Inland Empire(dir. David Lynch)
This is my first "whole" experience with Lynch. I've only seen the first two episodes after the pilot of Twin Peaks and I've seen big bits and pieces of Blue Velvet pretty much all the way through so it might technically not be my first experience with Lynch, but still... Knowing this was most likely a bad place to start since even some of the most dedicated Lynch fans didn't know what quite to make of it, I decided to start with it anyways because baby, I don't gradually get in the pool from the shallow end, I jump in the deep end. I'm not going to pretend I understood it because honestly, I don't think that's possible, but I honestly felt I "got" it. The movie really clicked. To overuse the pool metaphor a little more, after jumping in the pool, it had a nice casual cooling effect until I hit the bottom and wondered what happened? Sure, the movie was not nice or casual, but disorienting and totally unpredictable. It's unpredictability was it's greatest asset. This movie was fucking nuts and I was particularly amazed by how random it was up until the end. This is where I felt the movie turned from masterpiece to just near-masterpiece. It felt like the ending was trying to wrap things up nice and neatly even though I don't understand what it was wrapping up. It felt too conclusive for my tastes and the music was also a little on the cheesy side. It turned this disorienting mindfuck of a movie into an almost calm and cheerful one. I wish it stayed nuts the whole time. With that aside, I highly recommend seeing this movie.
***1/2 out of ****
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Monday, August 27, 2007
Oh Tony Leung...
Flowers of Shanghai(dir. Hou Hsiao-Hsien)
It had a beautiful look and soundtrack, but was the film as equally as beautiful? Not quite. It definately was boring until the narrative took form. It definately showed a little too many scenes of them playing the drinking game at the table, but the film veers away from that in it's last half hour or so. It wasn't as engaging as it could have been because of it's restraint. It felt detached and cold to a degree, which for a film like Goodbye South, Goodbye makes sense, but here doesn't make that much sense. I guess you could argue that it's detached and cold because of the social code that everybody had to prescribe to back then not allowing people to express their true emotions in a very obvious fashion. The ending felt just right in it's restrained and simple nature. It was definately good, but it definately was no masterpiece either.
*** out of ****
It had a beautiful look and soundtrack, but was the film as equally as beautiful? Not quite. It definately was boring until the narrative took form. It definately showed a little too many scenes of them playing the drinking game at the table, but the film veers away from that in it's last half hour or so. It wasn't as engaging as it could have been because of it's restraint. It felt detached and cold to a degree, which for a film like Goodbye South, Goodbye makes sense, but here doesn't make that much sense. I guess you could argue that it's detached and cold because of the social code that everybody had to prescribe to back then not allowing people to express their true emotions in a very obvious fashion. The ending felt just right in it's restrained and simple nature. It was definately good, but it definately was no masterpiece either.
*** out of ****
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Oh Maggie Cheung...
Clean(dir. Olivier Assayas)
I really liked it's somber tone. It was very relaxing and "mediative." This movie seems more like a showcase for it's actors than it's director, but having not seen any of his other work, I can't be totally sure. I am sure that Maggie Cheung and Nick Nolte give good performances. Actually, I'll say pretty much everybody except the kid give good performances. I thought the ending was just right for this type of story. Biggest flaw? It was too clean. Sorry for the pun, but it just seems like a movie about a recovering drug addict should be a little bit more gritty. The whole sub-plot about trying to get Tricky to convince her father-in-law to give her custody of her son was pretty ridiculous, but it's actually handled well in the film and it made sense at the time. It was really good.
***1/2 out of ****
I really liked it's somber tone. It was very relaxing and "mediative." This movie seems more like a showcase for it's actors than it's director, but having not seen any of his other work, I can't be totally sure. I am sure that Maggie Cheung and Nick Nolte give good performances. Actually, I'll say pretty much everybody except the kid give good performances. I thought the ending was just right for this type of story. Biggest flaw? It was too clean. Sorry for the pun, but it just seems like a movie about a recovering drug addict should be a little bit more gritty. The whole sub-plot about trying to get Tricky to convince her father-in-law to give her custody of her son was pretty ridiculous, but it's actually handled well in the film and it made sense at the time. It was really good.
***1/2 out of ****
Saturday, August 25, 2007
Oh Kate & Bruno...
Vacancy(dir. Nimrod Antal)
This is a thriller that is actually thrilling. It starts off creepily even if it was predictable. The atmosphere almost had a smutty feel to it like the snuff films that they watch. The film starts to lose it's energy the longer it went on and almost felt repetitive due to it's constrictive setting, but thankfully, the filmmakers decided to keep the movie on the short side (85 mins.) and not keep it going until eventually it lost all it's steam and become an absolute bore. Kate Beckinsale's character acted like an idiot most of the time, which was pretty frustrating. Luke Wilson's character surviving the whole ordeal was pretty ludicrious, but I'm willing to accept it because after all, it's a genre film. Portraying the ordeal as almost an alternative to couple's therapy wasn't all that off-putting because it was totally expected. I thought it was good.
*** out of ****
L'Humanite(dir. Bruno Dumont)
The shock imagery that he displayed in The Life of Jesus compared to some of the stuff in this was relatively tame in comparision. I understand the first shocking image to a certain extent because you could justify that it was showing the audience the ugliness of the crime, but the sex scenes and one particular scene seemed totally unnecessary and just seemed like a director trying to provoke the audience with shock imagery. I don't like that one bit especially with a particular scene almost derailing the whole film because it just seemed so distasteful. The main female character offers her body to the main character and after that incident, a shot of the woman's vagina is shown for a good length of time while the character cries. Some critics said it was to show how the main character views sex after the horrific crime, but that's no excuse for it's gratuitous and distasteful nature. The character wasn't even involved in that scene to make it seem that's what it's purpose was. It was a private moment for that particular character. The main character has some beautiful moments and some off-puttingly awkward ones. The character is an awkward one in the first place, but having him employing a homoerotic way of handling supects just seemed ridiculous especially at the end where he french kisses the man responsible for the horrific crime. Roger Ebert says these scenes are to show the audience that the character is becoming mad because of the crime. I think there is too much emphasis on the crime from most of the reviews I've read. It was probably as or even more horrific for the main character as it was for the audience to have to see, but I don't think his whole life and how he handles people were totally affected by it. The character is slow and almost seems like a grown man that is still at a child's mental and emotional capacity. He is quiet and almost displays a sense of spirituality, but he's no saint. He's an idiot. Critics say he's trying to carry the world's suffering on his shoulders, but is he really? The characters feels like a reject out of a Bresson film. There is also a tidbit thrown around that he used to have a girlfriend and a baby and it's almost used as an excuse for the way he behaves. He just seems like a man stunted not by his experiences in life, but by nature. That doesn't mean he's not an intriguing character, but when he starts doing something as strange as sniffing a suspect's hair and face, it just becomes really awkward and feels totally unnatural in the context of his character. It feels like an attempt to shock the audience. Dumont said in the interview on the DVD that he wants to confront the viewer, but I think there's much subtler ways to do that and I think he actually employs some of the subtler ways in this film, but he also ends up employing overly obvious ways of confronting the audience. The Life of Jesus proved that subtlety was more mysterious and rewarding than being confrontational. It's interesting to listen to Bruno Dumont trying to explain his view on life and film and not being able to really articulate it. It doesn't mean he's a bad director or person just because he's not very articulate on his method or his views on life, but it's interesting coming from a man that was a philosophy teacher, who you would think would be able to articulate his ideas more clearly. I'm not judging the film by his interview, but it kind of makes you think about the film in a different light because he might not be entirely sure of what he is doing, which makes it easier to stomach that he might not realize that his imagery is shocking or gratuitous, but in the context of this film, it seems obvious that he knows exactly what he's doing. It was a mixed bag artistically. The Life of Jesus is definately way better.
**1/2 out of ****
This is a thriller that is actually thrilling. It starts off creepily even if it was predictable. The atmosphere almost had a smutty feel to it like the snuff films that they watch. The film starts to lose it's energy the longer it went on and almost felt repetitive due to it's constrictive setting, but thankfully, the filmmakers decided to keep the movie on the short side (85 mins.) and not keep it going until eventually it lost all it's steam and become an absolute bore. Kate Beckinsale's character acted like an idiot most of the time, which was pretty frustrating. Luke Wilson's character surviving the whole ordeal was pretty ludicrious, but I'm willing to accept it because after all, it's a genre film. Portraying the ordeal as almost an alternative to couple's therapy wasn't all that off-putting because it was totally expected. I thought it was good.
*** out of ****
L'Humanite(dir. Bruno Dumont)
The shock imagery that he displayed in The Life of Jesus compared to some of the stuff in this was relatively tame in comparision. I understand the first shocking image to a certain extent because you could justify that it was showing the audience the ugliness of the crime, but the sex scenes and one particular scene seemed totally unnecessary and just seemed like a director trying to provoke the audience with shock imagery. I don't like that one bit especially with a particular scene almost derailing the whole film because it just seemed so distasteful. The main female character offers her body to the main character and after that incident, a shot of the woman's vagina is shown for a good length of time while the character cries. Some critics said it was to show how the main character views sex after the horrific crime, but that's no excuse for it's gratuitous and distasteful nature. The character wasn't even involved in that scene to make it seem that's what it's purpose was. It was a private moment for that particular character. The main character has some beautiful moments and some off-puttingly awkward ones. The character is an awkward one in the first place, but having him employing a homoerotic way of handling supects just seemed ridiculous especially at the end where he french kisses the man responsible for the horrific crime. Roger Ebert says these scenes are to show the audience that the character is becoming mad because of the crime. I think there is too much emphasis on the crime from most of the reviews I've read. It was probably as or even more horrific for the main character as it was for the audience to have to see, but I don't think his whole life and how he handles people were totally affected by it. The character is slow and almost seems like a grown man that is still at a child's mental and emotional capacity. He is quiet and almost displays a sense of spirituality, but he's no saint. He's an idiot. Critics say he's trying to carry the world's suffering on his shoulders, but is he really? The characters feels like a reject out of a Bresson film. There is also a tidbit thrown around that he used to have a girlfriend and a baby and it's almost used as an excuse for the way he behaves. He just seems like a man stunted not by his experiences in life, but by nature. That doesn't mean he's not an intriguing character, but when he starts doing something as strange as sniffing a suspect's hair and face, it just becomes really awkward and feels totally unnatural in the context of his character. It feels like an attempt to shock the audience. Dumont said in the interview on the DVD that he wants to confront the viewer, but I think there's much subtler ways to do that and I think he actually employs some of the subtler ways in this film, but he also ends up employing overly obvious ways of confronting the audience. The Life of Jesus proved that subtlety was more mysterious and rewarding than being confrontational. It's interesting to listen to Bruno Dumont trying to explain his view on life and film and not being able to really articulate it. It doesn't mean he's a bad director or person just because he's not very articulate on his method or his views on life, but it's interesting coming from a man that was a philosophy teacher, who you would think would be able to articulate his ideas more clearly. I'm not judging the film by his interview, but it kind of makes you think about the film in a different light because he might not be entirely sure of what he is doing, which makes it easier to stomach that he might not realize that his imagery is shocking or gratuitous, but in the context of this film, it seems obvious that he knows exactly what he's doing. It was a mixed bag artistically. The Life of Jesus is definately way better.
**1/2 out of ****
Friday, August 24, 2007
Oh John Travolta...
Wild Hogs(dir. Walt Becker)
The homophobia was in bad taste, but I guess all the jokes and pretty much everything was in bad taste. Not in terms of political correctness, in terms of humor. The only amusing part was seeing John Travolta getting attacked by a crow for no apparent reason. It was a ridiculous moment that was entertaining while all the other jokes don't even feel ridiculous, they just feel mundance and embarrassing in terms of how bad they are. They almost don't seem like their jokes because you question how some screenwriter thought any of them were funny. I wouldn't even think they were jokes if this movie wasn't labelled as a comedy. John Travolta gives an outstandingly bad performance. It wasn't totally dreadful to watch and it wasn't a terribly painful experience, but it definately wasn't a good one either.
*1/2 out of ****
The homophobia was in bad taste, but I guess all the jokes and pretty much everything was in bad taste. Not in terms of political correctness, in terms of humor. The only amusing part was seeing John Travolta getting attacked by a crow for no apparent reason. It was a ridiculous moment that was entertaining while all the other jokes don't even feel ridiculous, they just feel mundance and embarrassing in terms of how bad they are. They almost don't seem like their jokes because you question how some screenwriter thought any of them were funny. I wouldn't even think they were jokes if this movie wasn't labelled as a comedy. John Travolta gives an outstandingly bad performance. It wasn't totally dreadful to watch and it wasn't a terribly painful experience, but it definately wasn't a good one either.
*1/2 out of ****
Thursday, August 23, 2007
Oh Adrienne Shelly...
Waitress(dir. Adrienne Shelly)
This is definately a girl's movie. There's no denying that. It's a chick flick complete with it's happily ever after ending, but unlike other chick flicks, there's no man in the main character's life at the end. It's almost a girly cutesy version of Knocked Up. It's cute moments like her making pies were kind of too cutesy for my tastes, but there are some whimsical romantic moments like her doctor that she is having an affair with holding her because she is sad and needs some affection. It was definately a heart-tugging moment. I would have probably given this ***1/2 if it just ended there, but it kept going. It's refreshing that she doesn't end up with either her husband or her doctor, but it's still sort of unsatisfying. The most off-putting aspect was just it's overly cute moments. There's a sequence that shows her smiling because she is happy since she is having an affair with her doctor that almost verges on being scary. This definately felt like Hal Hartley-lite at some moments like a conversation between her and her doctor in his office felt like it was directly lifted out of a Hal Hartley movie. It wasn't as annoyingly cute as Miss Potter, but it still was kind of annoying in it's cuteness.
*** out of ****
This is definately a girl's movie. There's no denying that. It's a chick flick complete with it's happily ever after ending, but unlike other chick flicks, there's no man in the main character's life at the end. It's almost a girly cutesy version of Knocked Up. It's cute moments like her making pies were kind of too cutesy for my tastes, but there are some whimsical romantic moments like her doctor that she is having an affair with holding her because she is sad and needs some affection. It was definately a heart-tugging moment. I would have probably given this ***1/2 if it just ended there, but it kept going. It's refreshing that she doesn't end up with either her husband or her doctor, but it's still sort of unsatisfying. The most off-putting aspect was just it's overly cute moments. There's a sequence that shows her smiling because she is happy since she is having an affair with her doctor that almost verges on being scary. This definately felt like Hal Hartley-lite at some moments like a conversation between her and her doctor in his office felt like it was directly lifted out of a Hal Hartley movie. It wasn't as annoyingly cute as Miss Potter, but it still was kind of annoying in it's cuteness.
*** out of ****
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Oh Monica Vitti...
L'Ecclise(dir. Michelangelo Antonioni)
Since he died recently and I've had an interest in seeing his work, I decided to check this out. I was hestitant about seeing his work because usually I hear the word "boring" to describe it. This film surprised me because it wasn't boring at first and was actually really compelling, but this director obviously doesn't know when to stop with some scenes and go on to the next. The stock market scene when Vittoria is not present and the end come to mind. I feel the theme that this film is supposedly dealing with doesn't get examined as thoroughly compared to how it gets examined in a film by Tsai Ming-liang, who obviously was influenced by him. I can see the detachment especially when it becomes almost painfully obvious in a scene where Piero is more concerned about the shape of his car than the dead body in it. It's kind of superficial in it's examination. Sure, this must have been ground-breaking at the time, but it seems kind of ridiculous to show the rich as stereotypically out of touch with humanity and more concerned with material goods. I think the greatest aspect of this film is the sense of impeding doom that is felt throughout most of the picture. During the end, you almost expect a nuke to go off since it feels like a horror film with it's score and images of vast open streets. The newspaper shown at the end must have had some importance since the subtitles translated it for the audience. It could be Antonioni saying that detachment can cause nuclear war to break out in the days of the Cold War, which is a sound judgement, but it feels too far-reaching especially since the film has a relatively intimate and contained story. The film doesn't really adhere to a typical narrative structure, but you still get a sense of moving to some point. The end was a little much in terms of length, but I can see how individuals could think it was bold because it is. I just can't say it was entirely successful. Monica Vitti, while not really that sexy especially compared to someone like Claudia Cardinale, makes detachment almost seem fashionable with her performance. I hated the sound of her laugh, though. It was good and I will check out some of his other work.
*** out of ****
Since he died recently and I've had an interest in seeing his work, I decided to check this out. I was hestitant about seeing his work because usually I hear the word "boring" to describe it. This film surprised me because it wasn't boring at first and was actually really compelling, but this director obviously doesn't know when to stop with some scenes and go on to the next. The stock market scene when Vittoria is not present and the end come to mind. I feel the theme that this film is supposedly dealing with doesn't get examined as thoroughly compared to how it gets examined in a film by Tsai Ming-liang, who obviously was influenced by him. I can see the detachment especially when it becomes almost painfully obvious in a scene where Piero is more concerned about the shape of his car than the dead body in it. It's kind of superficial in it's examination. Sure, this must have been ground-breaking at the time, but it seems kind of ridiculous to show the rich as stereotypically out of touch with humanity and more concerned with material goods. I think the greatest aspect of this film is the sense of impeding doom that is felt throughout most of the picture. During the end, you almost expect a nuke to go off since it feels like a horror film with it's score and images of vast open streets. The newspaper shown at the end must have had some importance since the subtitles translated it for the audience. It could be Antonioni saying that detachment can cause nuclear war to break out in the days of the Cold War, which is a sound judgement, but it feels too far-reaching especially since the film has a relatively intimate and contained story. The film doesn't really adhere to a typical narrative structure, but you still get a sense of moving to some point. The end was a little much in terms of length, but I can see how individuals could think it was bold because it is. I just can't say it was entirely successful. Monica Vitti, while not really that sexy especially compared to someone like Claudia Cardinale, makes detachment almost seem fashionable with her performance. I hated the sound of her laugh, though. It was good and I will check out some of his other work.
*** out of ****
Tuesday, August 21, 2007
Oh Makika Esumi...
Pistol Opera(dir. Seijun Suzuki)
He is fucking nuts. A poet of insanity. This film mesmerized me up until a little bit before the end where two fairly monologues took me out of the experience. The main actress was easily the best out of the film by being bad ass and amazingly sexy. The underage nudity was kind of off-putting, but it wasn't displayed in an erotic way so I can't be too offended by it. The ending is rather abrupt, but it fits in with the rest of the insanity. I almost feel like I'm underrating this and I'm pretty certain that the next time I watch it, I will feel it deserves ****, but for now, it gets
***1/2 out of ****
He is fucking nuts. A poet of insanity. This film mesmerized me up until a little bit before the end where two fairly monologues took me out of the experience. The main actress was easily the best out of the film by being bad ass and amazingly sexy. The underage nudity was kind of off-putting, but it wasn't displayed in an erotic way so I can't be too offended by it. The ending is rather abrupt, but it fits in with the rest of the insanity. I almost feel like I'm underrating this and I'm pretty certain that the next time I watch it, I will feel it deserves ****, but for now, it gets
***1/2 out of ****
Monday, August 20, 2007
Oh David and 23...
16 Blocks(dir. Richard Donner)
The movie was good up until the bus situation. It could have ended there with the bad cops winning and the good cop losing and I would have been a happy camper, but Mos Def's character had to get back on the bus and ruin it. You realize at that moment that good guys will come up on top and the bad guys will take the fall. You also get taught the message that people can change which is taken to an extreme with it's cheesy ending. David Morse gives a good performance as the main bad cop. He has more charisma than either of the leads. Mos Def's voice gets annoying after awhile, but he has a sweet scene with a little girl and Bruce Willis competently plays his role. It was decent.
**1/2 out of ****
The Number 23(dir. Joel Schumacher)
The fact that it takes it's plot seriously is easily the worst aspect of it. It's just so ridiculous seeing the number 23 everywhere. As you get point of view shots of all the 23's he sees, you almost want to burst out laughing, but it isn't ridiculous enough to pass off as camp, which makes the film dull. For some reason, I liked the ending, while most reviewers did not. I felt it made the insanity seem kind of grounded in terms of what happens. The twist is clunky and preposterous, but it makes his insanity feels less like insanity and actually gives the audience the ability to sympathize with the characters mildly since their obsession wasn't a complete waste of time. It's definately not good, but it's definately not as bad as something like Premonition.
** out of ****
The movie was good up until the bus situation. It could have ended there with the bad cops winning and the good cop losing and I would have been a happy camper, but Mos Def's character had to get back on the bus and ruin it. You realize at that moment that good guys will come up on top and the bad guys will take the fall. You also get taught the message that people can change which is taken to an extreme with it's cheesy ending. David Morse gives a good performance as the main bad cop. He has more charisma than either of the leads. Mos Def's voice gets annoying after awhile, but he has a sweet scene with a little girl and Bruce Willis competently plays his role. It was decent.
**1/2 out of ****
The Number 23(dir. Joel Schumacher)
The fact that it takes it's plot seriously is easily the worst aspect of it. It's just so ridiculous seeing the number 23 everywhere. As you get point of view shots of all the 23's he sees, you almost want to burst out laughing, but it isn't ridiculous enough to pass off as camp, which makes the film dull. For some reason, I liked the ending, while most reviewers did not. I felt it made the insanity seem kind of grounded in terms of what happens. The twist is clunky and preposterous, but it makes his insanity feels less like insanity and actually gives the audience the ability to sympathize with the characters mildly since their obsession wasn't a complete waste of time. It's definately not good, but it's definately not as bad as something like Premonition.
** out of ****
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Oh McLovin...
Superbad(dir. Gret Mottola)
It wasn't as good as Knocked Up. The cop characters are a little much and they milk the McLovin joke for all it's worth. It was really raunchy and made American Pie look family-friendly. I definately recommend it because it has some really funny moments, but don't expect it to be hilarious the whole time. The whole idea that these guys grew up over one night just seemed a little preposterous, but it's a comedy so I forgive it.
*** out of ****
It wasn't as good as Knocked Up. The cop characters are a little much and they milk the McLovin joke for all it's worth. It was really raunchy and made American Pie look family-friendly. I definately recommend it because it has some really funny moments, but don't expect it to be hilarious the whole time. The whole idea that these guys grew up over one night just seemed a little preposterous, but it's a comedy so I forgive it.
*** out of ****
Friday, August 17, 2007
Oh Ryan and Shohei...
Fracture(dir. Gregory Hoblit)
As a mystery, it's not very mysterious and as a thriller, it's not very thrilling. As a movie, it's also not that compelling. It starts off fine, but it continually becomes increasingly dull and predictable. It's predictability isn't a crime against cinema, but it just seems like the film tries to prolong reaching it's inevitable "good" guys win conclusion.
** out of ****
Vengeance is Mine(dir. Shohei Imamura)
I like how upfront he is in displaying the character. He doesn't really expect audiences to be rooting for the guy, but the character does have his moments. I felt relatively detached throughout the film because it's hard to really sympathize or even understand the character. I guess that's the point. His romance with a woman that runs a inn was easily the best part of the film and that character brought some humanity and warmth to the picture. It's a shame what happens. The end was rather strange and awkward. This was definately good and I think I should probably rewatch this in the future. Definately interested in seeing some of his other films.
*** out of ****
As a mystery, it's not very mysterious and as a thriller, it's not very thrilling. As a movie, it's also not that compelling. It starts off fine, but it continually becomes increasingly dull and predictable. It's predictability isn't a crime against cinema, but it just seems like the film tries to prolong reaching it's inevitable "good" guys win conclusion.
** out of ****
Vengeance is Mine(dir. Shohei Imamura)
I like how upfront he is in displaying the character. He doesn't really expect audiences to be rooting for the guy, but the character does have his moments. I felt relatively detached throughout the film because it's hard to really sympathize or even understand the character. I guess that's the point. His romance with a woman that runs a inn was easily the best part of the film and that character brought some humanity and warmth to the picture. It's a shame what happens. The end was rather strange and awkward. This was definately good and I think I should probably rewatch this in the future. Definately interested in seeing some of his other films.
*** out of ****
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Oh Point Break...
Hot Fuzz(dir. Edgar Wright)
When the film turns into pretty much a mindless action movie, it is hilarious. Before, it had some funny moments, but it's not nearly as good as what it eventually turns into. It takes too long to get to the good part, but it's still really good and funny. Not as consistently funny as Knocked Up and the blood and gore, which some might find funny, was kind of nasty.
***1/2 out of ****
When the film turns into pretty much a mindless action movie, it is hilarious. Before, it had some funny moments, but it's not nearly as good as what it eventually turns into. It takes too long to get to the good part, but it's still really good and funny. Not as consistently funny as Knocked Up and the blood and gore, which some might find funny, was kind of nasty.
***1/2 out of ****
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Oh Lena & Vanilla Ice & Jesus & Pauly...
300(dir. Zack Snyder)
Homophobic and homoerotic? You bet. This film's idea of manliness is defending a society with such good wholesome morals as throwing babies in pits to die if they won't make good warriors because of deformities or some visible sign of weakness. The film's look isn't all that great. There's been a lot of hoopla about the film's look, but it's visually uninteresting when compared to a film like Sin City. The most visually interesting aspect was one of the few non-computer generated aspects of the film and that was the main actress, Lena Headey. A breath of fresh air in this sausage-fest of a movie. The film throws around words like freedom and slavery to add weight to their cause, but you don't really care because the acting and dialogue is bad. It would have been fine if the movie was trying to be campy, but the film takes it's idea of masculinity too seriously and expects people to buy into it. Probably the most manly scene doesn't even concern any of the 300 spartans. It concerns Lena Headey's character and a politician. There's actually spontaniety and excitement to that scene that is seriously lacking in the rest of the film. The action is dull because of the extreme amount of slow motion intended to make all the teenage boys in the theater to go "that's hella sick, bro." Snyder makes Mel look like a minimalist when it comes to use of slow motion. It can't even deliver on the violence either because of the computer generated blood looking extremely fake. I'm sure, some could make an argument that it's stylish, but it's still shitty looking especially when the rest of the film is bland and fairly one-note. The color that you'll come away with is gold because the sun always lights the scene in a dull gold shade. I actually liked Xerxes more than any of the spartans because he was flamboyant and actually had personality. It was obvious that the director intended for all the male viewers to view Xerxes as a freak because he's pretty much a drag queen, but I find him more sympathetic than Leonidas or his men because he's accepting of the hunchback character. The hunchback's betrayal was probably supposed to be some huge blow to the audience and I could imagine the audience wishing Leonidas would have killed him, but he has way more personality than any of the 300 spartans. This movie sucked.
*1/2 out of ****
TMNT(dir. Kevin Munroe)
No Shredder + No Personality + No Vanilla Ice = No Good
*1/2 out of ****
The Life of Jesus(dir. Bruno Dumont)
I like how he displays these asshole characters as pretty much assholes. I think the title applies to the Arab character because he's easily the most sympathetic guy in the movie and well, he dies. He adds a sense of humanity to the picture that the film was lacking. The shots of actual penetration during the sex scenes were unnecessary. Along with seeing Freddy's mom's vagina after she got out of the bath, which amounted to about 2 seconds of the film and seemed as if the editor just didn't cut in time or something. The ending was moving in a sense, but you could picture it having a stronger emotional impact if you were able to sympathize with Freddy's character more.
***1/2 out of ****
Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters(dir. Paul Schrader)
This is the way you make a film about an artist. You show bits of his life and you show bits of his work. It shows how his life shaped his work and it shows how his work shaped him. Phillip Glass's score is amazing. This film would have been amazing if a moment near the end didn't feel so ridiculous and akward. It's easily the best film I've seen by him so far.
***1/2 out of ****
Homophobic and homoerotic? You bet. This film's idea of manliness is defending a society with such good wholesome morals as throwing babies in pits to die if they won't make good warriors because of deformities or some visible sign of weakness. The film's look isn't all that great. There's been a lot of hoopla about the film's look, but it's visually uninteresting when compared to a film like Sin City. The most visually interesting aspect was one of the few non-computer generated aspects of the film and that was the main actress, Lena Headey. A breath of fresh air in this sausage-fest of a movie. The film throws around words like freedom and slavery to add weight to their cause, but you don't really care because the acting and dialogue is bad. It would have been fine if the movie was trying to be campy, but the film takes it's idea of masculinity too seriously and expects people to buy into it. Probably the most manly scene doesn't even concern any of the 300 spartans. It concerns Lena Headey's character and a politician. There's actually spontaniety and excitement to that scene that is seriously lacking in the rest of the film. The action is dull because of the extreme amount of slow motion intended to make all the teenage boys in the theater to go "that's hella sick, bro." Snyder makes Mel look like a minimalist when it comes to use of slow motion. It can't even deliver on the violence either because of the computer generated blood looking extremely fake. I'm sure, some could make an argument that it's stylish, but it's still shitty looking especially when the rest of the film is bland and fairly one-note. The color that you'll come away with is gold because the sun always lights the scene in a dull gold shade. I actually liked Xerxes more than any of the spartans because he was flamboyant and actually had personality. It was obvious that the director intended for all the male viewers to view Xerxes as a freak because he's pretty much a drag queen, but I find him more sympathetic than Leonidas or his men because he's accepting of the hunchback character. The hunchback's betrayal was probably supposed to be some huge blow to the audience and I could imagine the audience wishing Leonidas would have killed him, but he has way more personality than any of the 300 spartans. This movie sucked.
*1/2 out of ****
TMNT(dir. Kevin Munroe)
No Shredder + No Personality + No Vanilla Ice = No Good
*1/2 out of ****
The Life of Jesus(dir. Bruno Dumont)
I like how he displays these asshole characters as pretty much assholes. I think the title applies to the Arab character because he's easily the most sympathetic guy in the movie and well, he dies. He adds a sense of humanity to the picture that the film was lacking. The shots of actual penetration during the sex scenes were unnecessary. Along with seeing Freddy's mom's vagina after she got out of the bath, which amounted to about 2 seconds of the film and seemed as if the editor just didn't cut in time or something. The ending was moving in a sense, but you could picture it having a stronger emotional impact if you were able to sympathize with Freddy's character more.
***1/2 out of ****
Mishima: A Life in Four Chapters(dir. Paul Schrader)
This is the way you make a film about an artist. You show bits of his life and you show bits of his work. It shows how his life shaped his work and it shows how his work shaped him. Phillip Glass's score is amazing. This film would have been amazing if a moment near the end didn't feel so ridiculous and akward. It's easily the best film I've seen by him so far.
***1/2 out of ****
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Oh Chevy Chase...
Fletch(dir. Michael Ritchie)
The first movie I've seen with Chevy Chase where he's actually funny. His other movies usually rely on ridiculous situations to make him "seem" funny, but he's actually funny in this. The movie took it's plot a little too seriously and the actress playing Fletch's love interest made Chevy look like a good actor. It was good.
*** out of ****
The first movie I've seen with Chevy Chase where he's actually funny. His other movies usually rely on ridiculous situations to make him "seem" funny, but he's actually funny in this. The movie took it's plot a little too seriously and the actress playing Fletch's love interest made Chevy look like a good actor. It was good.
*** out of ****
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Oh Get Off My Plane!...
Air Force One(dir. Wolfgang Peterson)
It was dumb and it took itself relatively seriously, but it was still fun in it's dumb and uninspired way. The "Get Off My Plane!" line is what attracted me to the film and was screaming to be parodied by YTMND. I might be growing soft, but I can't really knock a dumb action movie for being a dumb action movie unless it attached itself to an issue like say the diamond trade in Africa. Harrison Ford for President.
*** out of ****
It was dumb and it took itself relatively seriously, but it was still fun in it's dumb and uninspired way. The "Get Off My Plane!" line is what attracted me to the film and was screaming to be parodied by YTMND. I might be growing soft, but I can't really knock a dumb action movie for being a dumb action movie unless it attached itself to an issue like say the diamond trade in Africa. Harrison Ford for President.
*** out of ****
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Oh Jackie Chan...
Rush Hour 3(dir. Brett Ratner)
I came into the theater expecting to hate it, but somehow, I came out of the theater liking it. Was it as stupid as I was expecting? No, it was stupider. There's something brilliant about Jackie Chan swinging on a swing and singing a romantic duet with Chris Tucker. A lot of the humor is just so ridiculous that you can't believe it made the final cut. One example: Lee and Carter get in a fight and after the fight, they decide to order the other's favorite food. Carter gets Chinese food and Lee gets fried chicken and sweet potatoe pie. It's not exactly funny because it's so stupid, but you sit there amazed by it. It's stupidity is mesmerizing. This film has two important messages: don't let Roman Polanski give you a rectal examination and French flags make good parachutes.
*** out of ****
I came into the theater expecting to hate it, but somehow, I came out of the theater liking it. Was it as stupid as I was expecting? No, it was stupider. There's something brilliant about Jackie Chan swinging on a swing and singing a romantic duet with Chris Tucker. A lot of the humor is just so ridiculous that you can't believe it made the final cut. One example: Lee and Carter get in a fight and after the fight, they decide to order the other's favorite food. Carter gets Chinese food and Lee gets fried chicken and sweet potatoe pie. It's not exactly funny because it's so stupid, but you sit there amazed by it. It's stupidity is mesmerizing. This film has two important messages: don't let Roman Polanski give you a rectal examination and French flags make good parachutes.
*** out of ****
Friday, August 10, 2007
Oh Renée, Mel, and Shirley...
Miss Potter(dir. Chris Noonan)
Too cutesy. The sad moments in this film could possibly pass off as the happy moments in another bleaker film. The characterization was shallow, but the film was still kind of whimsical in it's overtly cute way. It seems almost drunk on it's cuteness. How cute.
**1/2 out of ****
Apocalypto(dir. Mel Gibson)
I really don't know what to say about this film. It feels wrong, but I got some enjoyment out of it. Mel obviously isn't a very subtle director and obviously loves to fuck around with slow mo a lot. The characters are all pretty over the top and while some will think the violence is disgusting, it seems almost comic-book-ish. It reminds me of a videogame like Mortal Kombat and if Mel ever played that, he was probably a fan of Kano's fatality. The violence is just there. The cinematography looks TV-ish probably due to using digital. The jungle is probably lush and beautiful, but the film doesn't really make it look all that beautiful. The New World? This is not. It's like a mindless action movie masquerading as a National Geographic documentary. It's almost scary that people actually watch this and feel like they're learning about Mayan culture. The film has a mad genius to it in terms of it's scope and attention to detail. I slightly recommend?
**1/2 out of ****
24 Hour Party People(dir. Michael Winterbottom)
I'm a fan of Joy Division. Just wanted to get that out of the way. One review I've read concerning this film talked about how it doesn't really give you a completely truthful view of the era. I'd understand that especially how nonsensical the film can become especially with it's more fantastical scenes like pidgeons dying for no apparent reason and a UFO sighting re-enacted. These scenes, thankfully, have a very artificial feel so it never feels like it's totally trying to interwine these events with the storyline, but makes them seem like playful excursions. The film as a whole is playful in terms of it's self-reflexive nature. The style is excessive, but so are the characters on display. I really liked it.
***1/2 out of ****
Too cutesy. The sad moments in this film could possibly pass off as the happy moments in another bleaker film. The characterization was shallow, but the film was still kind of whimsical in it's overtly cute way. It seems almost drunk on it's cuteness. How cute.
**1/2 out of ****
Apocalypto(dir. Mel Gibson)
I really don't know what to say about this film. It feels wrong, but I got some enjoyment out of it. Mel obviously isn't a very subtle director and obviously loves to fuck around with slow mo a lot. The characters are all pretty over the top and while some will think the violence is disgusting, it seems almost comic-book-ish. It reminds me of a videogame like Mortal Kombat and if Mel ever played that, he was probably a fan of Kano's fatality. The violence is just there. The cinematography looks TV-ish probably due to using digital. The jungle is probably lush and beautiful, but the film doesn't really make it look all that beautiful. The New World? This is not. It's like a mindless action movie masquerading as a National Geographic documentary. It's almost scary that people actually watch this and feel like they're learning about Mayan culture. The film has a mad genius to it in terms of it's scope and attention to detail. I slightly recommend?
**1/2 out of ****
24 Hour Party People(dir. Michael Winterbottom)
I'm a fan of Joy Division. Just wanted to get that out of the way. One review I've read concerning this film talked about how it doesn't really give you a completely truthful view of the era. I'd understand that especially how nonsensical the film can become especially with it's more fantastical scenes like pidgeons dying for no apparent reason and a UFO sighting re-enacted. These scenes, thankfully, have a very artificial feel so it never feels like it's totally trying to interwine these events with the storyline, but makes them seem like playful excursions. The film as a whole is playful in terms of it's self-reflexive nature. The style is excessive, but so are the characters on display. I really liked it.
***1/2 out of ****
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Oh Harry...
Fool for Love(dir. Robert Altman)
An engaging mess. It's pretty obvious that this was a play before it turned into a movie. I'd imagine Bug is similar to this with it's white trash hotel setting. The end is compelling to an extent, but it's a little too crazy for it's own good. I recommend.
*** out of ****
An engaging mess. It's pretty obvious that this was a play before it turned into a movie. I'd imagine Bug is similar to this with it's white trash hotel setting. The end is compelling to an extent, but it's a little too crazy for it's own good. I recommend.
*** out of ****
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
Oh Jean & Sterling...
Decoy(dir. Jack Bernhard)
Jean Gillie is excellent in this as the femme fatale. Everybody does a competent job. Most memorable scene is easily Jean running over her thug "boyfriend." The story doesn't make a whole lot of sense especially concerning how the doctor was able to survive two bullet wounds and make it back to San Francisco and Jean's character developing an evil cackle was pretty outlandish. It was solid enough to recommend.
*** out of ****
Crime Wave(dir. Andre de Toth)
Sterling Hayden is the man. I wish he was the main character instead of that other guy. Pretty much everybody else does a better job than him. You can't really get involved with the story because you can't really sympathize with his plight. The actor doesn't do a good job, but everybody else does. The end was actually pretty exciting probably because Sterling came back into the picture. Charles Bronson was in it so that's always a plus. It was disappointing, but it was still good.
*** out of ****
Jean Gillie is excellent in this as the femme fatale. Everybody does a competent job. Most memorable scene is easily Jean running over her thug "boyfriend." The story doesn't make a whole lot of sense especially concerning how the doctor was able to survive two bullet wounds and make it back to San Francisco and Jean's character developing an evil cackle was pretty outlandish. It was solid enough to recommend.
*** out of ****
Crime Wave(dir. Andre de Toth)
Sterling Hayden is the man. I wish he was the main character instead of that other guy. Pretty much everybody else does a better job than him. You can't really get involved with the story because you can't really sympathize with his plight. The actor doesn't do a good job, but everybody else does. The end was actually pretty exciting probably because Sterling came back into the picture. Charles Bronson was in it so that's always a plus. It was disappointing, but it was still good.
*** out of ****
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Oh Freddy Wiseman...
Hospital(dir. Frederick Wiseman)
The mundane and the beautiful. There are some "scenes" that take too long, but that's fine because in order for this to be a complete portrait of hospital life, you must show the monotony that doctors and nurses must experience since it is their work and all work can become monotonous. It's heart-breaking to see a man being so embarassed and ashamed for going to the doctor to see if he has testicular cancer that he almost bursts into tears. There are a lot memorable moments that Wiseman allows the viewer to see. One memorable "scene" is where a man who has taken an unknown pill fears that he is going to die. A user on IMDb said the "scene" was unnecessary because it is used for comedic effect, but I was honestly scared that the guy might have died even if the doctor kept reassuring him that he wasn't going to. His fear is so real that you can't help, but wonder if he will in fact die or not. He then throws up in a room, which is disgusting to see, but it is necessary to see it. My favorite moments were when loved ones of the patients came to see them and started showing affection towards them. One lovely, but horrifying scene is of a man who has been stabbed in the throat reaching out towards his lover's hand to hold it. Another moment that is both heart-breaking and uplifting is of a daughter seeing her mother as doctors try to restore her health and she goes over and strokes her head, kisses her on the chin with tears in her eyes. It's moments like these that provide warmth and reassurance that we're a flawed species, but we're still good at heart. This film shows that we all need individuals to help us out sometimes even if we're ashamed or too proud to get this help. The only Wiseman film that has rubbed me the wrong way was High School because it felt like he was critical of the people on screen and that just seems sleazy for a documentarian to do. It's easy to show the worst of people, but it's definately harder and more rewarding to show the beauty of an ugly situation. Amazing stuff.
**** out of ****
The mundane and the beautiful. There are some "scenes" that take too long, but that's fine because in order for this to be a complete portrait of hospital life, you must show the monotony that doctors and nurses must experience since it is their work and all work can become monotonous. It's heart-breaking to see a man being so embarassed and ashamed for going to the doctor to see if he has testicular cancer that he almost bursts into tears. There are a lot memorable moments that Wiseman allows the viewer to see. One memorable "scene" is where a man who has taken an unknown pill fears that he is going to die. A user on IMDb said the "scene" was unnecessary because it is used for comedic effect, but I was honestly scared that the guy might have died even if the doctor kept reassuring him that he wasn't going to. His fear is so real that you can't help, but wonder if he will in fact die or not. He then throws up in a room, which is disgusting to see, but it is necessary to see it. My favorite moments were when loved ones of the patients came to see them and started showing affection towards them. One lovely, but horrifying scene is of a man who has been stabbed in the throat reaching out towards his lover's hand to hold it. Another moment that is both heart-breaking and uplifting is of a daughter seeing her mother as doctors try to restore her health and she goes over and strokes her head, kisses her on the chin with tears in her eyes. It's moments like these that provide warmth and reassurance that we're a flawed species, but we're still good at heart. This film shows that we all need individuals to help us out sometimes even if we're ashamed or too proud to get this help. The only Wiseman film that has rubbed me the wrong way was High School because it felt like he was critical of the people on screen and that just seems sleazy for a documentarian to do. It's easy to show the worst of people, but it's definately harder and more rewarding to show the beauty of an ugly situation. Amazing stuff.
**** out of ****
Sunday, August 05, 2007
Oh Nick Nolte...
Affliction(dir. Paul Schrader)
This film doesn't feel fully developed. Pretty much all the stories and relationships feel underdeveloped. I don't really see how his father's actions when he was a child has any effect on the present. I'm sure it scarred his character, but Nolte performs in a way that doesn't seem like his actions are propelled by his past. His actions seem like they stem from his present situation with his ex-wife and child and the hunting accident. I'm sure someone could explain to me those are just ways to release his frustration from all the pain his father inflicted on him, but his flashbacks are not nearly as horrific as what his character ends up doing. His father is pretty much a monster and Nolte's character is pretty much nuts especially at the end. The end was oddly moving probably due to the fact that the imagery becomes hauntingly beautiful for the first time in the film. Watching Nick Nolte drink his alcohol in front of a window with a farm on fire is amazing within itself. Willem Dafoe's narration feels completely unnecessary especially since this is Nolte's character's movie, not his character's. I might rewatch this at a later date.
**1/2 out of ****
This film doesn't feel fully developed. Pretty much all the stories and relationships feel underdeveloped. I don't really see how his father's actions when he was a child has any effect on the present. I'm sure it scarred his character, but Nolte performs in a way that doesn't seem like his actions are propelled by his past. His actions seem like they stem from his present situation with his ex-wife and child and the hunting accident. I'm sure someone could explain to me those are just ways to release his frustration from all the pain his father inflicted on him, but his flashbacks are not nearly as horrific as what his character ends up doing. His father is pretty much a monster and Nolte's character is pretty much nuts especially at the end. The end was oddly moving probably due to the fact that the imagery becomes hauntingly beautiful for the first time in the film. Watching Nick Nolte drink his alcohol in front of a window with a farm on fire is amazing within itself. Willem Dafoe's narration feels completely unnecessary especially since this is Nolte's character's movie, not his character's. I might rewatch this at a later date.
**1/2 out of ****
Saturday, August 04, 2007
Oh George and Scarlett...
Ocean's Thirteen(dir. Steven Soderbergh)
The first one was cool and suave. The second was I don't know since I didn't see it. The third one was dumb and clumsy. It's dumbness and cluminess was probably what was entertaining about it. It's attempts at cool were the weak portions of the film like it's use of split screen in an extended sequence. It really doesn't enhance the experience, it just felt like an uncool film trying so hard to be cool. The film's best portions were the most ridiculous. A revolution at an Mexican dice factory was ridiculously entertaining and seeing Brad Pitt and George Clooney crying to Oprah was another highlight. The film is pretty visually uninteresting, which made the stretches that weren't comedic drag. It's definately not as good as the first one and it definately needed more Elliot Gould, but it was still fun nonetheless.
*** out of ****
Scoop(dir. Woody Allen)
A light, fun romp. I don't really understand the critical reaction to this film. I guess Match Point is an easier film to praise just because it was serious and didn't feel like a Woody Allen film so you could easily state he was growing, but that film was surprisingly underwhelming and it was pretty much a retread of the same thematic territory that was in Crimes and Misdemeanors, which is much better in it's handling of said thematic territory. This film isn't deep. It's just a lot of fun, which is good enough for me.
***1/2 out of ****
The first one was cool and suave. The second was I don't know since I didn't see it. The third one was dumb and clumsy. It's dumbness and cluminess was probably what was entertaining about it. It's attempts at cool were the weak portions of the film like it's use of split screen in an extended sequence. It really doesn't enhance the experience, it just felt like an uncool film trying so hard to be cool. The film's best portions were the most ridiculous. A revolution at an Mexican dice factory was ridiculously entertaining and seeing Brad Pitt and George Clooney crying to Oprah was another highlight. The film is pretty visually uninteresting, which made the stretches that weren't comedic drag. It's definately not as good as the first one and it definately needed more Elliot Gould, but it was still fun nonetheless.
*** out of ****
Scoop(dir. Woody Allen)
A light, fun romp. I don't really understand the critical reaction to this film. I guess Match Point is an easier film to praise just because it was serious and didn't feel like a Woody Allen film so you could easily state he was growing, but that film was surprisingly underwhelming and it was pretty much a retread of the same thematic territory that was in Crimes and Misdemeanors, which is much better in it's handling of said thematic territory. This film isn't deep. It's just a lot of fun, which is good enough for me.
***1/2 out of ****
Friday, August 03, 2007
Oh Cate & Hal & Stanley...
Somersault(dir. Cate Shortland)
This movie has some scenes that are almost laughably bad and they concern Heidi when she gets mad. The first one is at a restaurant and she is mad at her "boyfriend" for not knowing if she is his girlfriend or not so she decides to eat some chiles. That'll show him. Another scene concerns her and her friend at the gas station mart where she yells out of frustration. There's another scene that felt completely unnecessary. She goes out in the cold naked trying desperately to get her "boyfriend" to come back in the house. I'm not complaining about the nudity just how it's handled. Why would a girl go out in the cold winter naked? I don't think being drunk really excuses it. This film has it's flaws, but it's definately gorgeous to look at. The actress plays most of her scenes perfectly and is beautiful in a bland sort of way. The character doesn't seem like the most intelligent person, but you still take interest in her story. This film almost seems like it was trying to be Morvern Callar, but unlike Morvern Callar, who is mysterious and bewildering, Heidi just seems like a blank slate. The ending redeems the faults I had with the film with it's simplicity and serenity. It's definately one to check out even if not all the scenes completely work.
***1/2 out of ****
Surviving Desire(dir. Hal Hartley)
The version I saw didn't have 6 minutes of it, but still, I got a good idea of how the film is. It's good, but definately not up to par with his other work probably due to the fact that it felt rushed. It also felt too lovey dubby. Yeah. It was good.
*** out of ****
Guess Who's Coming to Dinner(dir. Stanley Kramer)
This film is not graceful at all about it's subject. I guess I have to kind of respect that it is so upfront, but did every conversation really need to feel like a speech about racial inequality and how interracial relationships shouldn't be that big of a deal. I agree with what it's trying to say, but it's ridiculous in how repetitive it gets to the point where you lose all interest in the film. It keeps banging you over the head with it's message that you almost want to reject whatever it's saying. It was OK.
** out of ****
This movie has some scenes that are almost laughably bad and they concern Heidi when she gets mad. The first one is at a restaurant and she is mad at her "boyfriend" for not knowing if she is his girlfriend or not so she decides to eat some chiles. That'll show him. Another scene concerns her and her friend at the gas station mart where she yells out of frustration. There's another scene that felt completely unnecessary. She goes out in the cold naked trying desperately to get her "boyfriend" to come back in the house. I'm not complaining about the nudity just how it's handled. Why would a girl go out in the cold winter naked? I don't think being drunk really excuses it. This film has it's flaws, but it's definately gorgeous to look at. The actress plays most of her scenes perfectly and is beautiful in a bland sort of way. The character doesn't seem like the most intelligent person, but you still take interest in her story. This film almost seems like it was trying to be Morvern Callar, but unlike Morvern Callar, who is mysterious and bewildering, Heidi just seems like a blank slate. The ending redeems the faults I had with the film with it's simplicity and serenity. It's definately one to check out even if not all the scenes completely work.
***1/2 out of ****
Surviving Desire(dir. Hal Hartley)
The version I saw didn't have 6 minutes of it, but still, I got a good idea of how the film is. It's good, but definately not up to par with his other work probably due to the fact that it felt rushed. It also felt too lovey dubby. Yeah. It was good.
*** out of ****
Guess Who's Coming to Dinner(dir. Stanley Kramer)
This film is not graceful at all about it's subject. I guess I have to kind of respect that it is so upfront, but did every conversation really need to feel like a speech about racial inequality and how interracial relationships shouldn't be that big of a deal. I agree with what it's trying to say, but it's ridiculous in how repetitive it gets to the point where you lose all interest in the film. It keeps banging you over the head with it's message that you almost want to reject whatever it's saying. It was OK.
** out of ****
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
Oh Sinitta...
Last Life in the Universe(dir. Pen-Ek Ratanaruang)
The lead actress is quite foxy. It's not entirely successful artistically. The actresses switch in the middle of the film rather slyly, but it sounds much better on paper than how it is in the actual film. Probably due to the fact that I found the actress playing Noi more attractive than Nid. Near the end, the picture seems to fall into place. The film's biggest problem is that it doesn't quite achieve that dream-like feel it wants to have, but the end was definately whimsical and romantic.
***1/2 out of ****
The lead actress is quite foxy. It's not entirely successful artistically. The actresses switch in the middle of the film rather slyly, but it sounds much better on paper than how it is in the actual film. Probably due to the fact that I found the actress playing Noi more attractive than Nid. Near the end, the picture seems to fall into place. The film's biggest problem is that it doesn't quite achieve that dream-like feel it wants to have, but the end was definately whimsical and romantic.
***1/2 out of ****
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)