23 December 2007

Rope (1948)

...Scorsese's advertisement-fling gave me appetite for watch some Hitchcock. My choice was quite easy: because I'm on my traditional Christmas-tour (at the moment in Belgium) I had to check my laptop which hided a real masterpiece...

First of all you should know (probably you know already) that this is the famous Hitchcock feature film which contains only 11 shots (thanks for Alan Sings to count them). For you it isn't an amazing trick anymore but in 1948 that was really something. I would say the hidden "continuity" cuts (somebody covers the camera's lens, [cut], then the person's movements continuing) were only necessary because of technical limitations (limitations of reels in the camera), but I'm lazy to look after this time...

Via the lack of cutting everything is straight and linear just like a rope. But in a Hitchcock-movie the rope has usually different role, too. I bet you found out already...
The murder isn't motivated too far, Hitchcock is more interested in the psychology around and behind the crime, the joy of excitement on a perfect murder. The ice-cold Brandon's ("Nobody commits a murder just for the experiment of committing it. Nobody except us.") and the chickened out Philip's execution needs to be perfect, at least this is their aim. The simple the more immaculate...

"Murder is a crime for most people, but a privilege for a few." Here we are: the whole perfectionism is supplemented by some philosophical train of thought. Nietzsche and Hitler mentioned by name, Dostoevsky indirectly by Philip ("Stop playin' crime and punishment Rupert!").

Ow, I almost forgot to mention Rupert! Next to the rather weak performances (think on the ridiculous, theatrical conversations, which interestingly doesn't disturb our immersive illusion), Rupert Cadell's figure is the strongest in this film for sure. James Stewart's mistrustful character in Rope is one of his bests. Just think on his entry or the first shadow of doubt in his face: Hitchcock's camera sticks on his seemingly emotionless face for a half a minute, earns as much tension as Jonathan Glazer did when "forget" his camera on Nicole Kidman's face in his Birth (I really hope you know what I'm talking about...).

Even if it's not Hitchcock's best film (my favorite from the master is
Stage Fright, I have my reasons why...), it's absolutely worth to watch. 80 minutes for a film historical but at least film technical cornerstone isn't too much price.

8/10

[the post was motivated by Ákos, the human chimpi]

18 December 2007

Direktøren for det hele / The Boss of it All (2006)

3–2–1, this will be a short review.
The story as simple as the movie is: there is a small company which owned and organized by one of its employee, who is coward to uncover himself front of his colleagues. When the situation is getting indefensible, he needs to introduce The Boss of it all...

Lars von Trier's film is nothing more than a simple situational comedy. Trier is much more than this. He knows this too when he says his reflexive-like apologies at the end:

"I would like to apologize to those who wanted more and to those who wanted less."

I wanted definitely more, especially from the director of Europa (from 1991!). But wait, if I look back, I need to realize that after this masterpiece he couldn't prove his talent anymore (you may not agree with me in this...).

Very briefly about the style: we have everything here what we learned by the Dogma-films. I feel this "random-cinematography" just not enough anymore... Even if you call it Automavision. What is it? Geoffrey Macnab tells it better than me:
"it was made without a cameraman. The director was using a new process, "developed with the intention of limiting human influence", which he has called Automavision. This entails choosing the best possible fixed camera position and then allowing a computer to choose when to tilt, pan or zoom. "For a long time, my films have been handheld," he explains. "That has to do with the fact that I am a control freak. With Automavision, the technique was that I would frame the picture first and then push a button on the computer. I was not in control - the computer was in control."

Let's see some talkative stills:



I suppose you don't need this technical hocus pocus to have this result...

Finally the points. There isn't any chance to influence or motivate the director, otherwise I would give only five out of ten. I'm 100 % sure that he could do better than this.
Anyway, there are always miracles: "Lars, you could do better than this. And you exactly know this..."

5/10

17 December 2007

The Pink Panther (1963)

Funny idea isn't it? Writing about the classic Pink Panther after promoting Rambo...

First of all I'd like to admit that I had better memories about the professional thief called 'Phantom'. I remember when I was a child Blake Edward's film was one of my favourites with its gentleman thief and dumb inspector. Actually Peter Sellers in the role of Inspector Jacques Clouseau is still stunning, but the rest of the film is rather forced and artificial. The scenes are overacted and sometimes made up only for giving convenient context for the stars. The movie is a typical benefit performance for Sellers, David Niven (if the name isn't familiar, his face is more than remarkable...), Claudia Cardinale and the most beautiful Capucine as the dubious wife of the inspector.

Anyway, it's (almost) Christmas, so time to recall the old easy classics from our childhood. The Pink Panther is definitely one of them. Don't expect too much, and don't glorify your faded memories. Just eat a lot, lean back and enjoy your holiday! Hmm, the Christmas is one week from now. Maybe I'm going to watch the other episodes of the series (did you realize that their titles are almost similar with the Star Wars trilogy's episodes? The Pink Panther Strikes Again / The Return of the Pink Panther / Revenge of the Pink Panther :))). 

Stay tuned...


6/10

13 December 2007

Rambo (2008)


"killing as easy as breathing"
My name's Rambo. John Rambo.





Forget the crappy trailers from Youtube,
CLICK here, and enjoy the evolution!

From the First Blood... until the umpteen.

"your call..."

(finally I'll see the Rambo4 which was promised me already around the end of the eighties (by kisSzabó from the gang...))
:))

11 December 2007

The Key to Reserva (2007)


I don't know how to introduce this experimental beauty. If I would say ScorseseHitchcock in 5 minutes? Would you click already?
And if I say the link directs you toward even phylosophical questions of film preserving? Hm?
Or do I need to add that this is the future of advertising? At least in my dreams...
A real, masterful tribute to Hitchcock!
I'm waiting already for the next project...

08 December 2007

Eastern Promises (2007)

Huh... There are films which keep you silent after the screening. There are two extremity: something is too bad or too good. You don't feel anything to say after this, but personally agree with those who almost cannot talk after Klimov's unbelievable Idi i smotri too. Luckily Cronenberg's new film is among the later examples.

I'm saying this despite I'm absolutely not a Cronenberg fan. For example – and now you can start to throw stons against me – the last piece (A History of Violence) from his auteur camera made me really disappointed. Maybe after the new one I will give another try to that one...

"Mom, are you okay?"
"Of course not, it's Christmas."
As you can see it doesn't start as a perfect family movie for Christmas. Actually if you don't like/bare explicit violence/blood/brutality, it's better not to watch (even outside Christmas-period). We are in present London, where the city's backyard full with immigrants who live their own life (everything is behind the touristic scenes of the city, there is only one sequence which refers to London how we know it). I almost said "who live their own life just like at home", but the film makes me sober and pulls me out from my convenient prejudices. The Russian maffia's boss gives the provocative statement: "I think London's blame for what Kirill is." The Western promises give false hopes for the people of the Eastern parts (of Europe). The image what it shows doesn't fit to the reality, to the "normal" reality of these people. They becomes whore or criminal because they are chasing some fake dreams, something which looks better than their former lives. The Western promises are responsible for all the processes which are happening today in Europe. The funny thing is that the Western countries are usually blame the Eastern immigrants because of their way of living, but don't realize that they make them who they are. The city's cultural pot makes some strange mixtures of human behavior, traditions and values. Cultural mutations.

Cronenberg's inquiry in these odd mutational mixtures is an old story. Common knowledge: usually he is interested in the different transformations of the body. Videodrome, Naked Lunch, Crash, eXistenZ,... I really don't need to continue. I feel this time he added a new actual value for these freak-shows: maybe first time he choose something acute, something which isn't timeless. We have the importance of the body here as well: meaningful tattoos, rape, murder, birth and death at the same moment, pulled out teeth, cutted fingers, freezed down corpses, and so on. But everything is embed into the chaotic intercultural "Now". Cronenberg doesn't need to slide into the sci-fi genre anymore, the reality in 2007's London lets his sick imagination look real.

By the way, realism: If you want to show some – for example Russian – authenticity, you don't need to travel East. Like some anthropologist, Cronenberg gives perfect view on the insane world of the globalized traditions. His characters are phenomenal (I hate this word's exaggerations, but this time...), at least the actors and actresses make these figures unbelievable true. If I say Vincent Cassel's language is more Russian than any of my Russian acquaintances, then what should I say about Viggo Mortensen's acting. He is just p e r f e c t! After this post I'm going to watch the scene again, where he defrosts (!) some unlucky dude. You have to watch it and forget all the poisoned background-interests about who and why will win the next Oscar prize...

Cronenberg is back (yes, I believe he climbed out from some crisis). I'm happy, and the sign of my enthusiasm is without any doubt:

10/10

04 December 2007

The Lady from Shanghai (1947)


Two post ago I told that Wong Kar Wai is planning to shoot a remake from Orson Welles' classic The Lady from Shanghai. That moment I realized that although I've seen Welles' film, it was more than 6-7 years ago, and almost didn't remember its plot. Of course you cannot forget the final sequence with the mirror room (already 10/10), but the rest faded away without trace...

Michael O'Hara's character is a classic figure, a simple and honest tough guy, who is getting involved in some higher power's dirty business. As he says: "some people can smell danger... Not me." The source of this danger is a deadly blond again, who is more dangerous than all the blond noir femme fatales together. Why? First Elsa's role played by Rita Hayworth (already 10/10), but if it wouldn't be enough, then I can tell you that she is that kind of type, who makes fool not only from an honest Irish sailor, but from you too. Beyond doubt.
By the way she is really like Laura Harring, alias Rita (Hayworth) from the Mulholland Drive...



The film is a huge setup with twists and turns, just watch this: Mr. Grisby wants Michael to kill Mr. Grisby. And for this favour he would be payed 5000$. By whom? You won't find out: by Mr. Grisby! (did I say already 10/10?)
The trial scene, the characters (sorry Rita, but my favorite is the Bobby Peru-like Glenn Anders as Mr. Grisby), the cinematography (the night scene on the boat is unbelievable), and Welles' genius screenplay and directing, and so on: everything is perfect.
After these what else, than

10/10

03 December 2007

The Kingdom (2007)


"Don't fear my child. We're going to kill them all."

Peter Berg's movie is not too complicated (the director is almost more known as an actor: small thing, but he played one of the films of András Szirtes' in 1989!). It's surfing on the waves of contemporary – American – issues. Of course I'm talking about the oil and terrorism.

The film depicts an investigation after a massive terrorist attack in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, the place "where tradition and modernity is in a violent coalition." That's all from the side of the story. The essence of the movie is hidden in the perfectionist mixture of style and action. It's about entertaining, not to give some poetical or wise answers to the political, economical and cultural problems in the background. You got what you expect. The noise of explosions, the pictures of car stunts, blood and cry covers the real questions. We're just scratching the problems' surface, but I have to say we shouldn't expect more from this genre. It's impossible to expose the situation within 100 minutes. So please don't come up with a critic about the shallowness of the film (the oversimplified negotiation between Jamie Foxx and the Saudi ambassador is ridiculous). It is, but it is the best what it can do. And it does pretty well.

A pro pos compression: the first 4 (!) minutes of the film tells the history of America and Saudi Arabia defined by their common denomination, the oil. 'Oil for protection', 'oil embargo' and who knows what else depicts the shaky relation of the two countries. The historical roller coaster just like some mind mapping starts in 1932 and lasts until the present days. The story's "high point" delivered by Osama Bin Laden evoked perfectly: an airplane is heading against two high graphs, one refers to the strongest oil producer country (SA), the other stands for the biggest oil costumer (USA).

As I said nothing special, but what else you need on a snowy Sunday evening? It seems blaspheme to give here 7 after Kar Wai's 5 points, but what can I do? Every film valuated by its own genre.
Brain off / push play: and BOOM!


7/10