite must-see for anyone who loved the graphic novel and...
[+] Read Full Review
Unmissable
Should've reviewed this a long time ago when I actually saw it, but I still remember it so clearly. Which goes to show how much of an impact it had.
Definite must-see for anyone who loved the graphic novel and is interested in the direction our country is going in (USA + UK). A real thinker.
The vision this film take is quite unique. It blends social commentary of the current issues in the world and packs it into a great action thriller. The story starts off in the dystopain future of England in 2020 where the country is governed by the Voice and Sutler and his cronies. Basically, the government controls everything, what the people watch, what the people hear, the 'truth' even. There's a talkative host who spins all the facts and does exactly what the government tells him to do and people believe him to be genuine.
There are subtle hints at how much of our current life is portrayed in such a film that's meant to be a blockbuster. You might see the Wachowski brothers attached to this project but don't let that fool you if you've been stigmatised with their previous films. McTeague, their former assisant director, takes the reins here and does a very good job for melding all the bits of the story and forming a more cohesive story than the graphic novel tries to be. It's surprising how relevant the graphic novel was at the time of Thatcher in the 80's and how history seems to repeat itself in the most hideous of ways. There's even a very straight cue to our current situations near the end of the detective's sleuthing journey to capture V which deals with water supplies, moral panics, and bird flu (!). Before this, the world was pretty fictional, the only real world relation is itâs set in England and has comedy sketch shows very similar to Benny Hill.
Letâs talk about the characters now, of which there arenât as many as in the comic book but sufficient enough to avoid many meandering sub-plots and irrelevant info that were problems of the original. Unlike the recent Da Vinci Code, this is one of those rare movies which is bettered on the silver screen and wonât have you crying, âThe book was much betterâ. There is the anarchist terrorist/freedom fighter of the name,V, whose path to justice is laden with grisly murders, theatrical performances, and an ambiguous relationship with a much younger reporter. V is deeply determined and will never go back from a decision. Heâs the sort of anti-hero that you will certainly sympathise for (of whom you definitely donât do in the novel) and will maybe question yourselves of this empathy for such an over the top persona who goes against the government so openly. Hugo Weavingâs acting here is probably his best to date and truly embodies the brash, grandeur V. You are completely absorbed by the guyâs voice and his authenticity to how the comic book character should be depicted on screen. Evey is the news reporter who is saved by V during a sexual assault in the middle of the night and has a now typical strong female personality but also develops as a wiser person throughout the movie. Natalie Portmanâs performance is excellent and true to the character, willing to sacrifice her hair (and clothes!), another character you will identify with. You could say sheâs the average joe/jill in the audience who sees Vâs actions and questions them which makes the movie even more emotional and personal. Another standout performance is the detective Finch played by Stephen Rea who has the downtrodden expression of a person who canât quite reach his goals. Thereâs Creedy with his sneering face youâd love to smash in and thereâs the brilliant dictator, Adam Sutler, played by John Hurt who flexes his jaw muscles for a lot of shouting. Simply he does a very good job here and doesnât wink as if such an experienced actor shouldnât be in this comic book movie.
Despite the trailers you mightâve seen, this is not an action blockbuster that involves pretentious 15 minute car chase scenes or overly dramatic special effects. The action is minimalistic but tight, never distracting you from the plot. The action itself is quite marvelous and beautiful to say the least, with certain scenes clearly sticking in your head after you leave the theatre. As said previously, the camera work is decent and colours and sets are subtle but vivid. There are other sub-plots that will capture you, such as Valerie the lesbianâs life story (which surprised me that it was included here) and Gordon, the eccentric TV presenter who collects memorabilia and is satirical. There are things there that will shock you, make you laugh, make you think, make you angry. The political standpoint of the movie is very in-your-face and doesnât shy from the details. In this case, it works and gets the point across unlike other movies where the audience is left thinking what the heck was that all about. The ending is awe-inspiring and has generated standing ovations from cinemas around the world. Itâs one of those water-cooler movies youâll feel glad you watched and make any comic fan feel all fuzzy inside. Alan Moore, you shouldnât have missed out on this one.
Should've reviewed this a long time ago when I actually saw it, but I still remember it so clearly. Which goes to show how much of an impact it had.
Definite must-see for anyone who loved the graphic novel and is interested in the direction our country is going in (USA + UK). A real thinker.
The vision this film take is quite unique. It blends social commentary of the current issues in the world and packs it into a great action thriller. The story starts off in the dystopain future of England in 2020 where the country is governed by the Voice and Sutler and his cronies. Basically, the government controls everything, what the people watch, what the people hear, the 'truth' even. There's a talkative host who spins all the facts and does exactly what the government tells him to do and people believe him to be genuine.
There are subtle hints at how much of our current life is portrayed in such a film that's meant to be a blockbuster. You might see the Wachowski brothers attached to this project but don't let that fool you if you've been stigmatised with their previous films. McTeague, their former assisant director, takes the reins here and does a very good job for melding all the bits of the story and forming a more cohesive story than the graphic novel tries to be. It's surprising how relevant the graphic novel was at the time of Thatcher in the 80's and how history seems to repeat itself in the most hideous of ways. There's even a very straight cue to our current situations near the end of the detective's sleuthing journey to capture V which deals with water supplies, moral panics, and bird flu (!). Before this, the world was pretty fictional, the only real world relation is itâs set in England and has comedy sketch shows very similar to Benny Hill.
Letâs talk about the characters now, of which there arenât as many as in the comic book but sufficient enough to avoid many meandering sub-plots and irrelevant info that were problems of the original. Unlike the recent Da Vinci Code, this is one of those rare movies which is bettered on the silver screen and wonât have you crying, âThe book was much betterâ. There is the anarchist terrorist/freedom fighter of the name,V, whose path to justice is laden with grisly murders, theatrical performances, and an ambiguous relationship with a much younger reporter. V is deeply determined and will never go back from a decision. Heâs the sort of anti-hero that you will certainly sympathise for (of whom you definitely donât do in the novel) and will maybe question yourselves of this empathy for such an over the top persona who goes against the government so openly. Hugo Weavingâs acting here is probably his best to date and truly embodies the brash, grandeur V. You are completely absorbed by the guyâs voice and his authenticity to how the comic book character should be depicted on screen. Evey is the news reporter who is saved by V during a sexual assault in the middle of the night and has a now typical strong female personality but also develops as a wiser person throughout the movie. Natalie Portmanâs performance is excellent and true to the character, willing to sacrifice her hair (and clothes!), another character you will identify with. You could say sheâs the average joe/jill in the audience who sees Vâs actions and questions them which makes the movie even more emotional and personal. Another standout performance is the detective Finch played by Stephen Rea who has the downtrodden expression of a person who canât quite reach his goals. Thereâs Creedy with his sneering face youâd love to smash in and thereâs the brilliant dictator, Adam Sutler, played by John Hurt who flexes his jaw muscles for a lot of shouting. Simply he does a very good job here and doesnât wink as if such an experienced actor shouldnât be in this comic book movie.
Despite the trailers you mightâve seen, this is not an action blockbuster that involves pretentious 15 minute car chase scenes or overly dramatic special effects. The action is minimalistic but tight, never distracting you from the plot. The action itself is quite marvelous and beautiful to say the least, with certain scenes clearly sticking in your head after you leave the theatre. As said previously, the camera work is decent and colours and sets are subtle but vivid. There are other sub-plots that will capture you, such as Valerie the lesbianâs life story (which surprised me that it was included here) and Gordon, the eccentric TV presenter who collects memorabilia and is satirical. There are things there that will shock you, make you laugh, make you think, make you angry. The political standpoint of the movie is very in-your-face and doesnât shy from the details. In this case, it works and gets the point across unlike other movies where the audience is left thinking what the heck was that all about. The ending is awe-inspiring and has generated standing ovations from cinemas around the world. Itâs one of those water-cooler movies youâll feel glad you watched and make any comic fan feel all fuzzy inside. Alan Moore, you shouldnât have missed out on this one.
Posted jan 21, 2007 2:14 am pt
Worth a watch for anyone wanting a fun popcorn blockbuster and a ride of escapism of being enthralled within the X-Men universe once again. X-Men fans, however, should shy away as there is quite enough disappointment.
I just came back...
[+] Read Full Review
I just came back...
[+] Read Full Review
Worth a watch for anyone wanting a fun popcorn blockbuster and a ride of escapism of being enthralled within the X-Men universe once again. X-Men fans, however, should shy away as there is quite enough disappointment.
I just came back from the Odeon Cinema where the movie showed and was with my sister. Even at this time (2:30 pm) there were quite a lot of people in the seats and many teenagers. DO stick around for the end, a very nice teaser however the name he blurts out has no relevance to an X-men character you might be thinking about.
Now, let me get this out: I was pretty disappointed with this movie. I can pretty much blame this on Ratner but that wouldn't be fair so I will blame Avi Arad too (Kirkland should be doing the movies! not the cartoons anymore). I'm a slight X-Men fan converted by the 1st movie and I do watch the cartoon regularly (X-Men Evolution). Anyone wanting to be more satisfied should watch the cartoon because no matter what your age, you'll find it better handles the story than this movie. This is the worst of the trilogy and I'll give you plentiful reasons.
The basic plot is the government has found a cure for the x mutant gene and are hoping to mass-produce it for administering it in every mutant. This is a good thing for Rogue due to her social problems and any of the mutants who look deformed enough to hate themselves. Of course, the matter is turned bad when Magneto's statement is proven right and the humans do draw first blood by using the cure specimens into weapons called "cure weapons". This opens up quite a humorous scene where soldiers are loading up with the cure and the guns look like plastic toy guns. This adds some untentional comedy to a movie that falls flat on some parts. Now, the gov't. uses Jimmy as the cure as you see in one scene with the Beast which is quite emotional and interesting.
Now we all know the X-Men have always been about varied characters and I'll give you the definite low-down on them.
The good: All the newcomers on the good side are done perfectly and stay true to their character. These are of course Angel, Beast, and Kitty Pryde. Beast is played by Kelsey grammar (Frasier) who is a very human character and Kelsey adds a lot of personal worth to the character and is quite funny, even though the make-up might be jarring at first. Angel is also given enough screen justice and has a chilling backstory of him trying to cut off his wings in what could be described as a suicide attempt, said so because of the many cutting tools on display. Kitty is however, the best character to be portrayed on the screen and has many likenesses with her counterpart in X-Men Evolution (again, do watch this cartoon, highly recommended ). She is innocent, sweet, and overall very sincere. Her chase from Juggernaut is quite fun to watch and she has a more than friendly relationship with Bobby. Colossus is pretty good too, being a budding partner of Wolverine (at least his powers are used in a funny way!)
The bad: However, there were a few stinkers. Nearly all the new bad guys are just plain one-dimensional. Juggernaut is good but completely miscast by Vinnie Jones although he does provide the only line that provided me happiness out of the whole writing: "I'm the Juggernaut, b*tch!". The punk goth mutant trio are just weird and the shockwave guy/girl is just shocking.
Surprising is the number of new mutants that you might spot out as X-Men but on the wrong side. Spike is definitely there in terms of features but looks like a generic bad guy fighting against Wolverine and is on the wrong side from the start. There is a self-replicating bad guy that is like the clone of the self-replicating much younger guy who you see in the very start, watching the news. But do not fret, Phoenix is done outstandingly by Famke Jansenn. She is basically the most powerful mutant ever and you'll feel sorry that Jean Grey never comes out and then has to go.
The action scenes are spectacular and the Golden Gate bridge scene is pretty amazing. There are loads of CGI mixed in with live footage which is done very well for special effects. The last battle which starts with flaming cars heading towards the good guys is pretty cool. Another action scene is at the very beginning which sort of kills your adrenaline meter after it's done but this is understandable since it's a training mission synonymous with the cartoons. But, from this scene we are hinted of a Sentinel who is never shown in the rest of the movie, but so isn't Stryker which is a shame. Also, Nightcrawler is missing and they've STILL not introduced Gambit! They've however, introduced Psylocke, Arclight, and Callisto (the punk goth trio I was talking about earlier).
The problem of the movie is it's rushed, not enough characters are given screen justice. Most of them are just plopped there just for the fans and this probably would be an insult. Wolverine isn't used to his full potential and I thought at least this time when he sliced enemies, blood might come out for added effect but you can't get everything. Phoenix is done very good and causes the death of Xavier which is probably THE MOST SHOCKING SCENE in the whole movie. Her killing Cyclops was a crap death and not needed. And then she has to die too by Wolverine. The Wolverine and Jean GRey scenes are pretty good and emotional (especially the makeout scene ). Writing is pretty bad but can be good sometimes, mainly for the main characters. One piece of dialogue said by the President saying Mystique having "hell hath no fury like a woman scorned" seemed pretty out of place.
I did love Mystique, she is brilliant. When she loses her powers and we see her human side, she is stunning especially with the black hair (i didn't notice the actor weirdly enough). There are some quite good scenes especially with Bobby and Pyro and Rogue but this movie has an odd ending and is sad that they're not making another sequel. Overall, a fun blockbuster but if you're a fan you might want to rent it on DVD even, if only for the amount of new mutants.
Also, where oh where, is Scarlet WITCH?! They don't even mention that Juggernaut is Xavier's brother!!! Please do watch the evolution cartoon, you'll be glad. 165 million smackeroonies and they can't do the comic book justice. See, I'm a newbie fan of X-Men and yet even I could be disappointed. I'm not a hardcore X-Men fan, I've never even read an Xmen comic! So you can respect my opinion.
I just came back from the Odeon Cinema where the movie showed and was with my sister. Even at this time (2:30 pm) there were quite a lot of people in the seats and many teenagers. DO stick around for the end, a very nice teaser however the name he blurts out has no relevance to an X-men character you might be thinking about.
Now, let me get this out: I was pretty disappointed with this movie. I can pretty much blame this on Ratner but that wouldn't be fair so I will blame Avi Arad too (Kirkland should be doing the movies! not the cartoons anymore). I'm a slight X-Men fan converted by the 1st movie and I do watch the cartoon regularly (X-Men Evolution). Anyone wanting to be more satisfied should watch the cartoon because no matter what your age, you'll find it better handles the story than this movie. This is the worst of the trilogy and I'll give you plentiful reasons.
The basic plot is the government has found a cure for the x mutant gene and are hoping to mass-produce it for administering it in every mutant. This is a good thing for Rogue due to her social problems and any of the mutants who look deformed enough to hate themselves. Of course, the matter is turned bad when Magneto's statement is proven right and the humans do draw first blood by using the cure specimens into weapons called "cure weapons". This opens up quite a humorous scene where soldiers are loading up with the cure and the guns look like plastic toy guns. This adds some untentional comedy to a movie that falls flat on some parts. Now, the gov't. uses Jimmy as the cure as you see in one scene with the Beast which is quite emotional and interesting.
Now we all know the X-Men have always been about varied characters and I'll give you the definite low-down on them.
The good: All the newcomers on the good side are done perfectly and stay true to their character. These are of course Angel, Beast, and Kitty Pryde. Beast is played by Kelsey grammar (Frasier) who is a very human character and Kelsey adds a lot of personal worth to the character and is quite funny, even though the make-up might be jarring at first. Angel is also given enough screen justice and has a chilling backstory of him trying to cut off his wings in what could be described as a suicide attempt, said so because of the many cutting tools on display. Kitty is however, the best character to be portrayed on the screen and has many likenesses with her counterpart in X-Men Evolution (again, do watch this cartoon, highly recommended ). She is innocent, sweet, and overall very sincere. Her chase from Juggernaut is quite fun to watch and she has a more than friendly relationship with Bobby. Colossus is pretty good too, being a budding partner of Wolverine (at least his powers are used in a funny way!)
The bad: However, there were a few stinkers. Nearly all the new bad guys are just plain one-dimensional. Juggernaut is good but completely miscast by Vinnie Jones although he does provide the only line that provided me happiness out of the whole writing: "I'm the Juggernaut, b*tch!". The punk goth mutant trio are just weird and the shockwave guy/girl is just shocking.
Surprising is the number of new mutants that you might spot out as X-Men but on the wrong side. Spike is definitely there in terms of features but looks like a generic bad guy fighting against Wolverine and is on the wrong side from the start. There is a self-replicating bad guy that is like the clone of the self-replicating much younger guy who you see in the very start, watching the news. But do not fret, Phoenix is done outstandingly by Famke Jansenn. She is basically the most powerful mutant ever and you'll feel sorry that Jean Grey never comes out and then has to go.
The action scenes are spectacular and the Golden Gate bridge scene is pretty amazing. There are loads of CGI mixed in with live footage which is done very well for special effects. The last battle which starts with flaming cars heading towards the good guys is pretty cool. Another action scene is at the very beginning which sort of kills your adrenaline meter after it's done but this is understandable since it's a training mission synonymous with the cartoons. But, from this scene we are hinted of a Sentinel who is never shown in the rest of the movie, but so isn't Stryker which is a shame. Also, Nightcrawler is missing and they've STILL not introduced Gambit! They've however, introduced Psylocke, Arclight, and Callisto (the punk goth trio I was talking about earlier).
The problem of the movie is it's rushed, not enough characters are given screen justice. Most of them are just plopped there just for the fans and this probably would be an insult. Wolverine isn't used to his full potential and I thought at least this time when he sliced enemies, blood might come out for added effect but you can't get everything. Phoenix is done very good and causes the death of Xavier which is probably THE MOST SHOCKING SCENE in the whole movie. Her killing Cyclops was a crap death and not needed. And then she has to die too by Wolverine. The Wolverine and Jean GRey scenes are pretty good and emotional (especially the makeout scene ). Writing is pretty bad but can be good sometimes, mainly for the main characters. One piece of dialogue said by the President saying Mystique having "hell hath no fury like a woman scorned" seemed pretty out of place.
I did love Mystique, she is brilliant. When she loses her powers and we see her human side, she is stunning especially with the black hair (i didn't notice the actor weirdly enough). There are some quite good scenes especially with Bobby and Pyro and Rogue but this movie has an odd ending and is sad that they're not making another sequel. Overall, a fun blockbuster but if you're a fan you might want to rent it on DVD even, if only for the amount of new mutants.
Also, where oh where, is Scarlet WITCH?! They don't even mention that Juggernaut is Xavier's brother!!! Please do watch the evolution cartoon, you'll be glad. 165 million smackeroonies and they can't do the comic book justice. See, I'm a newbie fan of X-Men and yet even I could be disappointed. I'm not a hardcore X-Men fan, I've never even read an Xmen comic! So you can respect my opinion.
Posted jan 21, 2007 2:12 am pt
Mindbending and memorable: My favourite film of all time
The folks at BBC Three graced me tonight with Donnie Darko. It's been quite a while since I saw it, but now all those wonderful and haunting feelings trickle back slowly into my...
[+] Read Full Review
The folks at BBC Three graced me tonight with Donnie Darko. It's been quite a while since I saw it, but now all those wonderful and haunting feelings trickle back slowly into my...
[+] Read Full Review
Mindbending and memorable: My favourite film of all time
The folks at BBC Three graced me tonight with Donnie Darko. It's been quite a while since I saw it, but now all those wonderful and haunting feelings trickle back slowly into my head. I learned to like dark movies because of this gem of a film, it was then I realised that darkness has more meaning in life than happiness. Happiness has been gruesomely transformed into a commercial commodity of which any corporation will feed you a product for a better life. Happiness is fake nowadays, people are fake, their feelings, their faces, their bodies...
Donnie Darko has some of the most mesmerising and mind-bending music committed to film. Forget overblown orchestras, this is music that perfectly complements the mood of the film and pulls at your heartstrings. In addition to the gut-wrenchingly beautiful score by Michael Andrews, there are some classic songs merged here such as Love will tear us apart from Joy Division, Killing Moon by Echo and the Bunnymen, Head over Heels, Mad World by Gary Jules, and much more I can't remember. It's the music that will make you cry when you go back to sleep.
Above you see, one of the great moments in the film where Drew Barrymoore, the teacher, is on the end of her string. This is the only film role I can tolerate her in, she is just amazing. And the fact that she's an executive producer is just really out of the blue. What is most shocking about this film is the stellar cast. I won't go into details about each character, but clearly there couldn't be better actors to portray them so perfectly. Patrick Swayze is great as the speaker of fake happiness and lover of kiddy porn. That mother who has "God is awesome!!!!" on her t-shirt is perfectly evil, you just want to stab her right through the heart. Who thought real-life siblings could be so great on-screen together (Jake and Maggie Gyllenhaal). There was just great performances all around.
This movie has enough memorable scenes to rival the Godfather in terms of possibility of being a classic in movie history. In fact, it probably is. You can't knock this film. The movie is less about philosophy and time travel (which is contradictory to the blog title) but more about human emotion. You've never seen a paranoid schizophrenic like Donnie Darko before, who relays his childish feelings and insecurities to us, but also bringing that air of pure destruction so coyly realised through Jake Gyllenhaal's smirk. Who can beat the bunny costume and freaky mask?
A brilliant script, great attention to detail (which means if you blink you might miss something very important in a scene), a geniune and novel approach to use philosophy to understand the world, and no gimmicks about time travel. Has there even been a more original movie to date? What's even more shocking that Richard Kelly, who wrote AND directed the film, shot the film in 28 days, giving the movie an eerie coincidence. Everything about this movie is disturbingly coincidental and relating to fate. If you do not cry at the last quarter of this film, your heart must truly be made of stone. I (being male) shed the tears, very uncharacteristic of me. This is obviously my favourite movie but if there is anyone who doesn't like this movie, then they must be seriously biased/bigoted/or just plain effin' crazy.
This movie has just breathtaking cinematography. Pacing is perfect and some of the camera angles are iconic, like when school starts and the camera tilts from horizontal in a spin to normal gravity with Donnie Darko evacuating the bus.
This movie is clearly not overrated. Whoever says that, must know nothing about popularity. You know what's overrated? Lord of the Rings getting eleven oscars. Now that is just unfair and wrong IMHO. This movie is the film all cult moviegoers worship to, it's not pretentious, or commercial, or fake in any way. There is no subjective loving for this film, everyone loves this movie for the exact same reasons. A deserved masterpiece in cult movie history and a classic of the modern age if ever I saw one. Ranks up there with the greats as one of the most daring and original movies, even bettering the Matrix franchise in the amount of love going into making the movie.
I sometimes feel depressed from this film and I hope no one thinks there is a romantic view of suicide here. But what always turns my face upside down is the ending, because it's not schmultzy, or emotion-whoring. It's the right way to end the film and it haunts you way long after the movie finishes. This is not a movie you easily forget, even if you don't understand it.
The folks at BBC Three graced me tonight with Donnie Darko. It's been quite a while since I saw it, but now all those wonderful and haunting feelings trickle back slowly into my head. I learned to like dark movies because of this gem of a film, it was then I realised that darkness has more meaning in life than happiness. Happiness has been gruesomely transformed into a commercial commodity of which any corporation will feed you a product for a better life. Happiness is fake nowadays, people are fake, their feelings, their faces, their bodies...
Donnie Darko has some of the most mesmerising and mind-bending music committed to film. Forget overblown orchestras, this is music that perfectly complements the mood of the film and pulls at your heartstrings. In addition to the gut-wrenchingly beautiful score by Michael Andrews, there are some classic songs merged here such as Love will tear us apart from Joy Division, Killing Moon by Echo and the Bunnymen, Head over Heels, Mad World by Gary Jules, and much more I can't remember. It's the music that will make you cry when you go back to sleep.
Above you see, one of the great moments in the film where Drew Barrymoore, the teacher, is on the end of her string. This is the only film role I can tolerate her in, she is just amazing. And the fact that she's an executive producer is just really out of the blue. What is most shocking about this film is the stellar cast. I won't go into details about each character, but clearly there couldn't be better actors to portray them so perfectly. Patrick Swayze is great as the speaker of fake happiness and lover of kiddy porn. That mother who has "God is awesome!!!!" on her t-shirt is perfectly evil, you just want to stab her right through the heart. Who thought real-life siblings could be so great on-screen together (Jake and Maggie Gyllenhaal). There was just great performances all around.
This movie has enough memorable scenes to rival the Godfather in terms of possibility of being a classic in movie history. In fact, it probably is. You can't knock this film. The movie is less about philosophy and time travel (which is contradictory to the blog title) but more about human emotion. You've never seen a paranoid schizophrenic like Donnie Darko before, who relays his childish feelings and insecurities to us, but also bringing that air of pure destruction so coyly realised through Jake Gyllenhaal's smirk. Who can beat the bunny costume and freaky mask?
A brilliant script, great attention to detail (which means if you blink you might miss something very important in a scene), a geniune and novel approach to use philosophy to understand the world, and no gimmicks about time travel. Has there even been a more original movie to date? What's even more shocking that Richard Kelly, who wrote AND directed the film, shot the film in 28 days, giving the movie an eerie coincidence. Everything about this movie is disturbingly coincidental and relating to fate. If you do not cry at the last quarter of this film, your heart must truly be made of stone. I (being male) shed the tears, very uncharacteristic of me. This is obviously my favourite movie but if there is anyone who doesn't like this movie, then they must be seriously biased/bigoted/or just plain effin' crazy.
This movie has just breathtaking cinematography. Pacing is perfect and some of the camera angles are iconic, like when school starts and the camera tilts from horizontal in a spin to normal gravity with Donnie Darko evacuating the bus.
This movie is clearly not overrated. Whoever says that, must know nothing about popularity. You know what's overrated? Lord of the Rings getting eleven oscars. Now that is just unfair and wrong IMHO. This movie is the film all cult moviegoers worship to, it's not pretentious, or commercial, or fake in any way. There is no subjective loving for this film, everyone loves this movie for the exact same reasons. A deserved masterpiece in cult movie history and a classic of the modern age if ever I saw one. Ranks up there with the greats as one of the most daring and original movies, even bettering the Matrix franchise in the amount of love going into making the movie.
I sometimes feel depressed from this film and I hope no one thinks there is a romantic view of suicide here. But what always turns my face upside down is the ending, because it's not schmultzy, or emotion-whoring. It's the right way to end the film and it haunts you way long after the movie finishes. This is not a movie you easily forget, even if you don't understand it.
Posted jan 21, 2007 2:06 am pt
Best Film of 2006
Christian Bale and Chris Nolan are back since Batmam Begins and have brought a masterpiece of a movie in such little time. The amount of twist and turns make Shyamalan films' ending twists combined to shame. The...
[+] Read Full Review
Christian Bale and Chris Nolan are back since Batmam Begins and have brought a masterpiece of a movie in such little time. The amount of twist and turns make Shyamalan films' ending twists combined to shame. The...
[+] Read Full Review
Best Film of 2006
Christian Bale and Chris Nolan are back since Batmam Begins and have brought a masterpiece of a movie in such little time. The amount of twist and turns make Shyamalan films' ending twists combined to shame. The story is about two rival magicians and their journey through hardship and sacrifice. I won't reveal any more details and read on below for more about the plot. This movie is just in 2 simple words: absolutely mind-blowing or absolutely mind-blogging (I'm not decided on which). Chris Nolan has perfected his own way of filming. He has revolutionised filmmaking through his distortion of acts. Every movie has a beginning, middle, and an end. His films have a beginning, ending, middle, beginning, etc.
you get the idea, he plays with you. It's his own little game, just to confuse you, and make you figure out the movie like a jigsaw but
without the pieces.
First thing I should tell you, the acting is superb. Top-notch. I couldn't have expected any better. Hugh Jackman has finally given a
performance worthy of accolades, it's been a long, long time coming. Wolverine in X-Men didn't do much for me and I'm glad to say,
Jackman is an actual actor. Christian Bale is an acting genius, delving like a dagger into his characters, getting you sucked in from the
get-go. Michael Caine, as always, is marvelous and has great timing.
Scarlett Johansson (who I completely didn't expect; see I don't watch a movie because of only the actors) does a brilliant job. Basically, everyone does their part and no one overdoes it.
Second, the cinematography is excellent. The costume designs, sets, blah blah are very realistic and grounded. Just thinking about it hurts my head about how much detail they went on painting a background people can believe in i.e. this is the 19th century England. Wally Pfister is back from Batman Begins and you notice his work from the orange hues.
The lighting actually plays a huge role into the story and timeline.
Let's just leave it at that and let you figure it out .
Finally, the story. I know I can't reveal any details but all you need to know is there are two magicians who are the warmest of friends and the worst of enemies. One minute you'll be siding with one character and you think he's good, but then the next minute he "turns". The story is a "journey" to put it mildly. It's an actual journey through the human heart. Through what obsession can do to a man. Through what sacrifice a person is willing to go through. Humans are fragile beings but their will is unparalleled compared to other species, and this is why they can be the cruelest of all.
Just to point out: I actually cried during one scene of the film. I've actually never cried at a movie, but have had a teary eye before, yet
this is the closest I've ever gotten. It takes a lot to move me. I go to the cinema to be moved. That's why I only see probably 6-8 movies a year. I pick my films very wisely, and not once have I been disappointed with a decision. Of course, there is Star Wars III and Harry Potter: Goblet of Fire so I guess those experiences balance with the good ones.
The twists and turns will have you guessing to the VERY END.
And I bloody well mean that. You will have your own opinions and thoughts on what is happening. This is a movie people will be talking
for quite a while. Word of mouth will do it good and it already has!
Christian Bale and Chris Nolan are back since Batmam Begins and have brought a masterpiece of a movie in such little time. The amount of twist and turns make Shyamalan films' ending twists combined to shame. The story is about two rival magicians and their journey through hardship and sacrifice. I won't reveal any more details and read on below for more about the plot. This movie is just in 2 simple words: absolutely mind-blowing or absolutely mind-blogging (I'm not decided on which). Chris Nolan has perfected his own way of filming. He has revolutionised filmmaking through his distortion of acts. Every movie has a beginning, middle, and an end. His films have a beginning, ending, middle, beginning, etc.
you get the idea, he plays with you. It's his own little game, just to confuse you, and make you figure out the movie like a jigsaw but
without the pieces.
First thing I should tell you, the acting is superb. Top-notch. I couldn't have expected any better. Hugh Jackman has finally given a
performance worthy of accolades, it's been a long, long time coming. Wolverine in X-Men didn't do much for me and I'm glad to say,
Jackman is an actual actor. Christian Bale is an acting genius, delving like a dagger into his characters, getting you sucked in from the
get-go. Michael Caine, as always, is marvelous and has great timing.
Scarlett Johansson (who I completely didn't expect; see I don't watch a movie because of only the actors) does a brilliant job. Basically, everyone does their part and no one overdoes it.
Second, the cinematography is excellent. The costume designs, sets, blah blah are very realistic and grounded. Just thinking about it hurts my head about how much detail they went on painting a background people can believe in i.e. this is the 19th century England. Wally Pfister is back from Batman Begins and you notice his work from the orange hues.
The lighting actually plays a huge role into the story and timeline.
Let's just leave it at that and let you figure it out .
Finally, the story. I know I can't reveal any details but all you need to know is there are two magicians who are the warmest of friends and the worst of enemies. One minute you'll be siding with one character and you think he's good, but then the next minute he "turns". The story is a "journey" to put it mildly. It's an actual journey through the human heart. Through what obsession can do to a man. Through what sacrifice a person is willing to go through. Humans are fragile beings but their will is unparalleled compared to other species, and this is why they can be the cruelest of all.
Just to point out: I actually cried during one scene of the film. I've actually never cried at a movie, but have had a teary eye before, yet
this is the closest I've ever gotten. It takes a lot to move me. I go to the cinema to be moved. That's why I only see probably 6-8 movies a year. I pick my films very wisely, and not once have I been disappointed with a decision. Of course, there is Star Wars III and Harry Potter: Goblet of Fire so I guess those experiences balance with the good ones.
The twists and turns will have you guessing to the VERY END.
And I bloody well mean that. You will have your own opinions and thoughts on what is happening. This is a movie people will be talking
for quite a while. Word of mouth will do it good and it already has!
Posted jan 21, 2007 2:01 am pt
Exotic locations, fast cars, and even faster ladies are still the norm here but they're downplayed to the extent that they're not as jarring as of the latest movies. Here, there's some ACTUAL character development to James Bond, he's not just the...
[+] Read Full Review
[+] Read Full Review
Exotic locations, fast cars, and even faster ladies are still the norm here but they're downplayed to the extent that they're not as jarring as of the latest movies. Here, there's some ACTUAL character development to James Bond, he's not just the stiff, 'shaken not stirred' coolio pimp kind of guy. Oh no...
It's been a very long while for a Bond movie to be considered good in terms of a film and even in terms of a Bond film. The last good one I remember is Goldeneye and the Sean Connery ones. But now, we have a new actor playing Bond and that is Daniel Craig. Suffice to say, he gets the job done and with a dab of personality. What's so different about him from other Bonds is his acting, he actually acts rather than giving cliched facial expressions and dry one liners. The script should be commended for giving him breathing space for his character besides from all the killing and action. Talking of action, let me get onto that right away...
Straight in the opening, a stylish black and white scene that could be mistaken for a cool 40s noir movie, we're told that James Bond is a noob. He's gotta get 2 kills and when his target makes Bond recollect his 1st kill, do we realise this Bond isn't so nice to the baddies. Close combat ensues and we're treated to a sink drowning, one of the first of quite a few brutal Bond kills, not seen of which in quite a while. The tone of the movie is set, gritty, realistic, and above all else, daring. Bond is not afraid to have blood on his hands and his character develops into a more vulnerable, "trigger-happy" secret agent. After acquiring the 00 status with an awkwardly, fast-paced 2nd kill, we're sent to Uganda where some typical freedom fighters are hanging about. We know who the villains are, like in all Bond movies. Oh, let me point out the credit sequence is very cheesy. At least, one Bond tradition that hasn't died away, unfortunately.
One of the best action scenes comes right here, with Bond chasing an "unarmed prisoner" and doing all sorts of stunts and 'parkour' running. Congrats on the stunt actors, presumably the African guy being chased being one, for modernising Bond action with free running resulting in a very no-holds-barred stuntfest. This scene has to be seen to be believed, and it is here where the big budget is best put to use. This is where you realise Bond has become more like Jason Bourne. He thinks on his feet, relying heavily on instincts. There are some neat feats he tries out like shortcuts, human shields, and so on. His tactics are similar to that of Bourne very much. Bourne fans be delighted, if you (like me) are eagerly waiting for the next Bourne Ultimatum.
Following the intense, white-knuckle action of Bond clumsily catching up the bad dude, the tone of the film subdues. Now the movie lives up to the name, Casino Royale, of Montenegro. Let me point out another Bond tradition: there usually are 2 Bond gals. The "disposable" one and the proper Bond lady who has other motives in mind. Sure enough, the "disposable" one is easily 'disposed' off right after some good close-up "action" ( ) but in a brutal, if slightly, puzzling manner. Seriously, the day I die of hammock squeezing is the day I'll pay tribute to Bond films!
As I said, the focus is on this huge poker game that if goes wrong, means that the U.K. and Her Majesty's Service have directly financed terrorism (yes, it's as weird as it sounds). It's actually quite tongue-in-cheek how another Bond tradition is put into play. Before snuggling up to the "disposable" Bond lady (Solange played by Caterina Murino), Bond goes against this guy in a poker game and wins his ASTON MARTIN. Thank god he gets to replace that awful Ford car with the Martin baby. They made a poker game as exciting as possible, with all the bluff looks and dealing going on. Le Chiffre's life is also on the line here, which is very uncommon for a Bond villain. The only complaint I have with the game is it seems only Le Chiffre and James Bond are interested, everyone else is just a rich sucker who only know how to fold. Either way, it makes for some tense looks and guessing by us.
The characters of noteworthy praise are Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen) for making a believable and yet cool-looking villain, Vesper Lynd (Eva Green) for an intelligent and mature but also vulnerable Bond girl, and M (Judi Dench) for a 'tough love' boss. M and Bond's scenes pave way for some good old British wry humour, much needed since there is no Q. All the actors do fine jobs, Vesper getting some recognition for giving depth to Bond girls, whom have usually become extremely predictable. She may be cocky but she's also like the most evolved Bond girl to date. Which is actually quite ironic, since she's supposed to be the 1st Bond girl . Daniel Craig can't be praised enough for redefining and reminding us what Bond was originally envisaged as: tough, brutal, cold, but also emotionally vulnerable in Ian Fleming's earlier writing. Bond loses his armour, his blood, nearly his heart, and even his balls (!) in an attempt to become more human and therefore, far more believable to us. He's not afraid of getting his hands dirty and is involved in the slow deaths of 2 baddies, scenes of which stick in your mind, because they don't mesh well with the clean shaved vision of James Bond.
There were some things I liked and some not as much. I didn't understand the need for a chase scene through an airport for a guy who eventually wants to blow up a new airliner. Bond goes through all that, but there is no underlying story to it, I've now forgotten what his real mission was. Even though the action scene is great, with the big budget being put to use nicely, I have no idea what it all has to do with the 'Skyfleet' airplane, which by the way, is one huge motha of a plane! XD
The plot is overall pretty simple. Terrorists want to blow up stuff. They need someone to take care of money. Banking stuff and poker games. I'm not sure what the freedom fighters need to trust bankers with their money or that why they're trusting Le Chiffre with it or something. It's that forgettable.
The good bits I liked were the action scenes. They're superbly shot, with incredibly low camera pans as Bond goes on a run for his lady or a car. You'll be loving the action scenes from start to finish, and they're just enough to satisfy your blockbuster craving. A lot of close combat scenes and some shooting, which should remind some of the Bourne films, and why not? There are some pulse-pounding moments where Bond's life is in danger when he's been poisoned and a different artisitic tone is set where everything is topsy-turvy. Very nicely shot and provides emotion. The closer camera angles give the film a more nitty gritty, realistic vision showing Craig getting into the thick of it, without having to resort to a candid quip at the end. I'm OK with M firmly telling the film is set after 9/11 although we really didn't need that in the script even though it has to with an airliner about to be bombed.
*MAJOR SPOILERS* Highlight to see (if you're using white backgrond):
When Bond is having a cardiac arrest and Vesper is supposed to put the lead back into the defribbilator, I noticed she didn't put it all the way in and it's left hanging there. It's visible and this is not a fault of the movie, but just of the scene supervisor. Which goes to show how strict the movie is on everything else, the movie is realistic while still having that Bond level of suspending belief.
All in all, a very good movie, not perfect (what is really if you think about it) and a most satisfying blockbuster. Where blockbusters go for the easy thrill ride and simple plot, this film adds emotion, character, and great direction to a package that's been sorely needed for quite a while. Even though the ending is sudden and we see the transformation of likeable Bond (who I miss now...sorely) to cold-blooded, normal Bond, I have knowledge that there's a direct sequel in the works. Too bad one character won't be coming back, which is another daring thing this film has done.
10/10 for a Bond movie
8.5/10 as a film
It's been a very long while for a Bond movie to be considered good in terms of a film and even in terms of a Bond film. The last good one I remember is Goldeneye and the Sean Connery ones. But now, we have a new actor playing Bond and that is Daniel Craig. Suffice to say, he gets the job done and with a dab of personality. What's so different about him from other Bonds is his acting, he actually acts rather than giving cliched facial expressions and dry one liners. The script should be commended for giving him breathing space for his character besides from all the killing and action. Talking of action, let me get onto that right away...
Straight in the opening, a stylish black and white scene that could be mistaken for a cool 40s noir movie, we're told that James Bond is a noob. He's gotta get 2 kills and when his target makes Bond recollect his 1st kill, do we realise this Bond isn't so nice to the baddies. Close combat ensues and we're treated to a sink drowning, one of the first of quite a few brutal Bond kills, not seen of which in quite a while. The tone of the movie is set, gritty, realistic, and above all else, daring. Bond is not afraid to have blood on his hands and his character develops into a more vulnerable, "trigger-happy" secret agent. After acquiring the 00 status with an awkwardly, fast-paced 2nd kill, we're sent to Uganda where some typical freedom fighters are hanging about. We know who the villains are, like in all Bond movies. Oh, let me point out the credit sequence is very cheesy. At least, one Bond tradition that hasn't died away, unfortunately.
One of the best action scenes comes right here, with Bond chasing an "unarmed prisoner" and doing all sorts of stunts and 'parkour' running. Congrats on the stunt actors, presumably the African guy being chased being one, for modernising Bond action with free running resulting in a very no-holds-barred stuntfest. This scene has to be seen to be believed, and it is here where the big budget is best put to use. This is where you realise Bond has become more like Jason Bourne. He thinks on his feet, relying heavily on instincts. There are some neat feats he tries out like shortcuts, human shields, and so on. His tactics are similar to that of Bourne very much. Bourne fans be delighted, if you (like me) are eagerly waiting for the next Bourne Ultimatum.
Following the intense, white-knuckle action of Bond clumsily catching up the bad dude, the tone of the film subdues. Now the movie lives up to the name, Casino Royale, of Montenegro. Let me point out another Bond tradition: there usually are 2 Bond gals. The "disposable" one and the proper Bond lady who has other motives in mind. Sure enough, the "disposable" one is easily 'disposed' off right after some good close-up "action" ( ) but in a brutal, if slightly, puzzling manner. Seriously, the day I die of hammock squeezing is the day I'll pay tribute to Bond films!
As I said, the focus is on this huge poker game that if goes wrong, means that the U.K. and Her Majesty's Service have directly financed terrorism (yes, it's as weird as it sounds). It's actually quite tongue-in-cheek how another Bond tradition is put into play. Before snuggling up to the "disposable" Bond lady (Solange played by Caterina Murino), Bond goes against this guy in a poker game and wins his ASTON MARTIN. Thank god he gets to replace that awful Ford car with the Martin baby. They made a poker game as exciting as possible, with all the bluff looks and dealing going on. Le Chiffre's life is also on the line here, which is very uncommon for a Bond villain. The only complaint I have with the game is it seems only Le Chiffre and James Bond are interested, everyone else is just a rich sucker who only know how to fold. Either way, it makes for some tense looks and guessing by us.
The characters of noteworthy praise are Le Chiffre (Mads Mikkelsen) for making a believable and yet cool-looking villain, Vesper Lynd (Eva Green) for an intelligent and mature but also vulnerable Bond girl, and M (Judi Dench) for a 'tough love' boss. M and Bond's scenes pave way for some good old British wry humour, much needed since there is no Q. All the actors do fine jobs, Vesper getting some recognition for giving depth to Bond girls, whom have usually become extremely predictable. She may be cocky but she's also like the most evolved Bond girl to date. Which is actually quite ironic, since she's supposed to be the 1st Bond girl . Daniel Craig can't be praised enough for redefining and reminding us what Bond was originally envisaged as: tough, brutal, cold, but also emotionally vulnerable in Ian Fleming's earlier writing. Bond loses his armour, his blood, nearly his heart, and even his balls (!) in an attempt to become more human and therefore, far more believable to us. He's not afraid of getting his hands dirty and is involved in the slow deaths of 2 baddies, scenes of which stick in your mind, because they don't mesh well with the clean shaved vision of James Bond.
There were some things I liked and some not as much. I didn't understand the need for a chase scene through an airport for a guy who eventually wants to blow up a new airliner. Bond goes through all that, but there is no underlying story to it, I've now forgotten what his real mission was. Even though the action scene is great, with the big budget being put to use nicely, I have no idea what it all has to do with the 'Skyfleet' airplane, which by the way, is one huge motha of a plane! XD
The plot is overall pretty simple. Terrorists want to blow up stuff. They need someone to take care of money. Banking stuff and poker games. I'm not sure what the freedom fighters need to trust bankers with their money or that why they're trusting Le Chiffre with it or something. It's that forgettable.
The good bits I liked were the action scenes. They're superbly shot, with incredibly low camera pans as Bond goes on a run for his lady or a car. You'll be loving the action scenes from start to finish, and they're just enough to satisfy your blockbuster craving. A lot of close combat scenes and some shooting, which should remind some of the Bourne films, and why not? There are some pulse-pounding moments where Bond's life is in danger when he's been poisoned and a different artisitic tone is set where everything is topsy-turvy. Very nicely shot and provides emotion. The closer camera angles give the film a more nitty gritty, realistic vision showing Craig getting into the thick of it, without having to resort to a candid quip at the end. I'm OK with M firmly telling the film is set after 9/11 although we really didn't need that in the script even though it has to with an airliner about to be bombed.
*MAJOR SPOILERS* Highlight to see (if you're using white backgrond):
When Bond is having a cardiac arrest and Vesper is supposed to put the lead back into the defribbilator, I noticed she didn't put it all the way in and it's left hanging there. It's visible and this is not a fault of the movie, but just of the scene supervisor. Which goes to show how strict the movie is on everything else, the movie is realistic while still having that Bond level of suspending belief.
All in all, a very good movie, not perfect (what is really if you think about it) and a most satisfying blockbuster. Where blockbusters go for the easy thrill ride and simple plot, this film adds emotion, character, and great direction to a package that's been sorely needed for quite a while. Even though the ending is sudden and we see the transformation of likeable Bond (who I miss now...sorely) to cold-blooded, normal Bond, I have knowledge that there's a direct sequel in the works. Too bad one character won't be coming back, which is another daring thing this film has done.
10/10 for a Bond movie
8.5/10 as a film
Posted jan 21, 2007 1:57 am pt
Undercooked but it has its moments.
For some reason, I just thought of wanting to see Blue Velvet. I had borrowed Mulholland Dr. from the library but never got around to watching all of it. I intended to see what all the fuss was...
[+] Read Full Review
For some reason, I just thought of wanting to see Blue Velvet. I had borrowed Mulholland Dr. from the library but never got around to watching all of it. I intended to see what all the fuss was...
[+] Read Full Review
Undercooked but it has its moments.
For some reason, I just thought of wanting to see Blue Velvet. I had borrowed Mulholland Dr. from the library but never got around to watching all of it. I intended to see what all the fuss was about Blue Velvet.
When I obtained the movie, I watched it to the end. I was in the right setting, the right mood, and atmosphere. Which means 2am in the night! I tried my best to pay attention to details. Needless to say, there was no twist at the end. Don't ask me why, but when someone claims the movie is complex I usually think the ending will surprise me and so I should pay close attention. This is not a Shymalan or Nolan film after all. The movie's story was very straightforward. Too straightforward. A boy named Jeffrey finds a human ear in a field and tries to solve the murder mystery. He then is thrust into the underworld of drug dealing, sex, and lunatics like Dennis Hopper!
The movie ended after a brisk 2 hours. 1:45 hours into it, I was thinking where was the big revelation? Why is Frank holding onto Dorothy's baby and husband? What's up with the human ear? Why are there cockroaches? Why do I see firemen and yellow flowers at beginning and ending? What's up with the candle fire? Why does Frank inhale that mask? However, those were the wrong questions. All of these questions were self-explanatory. When I was done watching the movie everything made sense.
It's not a complicated film at all. Lynch's imagery is superb, I have to say. His use of lighting and contrast is marvelous. Like someone put it best, "techni-color noir". This is not a movie I needed to see twice. I got the imagery of cockroaches and ants to do with the underworld. The fake lies and smiling and happy neighbourhood knows nothing about freaks like Frank, Dorothy, drugs. Jeffrey matures throughout the course of the film. His innocence is destroyed, he's becoming an adult. Sandy was a pathetic character, with some truly bad acting, but as I've heard some of the acting is meant to be cheesy cause it's a satire. That I applaud to, but Lynch doesn't have to do so much hard work that it seems he did an amateur job. The songs were awesome, I could sing "bluuuuueee.... velllllllvettttttt...." all day. It's meant to be a satire of american life and detective dramas. This is clearly evident when the old ladies are watching TV and are watching some cheesy scenes like walking up stairs and camera zoomed on only gun floating across a room. It's just that the movie comes off as undone.
For some reason, I just thought of wanting to see Blue Velvet. I had borrowed Mulholland Dr. from the library but never got around to watching all of it. I intended to see what all the fuss was about Blue Velvet.
When I obtained the movie, I watched it to the end. I was in the right setting, the right mood, and atmosphere. Which means 2am in the night! I tried my best to pay attention to details. Needless to say, there was no twist at the end. Don't ask me why, but when someone claims the movie is complex I usually think the ending will surprise me and so I should pay close attention. This is not a Shymalan or Nolan film after all. The movie's story was very straightforward. Too straightforward. A boy named Jeffrey finds a human ear in a field and tries to solve the murder mystery. He then is thrust into the underworld of drug dealing, sex, and lunatics like Dennis Hopper!
The movie ended after a brisk 2 hours. 1:45 hours into it, I was thinking where was the big revelation? Why is Frank holding onto Dorothy's baby and husband? What's up with the human ear? Why are there cockroaches? Why do I see firemen and yellow flowers at beginning and ending? What's up with the candle fire? Why does Frank inhale that mask? However, those were the wrong questions. All of these questions were self-explanatory. When I was done watching the movie everything made sense.
It's not a complicated film at all. Lynch's imagery is superb, I have to say. His use of lighting and contrast is marvelous. Like someone put it best, "techni-color noir". This is not a movie I needed to see twice. I got the imagery of cockroaches and ants to do with the underworld. The fake lies and smiling and happy neighbourhood knows nothing about freaks like Frank, Dorothy, drugs. Jeffrey matures throughout the course of the film. His innocence is destroyed, he's becoming an adult. Sandy was a pathetic character, with some truly bad acting, but as I've heard some of the acting is meant to be cheesy cause it's a satire. That I applaud to, but Lynch doesn't have to do so much hard work that it seems he did an amateur job. The songs were awesome, I could sing "bluuuuueee.... velllllllvettttttt...." all day. It's meant to be a satire of american life and detective dramas. This is clearly evident when the old ladies are watching TV and are watching some cheesy scenes like walking up stairs and camera zoomed on only gun floating across a room. It's just that the movie comes off as undone.
Posted jan 21, 2007 1:54 am pt
A superb film but it has flaws.
I can remember enough of the movie to write it down here. I made some notes on my mobile so I wouldn't forget. The film starts off to a gruesome start as the camera lifts from the ground revealing a...
[+] Read Full Review
I can remember enough of the movie to write it down here. I made some notes on my mobile so I wouldn't forget. The film starts off to a gruesome start as the camera lifts from the ground revealing a...
[+] Read Full Review
A superb film but it has flaws.
I can remember enough of the movie to write it down here. I made some notes on my mobile so I wouldn't forget. The film starts off to a gruesome start as the camera lifts from the ground revealing a laid down girl bleeding to death. However, her blood is retreating back into her wounds and so time is reversing. Now, we're straight into Spain 1944. There's a Fascist regime in this Civil War. Ophelia and her mother are caught up in this war. Here's where I would start about the lush visuals and atmosphere. We see the cars riding down a road and stopping as Ophelia's mother is feeling sick. Ophelia steps out and like the Alice in apparently every movie fictional child, explores the area until noticing a huge locust. It flutters around playfully, the fluttering is so loud with the sound of vibrating hurting my ears. Very well done sound on the locust. Our curious Ophelia halts when bumping into a rock that she picks up. She notices a statue with a grooved hole where the eye would be. She places the rock in the appropriate position, now walking back to the car.
The story is the typical fantasy one where reality mixes with fantasy. It's World War II and the vicious Captain has made camp with his other cold-blooded troops. They have a house and there's the forest where the rebels reside. There is a very sparse story about the rebels and the movie does a good mix of history drama and fantasy. The director is trying to show that the story is more about Ophelia and her escaping from this reality. But the reality here about the war is done much better than the fantasy. It's like Del Toro had some some cool ideas, and then borrowed the rest from other classics. It's hard trying to understand the direction. Does he want me to focus, as the viewer, to understand the war or the fantasy? Can Ophelia really save the reality and stop the war with her fantasy quest? Is there any redemption? The realistic setting of Spain during a Civil War is an inspired choice. I'll detail my problems with the direction later on. Already twenty minutes in, and you'll notice a weird story flaw. There's one tale about a rose on top of a mountain that no one dares to pluck out because there are thorns everywhere. The rose can't "bequeathe" its gift to anyone so basically dies away for a millenia. This arc is never explained upon later in the movie, neither chronologically, thematically, or even as a passing mention. I understand that it's just a tale Ophelia tells her soon-to-be brother but it would be nice to follow up wit the unattainable rose. Another tale that is told is that a young princess (much like Ariel in Little Mermaid) wishes to get away from the underworld to the human world above. She goes to the light but her memory is erased and she dies just like any mortal human. Her father waits centuries for her, hoping as a soul she'll come back. This is the main story but is only resolved frustratingly near the end. Del Toro has a knack for superb story-telling in some sequences. Using CGI and almost breathtaking sets, costumes for creatures like the Faun and the child-eating, eyes-in-hands monster, you know now that any fantasy story can be made into a movie. LOTR raised the bar for faithful representation of the fantasy books they were based on, and Pan's Labyrinth does one better. As a voice (presumably the father of the princess) guides you with subtitles, you see what's on screen and what's shown is amazing in one scene. The camera-work is top notch, clear showing that the director knows what he's looking for in a frame. I literally cringed in the back of my throat when two strangers (a farmer dad and his son) have been caught by the fascist soldiers and then the inhuman Captain uses a wine bottle to smash it into the son's face. It's excruciating but bewildering that Del Toro focuses so much graphic violence. He doesn't back away like so many other directors have done to please everyone for a fantasy movie. The special effects are fantastic, and Del Toro has a very fine visionary eye. There are some inconsistent bits that stick out like when the maid hums a lullaby, you can tell it's a just a track being played from a recorded tape; or when some soldiers die and right there, already blood is sticking to the grass as if the liquid has instantly solidified. These are slight quips with the effects department, but on the whole the effects make this film worth experiencing on the cinema. There is a beautiful orchestra that is poignant in some scenes like the Pale Man waking up and when Ophelia first journeys into the haunting labyrinth. The cinematography is absolutely jaw-dropping with some scenes of particles flying in the air of pollen, the camera is always in motion, never stopping for a still frame. This makes the movie flow naturally and pushes more for a great fantasy movie. Everything about the cinematography and effects is heightened realism. Sounds are exaggerated, violence is over the top, and set design is very worth the good majority of filling up the big, silver screen. The graphic violence is certainly graphic, a clear showing that this movie wants to be an adult fantasy tale like most fables and fairty tales were back centuries ago. It might be over the top, but it's not dumb and not like a slasher flick. The Captain is demented and so it shows off his cold and calculating thinking machinery (the last word is not meant as a pun for anyone having already seen the movie).
This is the easiest aspect of the movie to recommend: the acting is brilliant on all fronts. The acting is remarkable and we might get some I'm thinking these Spanish actors are probably famous in their country or should be. They've done wonderful jobs, and you feel the pain in their faces, their eyes. They know the reality of this war and its toll. Ophelia conveys her emotions perfectly, every step of the way. The Captain Vidal is another standout role who is vicious but he's also a bit cliched in how his evil is shown. He certainly raises the bar to how much graphic violence you see a man do to another on screen. The faun is excellent, and is part menacing, but also a wonder to look at. Kinda like the Cheshire Cat, he's a bit weird. He makes growling noises when he's not talking, implying he's more evil than he lets off and I would've liked a dark twist to him in the story. The eyeless-hands anorexic humanoid character 'Pale Man' is another actor you should look out for. His movements are deliberate but also zombie-like. He scared the crap out of me, and I'm sure he will to you. The last time I was scared of a fantasy monster was in Spirited Away but this monster has his unique horror twist.
Ophelia's quest is to do three tasks and then the underworld comes back to life again and she regains her title as the princess. She has to first force stones into a toad living under a tree, not allowing the tree to grow. This sequence is amazing to watch because the actress gets really muddy and shows clear discomfort. Once she does get the stones into the toad's mouth, a sequence ensues of some great imagination. Basically a huge orange blob pops out of his mouth and the toad's skin has been shredded. She grabs the golden key. There is the 2nd task with a creature that is bound to be the most original looking monster in fantasy tales in years. A stroke of genius is displayed when Ophelia checks out this motionless monster's history of child eating. Nevertheless, she eats the forbidden fruit and suffers for it as two fairies get their heads chewed off!
Essentially the story is about Ophelia's quest of three tasks mixed in with the rebels trying to win against the fascist soldiers. It's a derivative storyline if you only consider her quest about the underworld. The film has borrowed elements from other fantasy movies like Alice in the Wonderland, Spirited Away, Labyrinth, and jumbled it. It doesn't work out as well as the war. The war story with the rebels is played out actually better than the fantasy side, because it has real kinetic emotion to it. Del Toro could have made a mindblowing war film, detailing the Spanish takeover from Natzis. The rebels do win obviously, but it's an excruciating wait and we have to see Captain torturing the poor stutterer of the rebels with giving him a very creative deal of whether he can count to 3 without stammering. The Captain, you realise, very early on is inhuman, shooting without remorse, and the bottle smashing in the face has stuck me. It will undoubtedly stick with me as one of the most disturbing death scenes in movie history. You feel no sympathy for him as a human; you want the guy dead. As the viewer you get a very awkward but surprisingly satisfying jab when the maid goes all out on him and leaves him with a carved mouth, looking like a Joker smile. The Captain's side-story with his broken watch is sadly never given justice and is only a ploy to humanise his character as you'll see in the end.
Most fantasy movies have the fairy tale of the protagonist being seemingly normal until he/she finds out they're chosen by destiny to be a great force and can save a fantasy world from imminent death. Here the same thing happens, but it's not Jungian in its progression at all. Ophelia would love to escape from this awful war, and so would we. She has the problem of returning to a crappy side of the world, where only suffering and death lie. The movie's exceedingly dark, and it's very depressing. You'd think Del Toro would have enough dark material to let us get to a good part. But no, the relief of a single scene where something good has happened is hastily snatched away. There is this odd false sense of security when you, the viewer, escape to Ophelia's own little world. Her fantasy is tied to her reality and unlike Chorincles of Narnia, when she comes back it's not like nothing's happened. There is a slight margin of relief but it's not much. When she does complete her task, it's in a very ironic and almost throwback way to the very old moral fables.
Let me first point out: The ending is very bad. It has good intentions, but is executed horribly. I won't spoil it, but the only good scene that you are left with is incredibly trite, cliched and is more of a rushed idea than a scene. The ending almost invalidates my recommendation for you to see this movie. The story has now it's own selfish purpose, it's a neverending story that's very frustrating to watch as a person in the cinema. No happy ending is fine but I know a bad ending. Maybe it deserves another viewing but it won't help ease the pain. It's an almost exhausting experience seeing so much bad happening, but then no real happiness emerges. Just glimmers of hope. There are many fantasy movies that don't have happy endings, but they are satisfying and understandable. They're justified. What you have here is as my good friend voiced out: "F'ed up ending...like those 'make your own ending' endings".
Too true, my friend, too true. There are other movies that have taken this idea of ending but have left us with enough info to make us think over after the movie's ended. This movie does no such things. You're not thinking anymore about this movie. I can point out some very recent examples that do a finer job:
Memento, Donnie Darko, Matrix Reloaded, Usual Suspects, etc.
It was the critical darling of 2006, but it doesn't deserve it. It would definitely deserve Best Foreign Film and even Best Film but I'm hazy on that ending.
Most people in the audience laughed at the ending. Almost like a pathetic laugh, as if they're saying "that's all you could come up with?!" or "No wonder this film only had one timing...it sucked!" That's how bad the ending is.
I'm questioning Del Toro and why he went with the direction he did. He proves himself as a great up-and-coming director with this film, until the very end. Blame the bad script. Blame only it. But you have to blame the manager, and so I'm questioning
what Del Toro might be doing to a Hellboy sequel. If you've read the comics, some stories are very fable-isc but taken in a darker direction. Go see this movie if you want to see what all the love is for but remember my cautious words.I recommend a very recent fantasy movie that was much better and is seriously underrated:
Mirror Mask
I can remember enough of the movie to write it down here. I made some notes on my mobile so I wouldn't forget. The film starts off to a gruesome start as the camera lifts from the ground revealing a laid down girl bleeding to death. However, her blood is retreating back into her wounds and so time is reversing. Now, we're straight into Spain 1944. There's a Fascist regime in this Civil War. Ophelia and her mother are caught up in this war. Here's where I would start about the lush visuals and atmosphere. We see the cars riding down a road and stopping as Ophelia's mother is feeling sick. Ophelia steps out and like the Alice in apparently every movie fictional child, explores the area until noticing a huge locust. It flutters around playfully, the fluttering is so loud with the sound of vibrating hurting my ears. Very well done sound on the locust. Our curious Ophelia halts when bumping into a rock that she picks up. She notices a statue with a grooved hole where the eye would be. She places the rock in the appropriate position, now walking back to the car.
The story is the typical fantasy one where reality mixes with fantasy. It's World War II and the vicious Captain has made camp with his other cold-blooded troops. They have a house and there's the forest where the rebels reside. There is a very sparse story about the rebels and the movie does a good mix of history drama and fantasy. The director is trying to show that the story is more about Ophelia and her escaping from this reality. But the reality here about the war is done much better than the fantasy. It's like Del Toro had some some cool ideas, and then borrowed the rest from other classics. It's hard trying to understand the direction. Does he want me to focus, as the viewer, to understand the war or the fantasy? Can Ophelia really save the reality and stop the war with her fantasy quest? Is there any redemption? The realistic setting of Spain during a Civil War is an inspired choice. I'll detail my problems with the direction later on. Already twenty minutes in, and you'll notice a weird story flaw. There's one tale about a rose on top of a mountain that no one dares to pluck out because there are thorns everywhere. The rose can't "bequeathe" its gift to anyone so basically dies away for a millenia. This arc is never explained upon later in the movie, neither chronologically, thematically, or even as a passing mention. I understand that it's just a tale Ophelia tells her soon-to-be brother but it would be nice to follow up wit the unattainable rose. Another tale that is told is that a young princess (much like Ariel in Little Mermaid) wishes to get away from the underworld to the human world above. She goes to the light but her memory is erased and she dies just like any mortal human. Her father waits centuries for her, hoping as a soul she'll come back. This is the main story but is only resolved frustratingly near the end. Del Toro has a knack for superb story-telling in some sequences. Using CGI and almost breathtaking sets, costumes for creatures like the Faun and the child-eating, eyes-in-hands monster, you know now that any fantasy story can be made into a movie. LOTR raised the bar for faithful representation of the fantasy books they were based on, and Pan's Labyrinth does one better. As a voice (presumably the father of the princess) guides you with subtitles, you see what's on screen and what's shown is amazing in one scene. The camera-work is top notch, clear showing that the director knows what he's looking for in a frame. I literally cringed in the back of my throat when two strangers (a farmer dad and his son) have been caught by the fascist soldiers and then the inhuman Captain uses a wine bottle to smash it into the son's face. It's excruciating but bewildering that Del Toro focuses so much graphic violence. He doesn't back away like so many other directors have done to please everyone for a fantasy movie. The special effects are fantastic, and Del Toro has a very fine visionary eye. There are some inconsistent bits that stick out like when the maid hums a lullaby, you can tell it's a just a track being played from a recorded tape; or when some soldiers die and right there, already blood is sticking to the grass as if the liquid has instantly solidified. These are slight quips with the effects department, but on the whole the effects make this film worth experiencing on the cinema. There is a beautiful orchestra that is poignant in some scenes like the Pale Man waking up and when Ophelia first journeys into the haunting labyrinth. The cinematography is absolutely jaw-dropping with some scenes of particles flying in the air of pollen, the camera is always in motion, never stopping for a still frame. This makes the movie flow naturally and pushes more for a great fantasy movie. Everything about the cinematography and effects is heightened realism. Sounds are exaggerated, violence is over the top, and set design is very worth the good majority of filling up the big, silver screen. The graphic violence is certainly graphic, a clear showing that this movie wants to be an adult fantasy tale like most fables and fairty tales were back centuries ago. It might be over the top, but it's not dumb and not like a slasher flick. The Captain is demented and so it shows off his cold and calculating thinking machinery (the last word is not meant as a pun for anyone having already seen the movie).
This is the easiest aspect of the movie to recommend: the acting is brilliant on all fronts. The acting is remarkable and we might get some I'm thinking these Spanish actors are probably famous in their country or should be. They've done wonderful jobs, and you feel the pain in their faces, their eyes. They know the reality of this war and its toll. Ophelia conveys her emotions perfectly, every step of the way. The Captain Vidal is another standout role who is vicious but he's also a bit cliched in how his evil is shown. He certainly raises the bar to how much graphic violence you see a man do to another on screen. The faun is excellent, and is part menacing, but also a wonder to look at. Kinda like the Cheshire Cat, he's a bit weird. He makes growling noises when he's not talking, implying he's more evil than he lets off and I would've liked a dark twist to him in the story. The eyeless-hands anorexic humanoid character 'Pale Man' is another actor you should look out for. His movements are deliberate but also zombie-like. He scared the crap out of me, and I'm sure he will to you. The last time I was scared of a fantasy monster was in Spirited Away but this monster has his unique horror twist.
Ophelia's quest is to do three tasks and then the underworld comes back to life again and she regains her title as the princess. She has to first force stones into a toad living under a tree, not allowing the tree to grow. This sequence is amazing to watch because the actress gets really muddy and shows clear discomfort. Once she does get the stones into the toad's mouth, a sequence ensues of some great imagination. Basically a huge orange blob pops out of his mouth and the toad's skin has been shredded. She grabs the golden key. There is the 2nd task with a creature that is bound to be the most original looking monster in fantasy tales in years. A stroke of genius is displayed when Ophelia checks out this motionless monster's history of child eating. Nevertheless, she eats the forbidden fruit and suffers for it as two fairies get their heads chewed off!
Essentially the story is about Ophelia's quest of three tasks mixed in with the rebels trying to win against the fascist soldiers. It's a derivative storyline if you only consider her quest about the underworld. The film has borrowed elements from other fantasy movies like Alice in the Wonderland, Spirited Away, Labyrinth, and jumbled it. It doesn't work out as well as the war. The war story with the rebels is played out actually better than the fantasy side, because it has real kinetic emotion to it. Del Toro could have made a mindblowing war film, detailing the Spanish takeover from Natzis. The rebels do win obviously, but it's an excruciating wait and we have to see Captain torturing the poor stutterer of the rebels with giving him a very creative deal of whether he can count to 3 without stammering. The Captain, you realise, very early on is inhuman, shooting without remorse, and the bottle smashing in the face has stuck me. It will undoubtedly stick with me as one of the most disturbing death scenes in movie history. You feel no sympathy for him as a human; you want the guy dead. As the viewer you get a very awkward but surprisingly satisfying jab when the maid goes all out on him and leaves him with a carved mouth, looking like a Joker smile. The Captain's side-story with his broken watch is sadly never given justice and is only a ploy to humanise his character as you'll see in the end.
Most fantasy movies have the fairy tale of the protagonist being seemingly normal until he/she finds out they're chosen by destiny to be a great force and can save a fantasy world from imminent death. Here the same thing happens, but it's not Jungian in its progression at all. Ophelia would love to escape from this awful war, and so would we. She has the problem of returning to a crappy side of the world, where only suffering and death lie. The movie's exceedingly dark, and it's very depressing. You'd think Del Toro would have enough dark material to let us get to a good part. But no, the relief of a single scene where something good has happened is hastily snatched away. There is this odd false sense of security when you, the viewer, escape to Ophelia's own little world. Her fantasy is tied to her reality and unlike Chorincles of Narnia, when she comes back it's not like nothing's happened. There is a slight margin of relief but it's not much. When she does complete her task, it's in a very ironic and almost throwback way to the very old moral fables.
Let me first point out: The ending is very bad. It has good intentions, but is executed horribly. I won't spoil it, but the only good scene that you are left with is incredibly trite, cliched and is more of a rushed idea than a scene. The ending almost invalidates my recommendation for you to see this movie. The story has now it's own selfish purpose, it's a neverending story that's very frustrating to watch as a person in the cinema. No happy ending is fine but I know a bad ending. Maybe it deserves another viewing but it won't help ease the pain. It's an almost exhausting experience seeing so much bad happening, but then no real happiness emerges. Just glimmers of hope. There are many fantasy movies that don't have happy endings, but they are satisfying and understandable. They're justified. What you have here is as my good friend voiced out: "F'ed up ending...like those 'make your own ending' endings".
Too true, my friend, too true. There are other movies that have taken this idea of ending but have left us with enough info to make us think over after the movie's ended. This movie does no such things. You're not thinking anymore about this movie. I can point out some very recent examples that do a finer job:
Memento, Donnie Darko, Matrix Reloaded, Usual Suspects, etc.
It was the critical darling of 2006, but it doesn't deserve it. It would definitely deserve Best Foreign Film and even Best Film but I'm hazy on that ending.
Most people in the audience laughed at the ending. Almost like a pathetic laugh, as if they're saying "that's all you could come up with?!" or "No wonder this film only had one timing...it sucked!" That's how bad the ending is.
I'm questioning Del Toro and why he went with the direction he did. He proves himself as a great up-and-coming director with this film, until the very end. Blame the bad script. Blame only it. But you have to blame the manager, and so I'm questioning
what Del Toro might be doing to a Hellboy sequel. If you've read the comics, some stories are very fable-isc but taken in a darker direction. Go see this movie if you want to see what all the love is for but remember my cautious words.I recommend a very recent fantasy movie that was much better and is seriously underrated:
Mirror Mask
Posted jan 21, 2007 1:36 am pt
Page
1
« prev
|
next »
