skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Sex And The City (2008)- directed by Michael Patrick King
Following up on the success of HBO's hit cable series, Sex And The City picks up not far from where the show last left the four main characters.Wow, wow, wow... I loved this movie! :D I only just got around to watching it so I'm a bit late to the party. During the time spent waiting to watch the movie I'd been hearing quite a lot of positive buzz about the film but that still didn't prepare me for the amount of fun I had. It felt like... the good ol' days. ;) I've been a longtime fan of the series and have seen ever single episode so I think it says a lot that I was more than satisfied with the outcome. My biggest worry was that the studio/production team would make a shitty film and bastardize the franchise all for the sake of making a quick buck, thankfully that wasn't the case. It felt like nothing had changed, in a good way, like I said it felt like the good ol' days. I think the film walked a fine line between feeling like an overextended t.v. show and a proper film, it was a perfect blend of the two. It felt like the show, but never did it feel bloated or exhausting. And as a film I think it did a great job of being open enough for an entirely new audience, I got the impression that you could pick up the story without ever having watched the original series. I can find no faults with this film. That said, I doubt it'll change your life... it's not a groundbreaking film, it just happens to be a whole lot of fun. But what's wrong with that? We all need to laugh once in a while. ;)9/10 Yeah that's right, a 9. I could watch this movie over and over and over again. :P An absolute must for any fan of the series. And straight guys, no need to fear, this film isn't just for chicks and fags. :P ;) I can't imagine anyone not liking this film on some level.DS333, pleased as punch.
Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull (2008)- directed by Steven Spielberg
The fourth film in the wildly popular and successful Indiana Jones franchise finds the titular character entangled in a plot with Russian militants bent on attaining a world-ruling power; to be bestowed in return of a lost, ancient relic.I feel funny about this review because I feel a review is based around the idea that I'm to dissuade or sway an audience toward a particular film and I can't imagine anyone not seeing this movie; There's nothing I can say, bad or good, that's going to stop someone from doing so. So what is there to say? I think the one thing you'll hear over and over again is that it was fun. It was entertaining. It was fun and it was entertaining. I'm sure there are very few that will say they love the film and truly mean it. I didn't fall in love. :( In fact, I might have been more than a tad disappointed. But y'know how I feel about expectations and disappointment. Maybe the blame should be on me, but I don't think I built up any expectations... at least nothing so grand. I only wanted the film to live up to the greatness of the previous three and I don't think it made it.I could probably rip this film apart if I wanted to, but as I said, I enjoyed myself and to be hypercritical now would be very disingenuous. It wasn't the greatest disappointment. I think I should just be grateful that it wasn't on par with the failure that was the Star Wars prequels. Anything looks better in that light. :P There was a lot I liked about the movie... but it didn't have the polish to make the grade. I guess it's true what they say, you can't go home again. :|
7/10 Sadly, my least favorite film of the franchise. A fine argument that digital effects aren't the be-all and end-all in world with practical effects. While not the best film of the franchise, definitely worth the watch for the awesomeness that is Cate Blanchett with a wicked Russian accent. Yowsa! :P ;)DS333, disillusioned.
Dreams (1990)- directed by Akira Kurosawa
A collection of eight short, self-contained films inspired by the dreams of visionary director Akira Kurosawa.Of all the films that were on my list to watch during my Kurosawa retrospective, Dreams was the film I most looked forward to watching. It was during the time I first conceptualized my own Dream project that I learned of Kurosawa's. It was one of those things, a sign. Having worked primarily in black & white I was hesitant about experimenting with color, that I would also be sharing something as personal to me as my own dreams paled in comparison to that initial fear. I'd always been a fan of Kurosawa but it wasn't until I learned of Dreams that I felt a true affinity for the artist. In my mind he existed in the old world of classic black & white cinema. I remember first seeing the cover/poster work for Dreams and feeling things click. I remember the color most of all; the dichotomy between old and new. I was instantly drawn in and had to see this film. But I had to wait...If for nothing else this film is worth seeing for the first short, Sunshine Through The Rain, which just so happens to be the inspiration for the cover/poster artwork of Dreams, it's that good. While the rest of the shorts didn't quite live up to the grandeur of the first, I did find things to take away from each of them. I'd say this film is largely a visual experiment... in that vein I found it to be arresting, compelling, strong and dramatic. There are so many images you'll walk away with after having watched the movie. Unfortunately, given the structure, there's not much to take away in terms of a coherent storyline. In fact, the film is characteristically Asian in that the film provides very little dialogue. It's exactly the film you would expect given the pitch. It's scattered, poignant, visual, meditative and mysterious. Certainly Kurosawa's most artistically experimental film to date. I loved this film through and through.8.5/10 In my opinion, Kurosawa's most visually arresting film. A film for the art set.DS333, greatly impressed.
Ran (1985)- directed by Akira Kurosawa
A Japanese period drama adapted from William Shakespeare's King Lear; A tale of an aging king driven to madness by his feuding sons; a house divided by avarice and treachery.I wanna keep this short and sweet (along with future Fetish posts), so I'll just say that I liked the film. I didn't love it, but I did enjoy myself. It's hard to go wrong when you pair two geniuses like Kurosawa and Shakespeare. However, given that the story is so simple the film is largely a visual experience and that might have to do with my lukewarm reception; I didn't view the best version of this film... I missed out on the Criterion edition. The copy I saw was the original DVD transfer and it looked quite muddy. If I had viewed the pristine version of the film I might have been bowled over by the visual impact, so much so that I might have forgiven the film's slight failings. The story, or, at least the screenplay seems to be quite lite with Kurosawa's epics... lite and drawn out. It's hard to live up to Shakespeare but if the writing were anywhere near as interesting I might have been able to forgive the muddy visuals. Anyway, it's a solid film... sadly despite my viewing experience, at this point, Kurosawa is working against himself; the film is nowhere as compelling as his earlier work.7/10 A visual treat of period Japan underlying one of Shakespeare's great works.DS333, underwhelmed.
Juno (2007)- directed by Jason Reitman
Witty acerbic high school junior, Juno, navigates the choppy waters of teenage pregnancy.Every field of interest has them, miserable assholes. You hear about them from time to time even if you don't happen to be immersed in their world. For instance, I wouldn't consider myself an audiophile but I know enough about that space to know that it's riddled with sonic snobs; joyless, anal retentive zombies. Being in love with film as much as I am means I'm familiar with the cinematic variety. I can't stand them. I can't stand anyone who can't have a good time; people who are bored, people who are blasé, people who are hypercritical, etc. Those people are deaf, dumb and blind. Case in point, their assessment of Juno. The film took a good beating from that camp, in fact, it was pretty much trashed. Over and over I heard about how trite and mediocre it was, indie-by-numbers is the phrase I remember being bandied about. I have no idea what movie they were watching. I loooved Juno.In some way I guess I could see what the cinephiles were trying to get at, but I feel they lost sight of what's really important, the heart of the film. It's a really great story; heartwarming, touching, funny and honest. It's not huge, not great, not all-encompassing, but it doesn't need to be... it still packs a punch. It's a small film that has all the right elements, that hits all the right notes. The star of the film, appropriately enough, is Ellen Page as Juno. Page along with Jennifer Garner and Allison Janney delivered phenomenal performances. As a whole I was pretty much bowled over by the strength of the cast, it's just something I wasn't really expecting. I was expecting the worst in a lot of ways, given what I had heard from the hardcores, but I was very pleasantly surprised. I think you might be too.8/10 A great dramedy that's a little lite on the drama and very heavy on the comedy; this film's loaded with laughs. :DDS333, surprised yet again.
Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber Of Fleet Street (2007)- directed by Tim Burton
After being unjustly exiled by the corrupt Judge Turpin in a plot to usurp his wife and the life he loved so dearly, Benjamin Barker returns to London a changed man and seeking revenge as The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, Sweeney Todd.I hate musicals. Let me qualify that, I hate most musicals... traditional musicals. As far as I can remember the only ones I've been able to get into have been comedies like South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut (1999) and Team America: World Police (2004). There was also Lars Von Trier's Dancer In The Dark (2000). And I was only drawn to them by a preexisting love for their creators; my love of Matt Stone and Trey Parker's comedy and my love of Björk's music. There's always been a hook to the musicals I've loved. I need to find a way in, otherwise they just seem ridiculous. I'm shut out from experiencing musicals in the way that fans of the genre do because I can't make sense of what's going on. Why are these people spontaneously bursting into song? How does everyone know the words? Where's the music coming from? This doesn't make sense, it's unnatural! I would have an easier time wrapping my head around them if they treated their performances as soliloquies. In a soliloquy the performer is removed from our reality; it's a window into the mind. I would even be fine with interpreting the songs as metaphors for the relationships of the characters involved, but the songs invariably contain specific information crucial to the plot progression. The songs are almost always symbolic of nothing, they're intended to be actual interactions and conversations. I just don't get it. Believe me, I could go on skewering the medium but that's not why I'm here. :P ;)Having said all that, I really enjoyed Sweeney Todd... and that should really mean something because it's structured in the way a traditional musical is. It's got everything save for the elaborate dance routines. But the film didn't win me over solely on its strength as a musical. The casting was spectacular; Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter are incredible and the supporting cast is just as strong. But tying it all together is the visionary genius of Tim Burton. Burton is definitely one of the high demigods in my personal pantheon. I don't believe there's been a film he's churned out that I haven't managed to enjoy. I just think he's a great filmmaker and this film... this story was perfectly suited for him and his visual style. The project as a whole is a perfect storm of talent and gore. :P7.5/10 One of the rare musical experiences I've managed to stomach and enjoy. At its heart, a great revenge film. Violence and vengeance set to Sondheim, what could be better? ;)DS333, pleasantly surprised.
Speed Racer (2008)- directed by Andy & Larry Wachowski
Based upon the 1960's American-adapted anime, Speed Racer follows the titular race car driver's struggle to honor and protect his family while attempting to expose the corruption within the corporate racing industry.If you've been keeping your ear to the ground you've probably heard that Speed Racer is considered a failure in almost every way, certainly critically and financially. I rarely let other people's opinions shape the way in which I experience a film and I care even less about how financially successful it is if it manages to entertain. Well, this film was entertaining for me. Granted it's not the best story... not even the best of the most mediocre but there was enough there to facilitate a blockbuster special effects powerhouse experience. If there's any reason you should see this film it's for the art direction, it's a killer spectacle. It's a hyperreal, pop art wonder fuck. I was blown away by what the film had to offer visually. I also managed to get caught up in the nostalgia of the original series, enough that I found myself at times getting really excited and racked with suspense. I'm probably being more forgiving than I should be but I just didn't hate the experience in the way that the critics at large hoped I would. Once you surrender yourself to the feel of the movie I think it's easy to get lost in the child-like optimism of it all. It's well worth a look if only to marvel at the technical achievements on display... that and the killer reworking of the original Speed Racer soundtrack, I still can't get that orchestral theme out of my head. :P ;)7/10 There's enough here to rope in any fan of the original series and even if you're not I think there's enough visual mastery on display to shock you into a state of awe and what could be better than that? :PDS333, in awe.
Iron Man (2008)- directed by Jon Favreau
Based upon the Marvel comic book character of the same name, Iron Man is the first film in what is sure to be a wildly successful franchise. At the center of this origin tale is billionaire industrialist and weapons engineer Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.). After suffering a near fatal attack at the hands of terrorists armed with weapons supplied from his own company Stark shifts his focus from a life of overindulgence and superficiality to one of nobility and uses his genius to hunt down his former captors.Everyone's saying it all over the place so who am I to disagree? Iron Man in the best superhero movie of all-time! I never really jibed with the idea that Tim Burton's Batman (1989) was ever in the running but I did feel that way about Spider-Man (2002) and Batman Begins (2005), though none of those films can hold a candle to Iron Man. The film was so beautifully crafted from top to bottom. I personally can't find any fault with it. Really I don't know what to say other than that, it's that good. What I love most about this film is that it doesn't suffer from the familiar trappings of every other superhero origin tale, quite simply it doesn't drag and it isn't ever boring. In a word the film is just fun. I don't know what more you can ask from a movie like this. The action sequences were perfectly choreographed, the special effects were incredible, the story structure was tight and efficient, the actors were strong and compelling... everything was just perfect. :D It's the type of movie I'd imagine non-geeks/non-comic book fans could fully enjoy.
I'm pretty sure I know why this film hit me the way it did and managed to earn the top superhero spot in my book, save for the reasons I already mentioned. First up, all of these stories have a romance angle... a love interest. Most of the time I'm just not digging it. The relationships always seem so forced and contrived... I'm just not interested. But the dynamic in this one was pitch-perfect because it was so believable. It wasn't heavy-handed and you get the impression that this too is just budding. Too often I think the love story develops too quickly in superhero films... it needs to slow down. I think the one nurtured here was perfectly paced. It might also have to do with the strength of Gwyneth Paltrow, I can't be sure. It's probably a mixture of character and actress. Whatever it is, is just worked. So what would traditionally be considered a flat, "intermission" scene suddenly became as compelling and engaging as every other scene in the movie. It was just brilliant.
I was also never familiar with the Iron Man mythos. I'm almost sure that this origin tale is nothing like that of the comics, but whatever else they managed to stay true or not I wouldn't be able to tell. So there might be this affection for something new and fresh that won me over in the end. It's just interested to see and hear something you've never experienced before.
Lastly, there's the whole tech angle. The film's basically robot porn... and I mean... c'mon! How could you not love that!? :P :D
9/10 I'd venture to give a higher rating save for the extreme guilt I might feel about previous reviews, but I just feel that enthusiastic about this movie... I could watch it over and over again. If you're looking for a great, well-rounded film look no further. ;)DS333, excited.
The Departed (2006)- directed by Martin Scorsese
Two cops from opposite sides of the tracks race against time to discover the identity of one other in an intense game of cat & mouse; one a dirty cop working for the local crime lord and the other an entrenched undercover agent working to bring down the crime syndicate from within.Okay... right off the bat I need to say that I'm probably going to be more harsh than I need to be with this review. Objectively I realize this is a solid film, a good film, but there was something I just didn't like about it. I've come up with a lot of reasons of why this might be and when you add it all together you might get the impression that I didn't like the film but I did. If for nothing else you should at least watch this film for the acting. Matt Damon and Leonardo DiCaprio are at a level I've never seen from them before. And to sweeten the pot further Jack Nicholson's performance trumps theirs by a hundred miles, he commands such power onscreen it's almost incredible.I feel the greatest thing the film had working against it was the fact that I had seen the film before... in the form of it's original source material, Infernal Affairs (2002). I loved that film. And when you're working with a story like this one I feel a lot of the power lies in the unknown. I was well aware of where things were going before they happened. The story takes a lot of twists and turns that were meant to be exciting and suspenseful but were ultimately lost on me. That's not a failing on the part of the film of course, I had essentially ruined the experience already by watching the original. And in some ways I wish I hadn't because this film has tons of polish and finesse that the original lacks, it also doesn't hurt to have one of the most talented directors of our time helming the project. :P In so many ways this version of the film is the best.Having said all that it seems petty to go on about all the other things I had a problem with, they're so minute. At the heart of this film lies a great suspenseful and dramatic story, and in the end it's all about the story. Given that it's a big budget Hollywood film directed by one of the greats you can trust that the fit and finish are top notch, there's very little about the technical aspects of the film to bemoan... although I will add that I didn't much care for the editing, I thought it was more than a bit sloppy and rushed. :P Still, all in all a fantastic picture.7.5/10 Yeah, I know... pretty low score but I have my reasons and it shouldn't affect your decision to see it by very much. This is a great film. If you're in the mood for a solid suspense crime-drama you won't find many films better than this.DS333, meh.
Breach (2007)- directed by Billy Ray
Based on a true story, Breach recounts computer specialist and support employee of the FBI, Eric O'Neill's (Ryan Phillippe) pursuit of special agent status within the bureau. His normal duties are put on the back burner when he is reassigned to track the movements of his new boss, special agent Robert Hanssen (Chris Cooper).Wow, what a great film. It's one of those movies I was meaning to get around to "sometime", but didn't until I heard an interview with Phillippe on The Howard Stern Show earlier this month. I kept hearing about how great it was, how strong it was, that I couldn't resist. It definitely lived up to the grand expectations.The film's basically a tale of espionage with heavy themes of deception and human behavior. It was right up my alley. Funny thing about the structure of the tale is that the ending is revealed at the beginning, which I think is a very ballsy move and speaks quite highly of the technical ability of the writer's to maintain a great sense of tension throughout the rest of the film. Knowing the ending doesn't spoil the story whatsoever, which is great to know since the headline is a memorable one. I remember this story and I imagine like others I just wasn't aware of the details. The Devil's in the details, this movie is all about subtlety and nuance. The story is gripping and tense. It's hard to pull yourself away at times. Intense is the watchword with this film. I just couldn't recommend this movie highly enough if you're in the mood for a great suspense drama loaded with strong acting talent.8.5/10 One of the best tales of espionage I've ever seen.DS333, pleased as punch.
Hannibal Rising (2007)- directed by Peter Webber
The origin of The Silence Of The Lambs' cannibalistic sociopath, Dr. Hannibal Lecter.If you haven't seen The Silence Of The Lambs, where have you been? It's one of the greatest films of all time. It's the film I credit sparking my serious interest in film. Before that film I can't remember film being anything more than passing entertainment, nothing truly long-lasting, fulfilling or enriching. It totally changed my perception of the medium. Though, I was ripe for the change. If it wasn't that film, it would've been another; Right time, right place... it just happened to be my first.So The Silence Of The Lambs holds a special place in my heart. There's so much I love about that film, too much to go into now. Like most of the world I fell in love with the film's villain, Dr. Hannibal Lecter. My interest in behavioral science, pathology and sociopathy certainly fueled that fire. There are few fictional characters I feel are as compelling as the good doctor.Anyway, I've been watching The Silence Of The Lambs recently. I've just been in the mood for that type of thing, for that character. I'd seen the entire series, ...Lambs along with Hannibal and Red Dragon, but I never got around to Hannibal Rising. Unfortunately I didn't catch it in the theatre. Maybe it's more appropriate to say that it's unfortunate that I didn't make the effort to see it in a theatre. Based on the trailers I had the impression it wouldn't stand firm amongst the rest of the films, and in some ways I guess I was right. I'd heard the criticism beforehand, that the film failed the character by humanizing him, that the story stripped away that air of mystery and the supernatural that surrounded Lecter. There was the idea that by explaining the character you were neutering him, making him less threatening and less terrifying. Though, I think any attempt at an origin tale would've been met with the same harsh criticism. I actually found the criticism quite funny, even before I saw the film, kind of a sign of the times... that making a human of this monster would be less horrifying? How 'bout that?There was this one thread floating about, that this film could've totally been stripped of the Lecter mythos and stood on its own as a pretty standard suspense/horror film. I'm very much in line with this thinking. The film was mediocre at best and in the rare moments it was able to transcend that feeling, it was due to allusions to the existing series. It's a funny thing, the film managed to do nothing... it neither tarnished nor polished my view of the character or the series. I think it had a lot to do with wresting the role from Anthony Hopkins hands, I really never felt I was watching Lecter on-screen. The film itself also exists in another time and in another place that seem absolutely divorced from the world that my Lecter lives in. I'm able to reconcile my disappointments. Then again, I wasn't really disappointed. It's so easy for me to have this film exist in its own space that I don't feel it failed to deliver. It almost feels like it doesn't have to exist?Anyway, I'm just rambling. I was in the mood and dying for closure so the film managed to deliver in that way. I just needed to watch it to watch it, I needed nothing more. As films go, it wasn't the worst. I enjoyed myself, but if I wasn't craving it... well it's hard to say if I would've enjoyed it in that instance. Like I said, it was pretty mediocre... but that doesn't make it bad. *shrug*6/10 A must for any Hannibal Lecter aficionado or anyone with a penchant for the macabre and violent. ;)DS333, meh.
My Blueberry Nights (2007)- directed by Wong Kar Wai
After a traumatic break-up a young woman treks across America in search of answers and change, along the way she meets a host of characters looking for the same.I'm a huge Wong Kar Wai fan, which makes reviewing this film a dicey situation. I say that because I'd like to be as unbiased as possible, but that's almost impossible in this instance. It's hard to separate myself and my experiences with his past work in relation to this film. I've been trying my best to take me out of myself for this one, if only for a moment. If I had to, I guess I'd have to say it's not a great film. It might seem very sporadic, or maybe messy? Clunky and chaotic? Something along those lines. Like some of Kar Wai's past films the story's structured in an episodic fashion. A lot of the story unfolds as a montage of images and sound, making it difficult to create any deep connections with any of the characters.Having said all that, I do feel it's a great film. It really just depends on your history with Kar Wai's work I suppose. I'm still unsure whether or not the average moviegoer would enjoy the experience because that's not how I came in contact with the film, and so I can never have that perspective. I can only make a guess. I would hope people would enjoy it. There's a lot here for a fan of his work to enjoy, plenty of allusions and references. They're the sort of things that make the story pop. They help to make connections to people and situations you might not otherwise. Then again, I feel most of Kar Wai's films are layered with archetypes. It's almost unnecessary to linger on any one story if you've seen the story play out before... in another film, another story, another song, etc. There's still something to be had, something to connect with. I just think the experience would be more enriching if you were to work off a symbology developed by the artist in the past.As a fan, I was very much satisfied. It really tied together and worked off the Days Of Being Wild, In The Mood For Love and 2046 "trilogy". I felt some sense of closure to that arc. It was also one of Kar Wai's more uplifting stories of romance. It was hopeful. All in all, one of the best love stories. ;)8/10 What I believe to be a very strong romance. Something to be enjoyed if you're in the mood for love. ;)DS333, pleased as punch.p.s. I didn't go into the technicalities of the film because I think they're pretty self-evident given that it's a Kar Wai film. Great everything. I know there's been much said about Norah Jones' acting but I think it was good... not great, but I wouldn't chuck any tomatoes at her. Jude Law, Rachel Weisz, David Strathairn and Natalie Portman deliver stellar performances. I was worried, given that this was WKW's first english-speaking film set in a non-Asian setting, but those fears were allayed. The soundtrack was as great as any other. Despite breaking ties with his longtime Director of Photography, the cinematography was breathtaking. It was just great, top to bottom. :D
War (2007)- directed by Philip G. Atwell
After the death of his partner at the hands of a notorious assassin known as Rogue, FBI special agent Jack Crawford is dead set on exacting his revenge.My Mom's a huge Jet Li fanatic, which is how this movie fell into my lap. I'm not all too sure I would've watched the movie otherwise. It's not something I could see myself actively pursuing. I love a good revenge tale, especially if you throw in some assassins for good measure but something about the film never grabbed me while it was in theatres. I don't have a thing against Li and I'm a huge Jason Statham fan. Still, it didn't seem like my fare.Obviously I went into the movie without any great expectations so I wasn't disappointed but I wasn't bowled over either. I did enjoy myself though. Overall the experience was mediocre, but I say that in the best possible way. It's got the feel of one of these filler flicks... it lacks any real substance. The fight scenes and action sequences aren't that spectacular or innovative but they're compelling enough to keep you engaged. I can't really say anything that bad about it. I sort of knew what I was walking into. It's okay and something worth watching if you're in the mood for something simple and violent. What else can I say?6/10 This hovers above the most cliche flicks that the revenge genre has to offer, but still manages to entertain. Only worth consuming if you're in the mood for a simple action flick.DS333, entertained.
3:10 To Yuma (2007)- directed by James Mangold
With a hefty payday at stake a desperate family man and rancher agrees to escort a vicious gang leader and dangerous fugitive onto a train to Yuma where his imprisonment awaits.I think it goes without saying (but I'll say it anyway :P ) that for the most part, I don't watch shitty movies. There's a standard that I hold films to. I'm pretty discerning. So 3:10 To Yuma is certainly a well-made film. It's great in that respect. Most of the technical aspects of the film are top notch. I found the cinematography and score to be the hallmarks of this film. There's much love to go around for this one. But, without spoiling anything, there was one part of this film that ruined the entire experience. That probably seems impossible, but it happened. It was a story element that became the rotten apple, the fly in the ointment. It spoiled what could have been a perfect film experience. So I have weird feelings about this film. I've several analogies I could use to frame the experience, but most of them are sexual in nature. :P There were huge chunks of this film to enjoy, there still are, but as a whole... the film just isn't... I don't know. This could very well be a love/hate situation. It's hard to tell where people will lie. I certainly fall into the hate category. Though I didn't really hate it. It's not a bad film. But it definitely taxes your ability to forgive. That one niggling issue ruined an otherwise perfect Western for me. So I don't know, check it out and decide for yourself.7/10 This easily could've been a 9.5, but that one issue brought it down for me. Wiping that from my mind... this is a killer Western with great actors doing what they do best. It's hard to make a horrible looking film with the American Southwest as your backdrop... it's a gorgeous film to behold. And the score harkens back to the Western films of old without delving into the cliche. Well worth a viewing.DS333, blind-sided.
Eastern Promises (2007)- directed by David Cronenberg
In hopes of finding relatives of a newly orphaned newborn a midwife uses the deceased mother's personal diary to track down leads, however, it ultimately leads her into the dark and dangerous world of the Russian mafia.As much as I say I'm a huge film fanatic and voyeur of the dark and disturbing it's quite embarrassing to have it known that I haven't seen much of David Cronenberg's work. Of course, I've known of him and his work... I just haven't gotten around to diving into it. To make it all the more tragic, the two films I can say I've seen in their entirety are his most commercial and mainstream efforts: A History Of Violence and Eastern Promises. That said, I can't say that's a bad thing; they're great films. And when it all boils down, that's the only thing worth caring about.Like A History Of Violence, Eastern Promises is a very simple film on the surface... and maybe even deep down? That's hard to say. They've the feel of great, little short stories. They're very linear and focused, which I quite like. They encompass very small and specific worlds. They're little windows to little worlds. And they're very character driven. Both star Viggo Mortensen and he does a great job of shouldering much of the films on his shoulders. He's a wonder to marvel. And I very much like this theme of... ghosts and shadows from the past affecting the present and future. There's a lot to be said of the dark side of humanity and moral ambiguity. It's all very murky and dark. It's very impressionistic. I can't say you'll walk away from either movie being forever changed, but they do linger. And at their root, they're just really great tension-filled suspense films.8/10 A solid film by anyone's standards. I can't imagine not loving this film. It's simple and well-rounded. It doesn't try to be clever or innovative... it harkens back to a day when films were pure story and less about the technical. Solid, solid, solid.DS333, a fan.* Spoilers *You've all heard about the fight scene and yes, it really does kick ass. A wet dream. ;)
Elizabeth - The Golden Age (2007)- directed by Shekhar Kapur
The sequel to 1998's Elizabeth, ...The Golden Age is an imaginative exploration into the relationship between Queen Elizabeth I and Sir Walter Raleigh amidst the turmoil leading up to the famed confrontation with the Spanish Armada.This isn't a history book, nor is it meant to be a history lesson. Films like this often have that attack launched against them. If you walk into the cinema seeking historical accuracy, you're a moron. :P This film, the history it's based on, is told in very broad strokes. So it's a breezy affair. It's quite lite in that regard. But that doesn't mean there isn't some depth to be found here. In certain respects this is a very rich film, a rich experience.
The pageantry of the film as a whole, and others like it, was one of the main draws for me. I'm a sucker for exquisite and extravagant art direction and costume design, which is something this film has in spades. You could get lost in the film on that level alone, you could just watch it; just experience its richness. The work on that plane is a true artistic achievement and it leaves me in awe. If you've an eye for the architectural and design you really owe it to yourself to watch this film for that reason alone.
The casting is quite perfect as well. Samantha Morton as Mary, Queen of Scots!? You gotta be kidding me. How perfect is that? Clive Owen has a real rakish flair as Sir Walter Raleigh... maybe verging on the annoying? But not quite, since I've always been a fan of his. ;) And of course I'd be remiss for not mentioning the amazing Geoffrey Rush as Sir Francis Walsingham. But the main attraction is Cate Blanchett in the title role of Elizabeth I. She's so commanding and powerful in her performance and yet, at times, also frail and vulnerable. It's quite something to see her at work. And while the melodramatic is often used as a negative, it's with films like these that I don't see why that's the case... if anything, I see it as a compliment. The melodrama on display is so compelling that I can't imagine it would be perceived as a detraction.
Lastly, I've always been fascinated with the world in which this story unfolds. The idea of monarchies and the social attitudes of the time. The dynamics between court officials and their subordinates. Political power plays, intrigue, espionage and diplomacy. It's a real complex network of interpersonal relationships set within a field that is the quintessence of the impersonal. Again, there is the idea of masks that I always find intriguing. And Queen Elizabeth I exemplifies that extraordinarily well. Although, I don't presume to know her. But the image of her is what I'm speaking to... and that I also find fascinating... this historical lens. We've nothing of the person, only the idea of what that person was. But that image... she's one of those historical figures I've never been able to shake. I fell in love with her the moment I learned of her. There's a lot going on there, a lot to dig through. The idea of a woman of that time, in that role, with that power, and what that all means. Pondering the effects of what that social duty means to the fulfillment of the self. This idea of restraint and sacrifice for something greater than you are. In some respects, living the life an ascetic. Privacy and solitude. Isolation. The farce of social graces. The hidden. I don't know... there's just so much there, in the image of this person that feels so... I don't know...
9/10 My score might seem a bit high given the general reception this film has garnered from critics, but this is supposed to be my review. :P I mainly base the score of these reviews on their replay value, their rewatchability. I'd own this film and I could easily see watching it over and over again. Goes without saying, if period films aren't your bag... avoid this movie at all costs. ;)
DS333, in tune.
* Spoilers *
For me, this film is littered with amazing scenes, but the execution of Mary, Queen of Scots has to be among the very best. Incredible! :D
Rambo (2008)- directed by Sylvester Stallone
After a group of Christian missionaries get captured by a group of ruthless Burmese militant radicals, Vietnam War veteran John Rambo joins a group of mercenaries sent to their rescue.What can I say? This movie is good for what it is, which is a mindless, comically violent, popcorn action flick. It's gore porn. It's what I wanted and it's what I was given. Though, this movie suffers from what some porno flicks suffer from as well, which is a futile effort to piece together some semblance of a story with horrible actors and worse dialogue. It just doesn't work on that level. The first 20-minutes or so of the movie are excruciating to sit through for this reason. Once it moves out of that space, the movie recovers. You get what you pay for: tons of action sequences, tons of gruesome deaths, etc. Pure violence. Ultimately this movie will prove to be an empty experience if that's something you're just not looking for because it's lacking in everything else a proper film should deliver on.6.5/10 Good ol' fashion Rambo action. ;)DS333, satisfied.* Spoilers *I love it... it's not enough to convey that the leader of the Burmese militants is the epitome of evil through the wildly violent execution sequences so you have to make him a pedophile... but not just any pedophile, a gay pedophile. 'Cause we all know the root of all evil and twisted perversion is homosexuality, right?. :P I'm not offended by something like that, but it's... it's so misleading. I think for a lot of people they think those phenomena are tightly interrelated, which is so not the case. Even my use of the term gay pedophile is improper because it puts emphasis on something that shouldn't even brought into the discussion. The focus is on pedophilia... the idea of preference in that vein is so wholly superficial. I know that, but I know so many people don't. He's now the fag, the fag who loves boys. Kill the fag! Die you evil fag!!! It's so ridiculous. And in the way that these sort of things filter into our systems it's done in the most heinous fashion, subtly. It's not overt. It's not a shout, but a whisper. And I find that whispers tend to linger more than anything else. And look, like I said... I'm not offended by this, or anything really, but it's something I'm aware of. I just thought it was funny... funny-interesting.
Okay, so I was proof-reading this... giving it one last read-through before I posted it and something didn't ring true. By saying I'm not offended I might infer that I'm not bothered by it, which I obviously am. But I'm also putting it into perspective. It's not the biggest thing in the world, not the greatest slight. I haven't lost sleep thinking about it or anything. But it's there... I've thought about it. It irks me. That type of thing usually does. Not the specific message. Although there is something to that. I mean it was a choice to make. It could've easily been a girl, why a boy? They decided to tap into this well of fear and ignorance. I mean don't we have enough to put up with without having these sort of messages being slipped under the social subconscious? That's where I have a problem I guess. The nature of delivery, it was very sly. A crafty use of subtext, a Trojan Horse. Almost alludes to a war of ideologies. And that's unfortunate. I would hope I wouldn't have to wage one on that front.
But the thing is... I keep coming back to the idea that this is nothing, which I firmly believe it is. It would be stupid of me to say that Sylvester Stallone wouldn't be the guy to push that type of agenda simply because I don't know him. He might very well be a rabid homophobe, I don't know. I would like to think he's not... might feel that he's not. Regardless of that fact, that choice still speaks to something. And if someone were to push an agenda like that, to demonize me... this would be the perfect way to do it. You'd push your message while making me seem hypersensitive, reactionary, paranoid... basically Looney Tunes at the same time. But I'm not. I just notice these things. I know the score.
Cloverfield (2008)- directed by Matt Reeves
The reckless journey of a group of young friends through a monster-ravaged New York is documented entirely by handheld video camera.Surely, by now, most people have seen this film. That said, I'm still gonna tip-toe around the most spoilerrific points of the film. I won't be surprising anyone by revealing this is a monster movie above all things, and a great one to boot. It's fun. I think that's a point that often gets lost with this film. So much has been made about this argument over it's potential disappointment as a whole, about whether or not it lived up to the expectations created by the compelling teaser trailer released last Summer. Expectations are a dicey thing, and mainly a failing on the part of the audience to appreciate things for what they are. This is a good movie, period. A great, suspenseful, action-filled monster flick. I don't know what else audiences wanted.The fact that J.J. Abrams had a hand in producing this film also means there's a lot of depth here, much to take away and explore if you choose to do so. There's a grand, expansive online element outside of the experience of the film that offers hints to answers never delivered during the course of that story. It's something I only got lost in after having seen the movie, and something I'm not taking into account with this review. Objectively, the sole experience of the film itself is truly solid and stands on its own as a great piece of storytelling.Lastly, I just wanted to make a comment on the actual mechanics of the storytelling; the use of handheld video camera... that first-person perspective. Well maybe I just wanted to throw out there my interest in the way that perspective, in general, is played around with in this... not film, but experience. The totality of Cloverfield is an interesting thing to contemplate. There's too much there to dive into but... above all, I was taken by the way in which media played an active role in this story... and the thought of what role it plays in the story of our lives. These cameras, these phones, these computers, truth, lies, answers, questions, secrets, etc. There's something there. I don't know what it is exactly, but I thought it was interesting. The influx of information... it's mutability... it's importance... accessing it, sharing it... I don't know, I found myself lost in... uhhh... I know I'm not explaining myself very well, but whatever it is I'm blathering on about in this paragraph... that space was the headspace I was in after having watched this film. It's very relevant, very pertinent, very now and new. In some ways I feel there's a twinge of the revolutionary somewhere in here... if that makes sense (probably not :P ).7.5/10 A lot of fun and well worth the price of admission. Worth watching if only for it's experiment with this type of storytelling. Though, be warned... not for those with weak stomachs, my brother can attest to that fact. Luckily I'm quite resistant to vertigo, if you are too watch this movie. ;)DS333, still.
So I wanted to rate these flicks but felt weird about giving them their own proper space since one is direct-to-DVD and the other two are as old as time itself. :P But I couldn't ignore them either, so here we go...Bender's Big Score (2007)- directed by Dwayne Carey-Hill7/10 This is the return of Futurama. Worth a viewing if you're a fan of the series, which I am, though I was a little underwhelmed by the movie. And I was more than a little disappointed to learn that this film, along with its three follow-up films, will be dissected into episodes for the "fifth season" of the series on Comedy Central. I'm guessing that decision, to separate each film into four separate episodes, is what made the experience less than stellar. Something seemed off about the movie. But hey, it's Futurama and it's good for a laugh... just not the best the series has been known to deliver.Die Hard (1988)- directed by John McTiernan8.5/10 An oldie but a goodie. It wasn't until recently that I watched this film in its entirety. I knew it was going to be great, I just didn't know how great. It's the boilerplate for every modern action flick. Save for a few niggling issues this film stands the test of time.Die Hard 2 - Die Harder (1990)- directed by Renny Harlin7/10 Not as great as the original, but an entertaining popcorn flick through-and-through.DS333, okay.
There Will Be Blood (2007)- directed by Paul Thomas Anderson
Loosely based on the Upton Sinclair novel, Oil!, There Will Be Blood follows the rise of silver miner-turned-oil prospector, Daniel Plainview's (Daniel Day-Lewis) family enterprise into the oil business.I'm struggling to make these posts shorter and less spoilerrific, so I'm gonna take a different approach on this one. I kinda wanted these posts to be as much about me as the films; if that makes sense. Bear with me, this is all experimentation. :PThere were a few reasons I wanted to see this film. For one, when I first saw the trailer (you can view the trailer of just about every film I review by clicking on it's title at the head of the post) I knew it would become one of those films that I wouldn't miss for anything in the world; it was instinctive. It's such an exemplary piece of great editing; definitely one of the all-time best trailers I've seen. It's also a Paul Thomas Anderson film. Anderson directed one of my most favorite films in this and every parallel universe; Magnolia (1999). I would've been dead-set to see whatever his follow-up film was. I'm also a huge Daniel Day-Lewis fan. I fell in love with the guy with Martin Scorsese's The Age Of Innocence (1993), both physically and artistically. I think the guy's one of the most gorgeous and talented actors in Hollywood. I would've been drawn to see whatever he attached himself to next. Lastly, I had heard some time ago that Radiohead virtuoso, Jonny Greenwood, was tapped to score the film. I've long believed that Jonny's one of the most criminally overlooked musicians out there. In my personal pantheon, the guy's a high demigod. The thought of Greenwood scoring a film had me excited to no end.In the end, this film is a symphony of technical mastery. It's helmed by a deft filmmaker who's really done his best to branch out in a new and exciting way. It stars one of the greatest actors in Hollywood giving one of the best performances in cinematic history. And it's all set to the tune of a truly talented avant-garde musician. I couldn't not love this movie. And I didn't; I loved this film. It's technically, perfect, but it rises above all else into something wholly other; it's a treasure trove of subtext and metaphor. I can't say enough about how much I loved this film. The story's engaging. The characters, compelling. Everything is right where it should be. And it all comes together to examine an interesting strain of the darker side of human nature that's characteristically American; a blend of avarice and a dark ambition fueled by a hatred of fellow man. Daniel Plainview is a misanthrope's misanthrope and a villain's villain. 'Nough said.10/10 Perfection. I'm a sucker for Paul Thomas Anderson, Daniel Day-Lewis and Jonny Greenwood. I'm also a sucker for brilliant storytelling, acting and scoring. I've also a thing for stories told over a great expanse of time, literally and figuratively. More than anything, I'm a sucker for dark character studies.DS333, pleased as punch.
