30 November 2007

My Blueberry Nights (2007)


"I don't know how the story had begun..." – Norah Jones starts to sing, and we don't need to wait for the new Wong Kar Wai movie anymore. How the story begun? Good question. I join Kar Wai, because I don't know either. Actually I think nobody knows. We just jump into some half worn story, but this isn't the only problem with the film...

I'm not going out too often watch a movie in the cinema. It's too expensive here (€ 9), so I save the occasion for those films which requires the big screen. I think Kar Wai deserves his price, you know, the colors, the soundtrack and the whole feeling (I'm not joking: I ate a blueberry muffin right before the screening too. No, I'm not sick:). And the recent one gives this values, I promise. But I have to say: nothing else. The story didn't start and doesn't go anywhere. I could say it is boring. Some kind of network narrative (those criss-cross paths with different stories which are going to meet) told in linear way, which hasn't got any aim or doesn't plant any interest or real feelings into you. Hey, it's not about a simple story (two people are searching for love: one stays one place – the another travels around to find). I really like those, but here it's just doesn't work. I found the word: weak. Especially weak from Kar Wai. I know, the expectations usually kill the amusement, but this film wouldn't be persuasive from Lajos Koltai neither (Ok, I went too far:))

The legend says that there was a misunderstanding between the director and Norah Jones. Kar Wai asked her to cooperate (writing and singing the soundtrack), and Jones thought that she can act in the film. That's the way how she entered the role. So what. She isn't a good actress. I mean she should have been much better under the hands of Kar Wai and front of the camera of Darius Khondji (if you don't know him, pls check his oeuvre). The rest of the characters are really ok: Jude Law is getting better and better (I feel with him like I did with Hugh Grant), Rachel Weisz is still deadly beautiful, Natalie Portman officially grown up (but still looks like Weisz's small sister), and David Strathairn is one of my new favorites (wish he wouldn't participate of the A Tale of Two Sisters' raping... (original and remake).

But it's still not enough. If you are left by your girlfriend or boyfriend, maybe you will like it, but come on, this kind of aimless sentimentalism just doesn't work in other cases. It's not about that "there isn't meaning". I really don't search desperately the meaning (just look at my Inland Empire-entry), but I like if a film gives at least the minimum within its aimed genre.

If Kar Wai would like to save his reputation, then maybe he should move forward from his earlier well done sentimentalism into some other directions. I have a feeling he gave already what he had from this field... I hope he will, especially with the rumored remake of Welles' The Lady from Shanghai (featuring Nicole Kidman, olala).

I'm gonna watch that one for sure. In a cinema.
I recommend My Blueberry Nights only for the hardcore Kar Wai fans. Or wait: I recommend only those, who doesn't like him.


P.s.: I found this a few minutes ago (here). James Rocchi's words summarizes perfect what I tried to tell above:

"My Blueberry Nights may be a bit more interested in look than feel -- it conveys blue as a color far more effectively than it conveys blue as an emotional state."

5/10

I am Legend


"A deadly virus has taken hold of the world – rejected by a few (the immune), killing many (the dead), and leaving the rest (the infected) – who live on to hunt the living, after dark.

The following are voices paying homage to Richard Matheson's classic novel, this is the experience of a dying mankind and the foretelling of a new world before we meet the legend, Robert Neville."

If you liked The Omega Man (1971), you might see this as well.
Click for the trailer until it's not too late...

29 November 2007

Inland Empire (2006)



Enough. I'm fed up. It makes me really sad how the people are thinking about the "new" David Lynch movie. If you believe that a film equals with the story, this won't be your favorite. I say more: you don't need to watch it. Especially you shouldn't write about it: You don't need to prove your narrowness. To accept my advice is your interest, really.
I have only one wish: Please accept it if somebody (Lynch) is thinking in a different way as you. You should have already recognized that Lynch is not a narrative storyteller. If he is (The Straight Story) then he makes it very lurid. The exception makes stronger the rule...

Here is my contribution to this shallow discussion. Only for Hungarian readers.

Analysis, but at least an article about the Inland Empire in the filmkultura.hu, CLICK!

(The mistake with the footnote isn't my fault.)

10/10

28 November 2007

Rescue Dawn (2006)


Early 1965. Laos. The pre-Vietnamese times, which are actually (but confidentially) already the dawn of the American assault against the Indochinese country. Secret mission, failure, vietkongs, prison. It's the same old story. Or not?

I don't need to introduce Werner Herzog, the important figure of the German New Wave, the director of Fitzcarraldo, Nosferatu or Jeder für sich und Gott gegen alle aka Kaspar Hauser, who at the age of 12 shared his apartment with Klaus Kinski, the worst-looking best German actor ever. Herzog isn't stranger in the American production's system, but without doubt the Rescue Dawn is his first Hollywood(-like) movie. Small remark for all the philologists: his father was a prisoner during the II. World War...
Hmm, Despite of my promise, I almost introduced him, or didn't I?

The background situation is in line with the old recipe too: the story is inspired by true events. You know what does this mean? Yes, it implies the biggest fictions:) Or it isn't?

The plot follows the case of a real person called Dieter Dengler, who's been captured by the vietkongs during his first mission at the early stage of the war. I won't tell more, instead of that I need to stress the qualities of Christian Bale's acting. I convinced about his talent since the schizo skeleton-acting in El Maquinista, but this time he gives even more. He is a protagonist in a war movie without any pathetic character. He is not a hero but a human being. At least he acts as a human being should behave. Not only in a war situation but in our everyday's life. He just doesn't believe what is happening with him, he is just doesn't take serious the whole situation. He just wanted to fly, not bombing in some stupid aimless war.


"The jungle is the prison" says one of Dengler's mate, and Herzog proves brutally the idea. Inside the deep jungle of Laos Michael Scofield would cry very desperately. Your survival skills must be stronger than your brain. This simple fact makes the purest realism what a movie can give. And we know all that the simple stories are the best. Aren't they?

8/10

25 November 2007

American Gigolo (1980)

Another perfect sunday is gone. Easy day – easy movie. I was planning for a while to watch Paul Schrader's American Gigolo, but Richard Gere (brr) in the main role scared me a lot. And today I made the decision – which became a really good one...

Schrader is definitely among the best screenplay writers in Hollywood. Taxi Driver, Raging Bull and the perfect Obsession for Brian de Palma. His movies are not so received – which sometimes underestimates his talent. Just think on the Blue Collar or the American Gigolo. Yes, I believe this movie is much more than Richard Gere's bare ass (actually you can have it too), but a real post noir hit. Just imagine a mixture of Ellis' American Psycho and some film noir classic. Our American gigolo is a typical-cynical noir male, this time a five star hooker (funny that 10 years later Gere changes his side and picks up Vivian from the street). Shiny cars, luxurious apartments, SL Mercedeses (the type which Pamela had in the Dallas – sorry for this), but the prostitution roots always in the deep underground. And as our protagonist encounters with the first blond, and soon the second one, who will be killed, his life turns upside down (ok, the film is full with blonds, but one of them is dead, and another is deadly for sure).

Without saying more it's highly recommended. Just because of its feeling, just because of the character's sunglasses (1980!), just because of Gere's acting (!), who is better than any Patrick Bateman ever, just because sentences from an elite prostitute like "I don't like to play the same numbers too often":)), just because the film's very last shot!


8/10

Murder, My Sweet (1944)

"I felt pretty good... like an amputated leg" – grumbles Marlowe, and we know immediately what kind of movie we are watching.

Today another Chandler classic on the screen from 1944. The title of the original novel of Chandler was Farewell, My Lovely – Dmytryk had to change not to mistaken with a musical with the same title (there are two other film adaptations from 1942 and 1975). Dick Powell played the protagonist's role in the musical as well – maybe better than here in the movie version. Unfortunately in Dmytryck's film he is far not so cynical as I would like to see a Marlowe-like character (even not mentioning Bogart's embodiments). His lines are quite ok, but the acting is weak (I'm not wondering that 70 minutes needs him to earn the first kiss:)). Well, sometimes he just find the right tone, for example when he is attacked by a hothead client:

- I'm afraid I don't like your manner!
- I've had complaints about it. But it keeps getting worse.

but he is not rough and tough enough. That's all my problems which is enough to ruin the whole film.

The story follows the classic film noir pattern: starts with a huge flashback which is the protagonist's, namely Marlowe's fabula itself. Seemingly the last weeks weren't the private eye's best ones. First he is hired by a giant dumb guy, Moose Malloy, who tries to find his lover, Velma, who disappeared 8 years earlier. And the avalanche starts to slide: there are coming other mysterious figures with secretive wishes... I won't give any spoiler if I tell you: all the jobs and names are heading into each other's direction. Now you see: this film isn't as original as for example Wilder's masterpiece, the Double Indemnity. In the Murder, My Sweet we have a cool detective, a deadly blonde, a hostile police chief and a bunch of bad guys, but nothing any genuine idea. The only reason we should watch this film should be Marlowe's character, which – as I suggested earlier – isn't convincing enough. He has 'chandlerish voice' (did you noticed that the voiceover narrator starts to talk as soon as the protagonist left alone?), but this time not so sharp as he is in The Big Sleep (Bogart) or in the unique Lady in the Lake (Montgomery).

Do you want to know how to lit a match-stick with the help of a putto-sculpture's bottom? Watch the movie! Otherwise I'm sure you will find better film noir than this in your collection.


5/10

20 November 2007

The Man from Earth (2007)

I really hate those films which don't look like films. Richard Schenkman's movie is one of them. They are usually look more like theater pieces or radio plays. Most of the cases they are stylistically bad combined with bad characters and their even worse acting. These features are still fit to The Man from Earth.

BUT.

Even these films has a writer who is responsible for the story. And the success of the film starts at this point. I would call more this film Jerome Bixby's movie, who forces us into his genuine story and saves the whole project. He creates a claustrophobic context which just doesn't let you leave (during the first ten minutes it was very tempting to stop watching, if you give a chance, the film pays you off).

The basic situation is very simple. We encounter Professor John Oldman, who collects his colleagues to announce after ten years: he is leaving them. The reasons are mysteriously unclear, but cannot be hidden too long (the followings are not spoilers, and I tell you why: this statement is one from the credible ones...). John contends that he is at least 14.000 years old, and cannot die. Don't laugh:) I'm not joking. But does he make fun from his friends? That's the question in this Twilight Zone-like film.

He states that he is originally a cave man, a cro magnon-type mate. But how could you prove this craziness for your best friends? Especially if there are anthropologists, archeologists, psychologists, biologists, etc. among them? These are hard questions, but not as tricky how the friends test John. For example their and the film's questions are: "Living more than 14.000 years what time would mean for you? Would you feel our lifetime as a second? What would you think about somebody's loss? How could you feel any emotions after the thousands of 'hello'-s and 'good bye'-s? Would you be a genius after the chance to learn through thousands of years?" and so on. If you need answers for these questions, don't afraid, you will get them. But after a funny and practical questions come the real important ones like: "What do you think about the future of the mankind? Are you following any kind of religion?" And this is the point where the story start to choose a really (really) scary direction. And still makes this only with the power of the company's discussion...

I admit it is not the most revealing sci-fi (?) ever written, but if you like(d) the unique atmosphere of the mentioned Twilight Zone, or the episodes of the Tales of the Unexpected, then you found something treasure. Why? Because Richard Schenkman's, I mean Jerome Bixby's movie gives the most close answer for the meaning of life (after the '42' of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy...:). Or not.



6/10

19 November 2007

Cloverfield


I had to wait until today when finally we can watch the official trailer in HD quality. Ow, I almost forgot: Cloverfield (formerly known as 1-18-08) is the secret project of J.J. Abrams (the director's name is Matt Reeves). Right, Abrams is one of the brains behind the Lost together with Damon Lindelof.
The insiders say that it isn't another Godzilla-thing. Hmm, we will see – exactly one month before the new episodes of Lost will start. Maybe the whole Cloverfield project is just for keep alive the interest and enthusiasm in the sleeping series? As far as we know Abrams' ability to keep up the suspense I wouldn't be surprised...

(This time I give you only a link - because the YouTube version's quality doesn't give the HD quality which is part of the whole concept)


17 November 2007

High Sierra (1941)



"I was getting nervous, waiting over an hour."
"I've been waiting too, over eight years."

That's the answer which represent the genre and the '40s' Hollywood for me. Especially if we receive this kind of quick riposte from Bogart's emotionless character, just released from the prison. Really, he is just perfect! It is a real luck that he was chosen for the part of Roy Earle, pardon, 'Mad Dog Earle'. I mean literally, because originally it was given for two other actors. After their refusal Raoul Walsh picked Bogart, which became his first major role (still Ida Lupino's name on the top...), and started the avalanche of his career. The same year he made Huston's The Maltese Falcon and a year later, yes, you found it out already, in 1942 he gave his biggest in the Casablanca.

But don't run away from this true masterpiece! I need to admit that despite of this title (masterpiece), not this movie is the best from the half-eyed Raoul Walsh. For me the White Heat (1949) with James Cagney is still the top, but It must be true, that without this Walsh couldn't arrive to his peak.
Actually Bogart is much more complex than Cagney's Arthur 'Cody' Jarret: he gave a perfect mixture of a soft-hearted guy and a tough crime-fella. His role – and especially his talent to balance these personalities of his – fuels complexity into the story as well. There is no doubt about how this story ends: the criminal with the heart, who is searching a 'Home' doesn't live long in Hollywood (if you wouldn't be familiar with the attributes of the genre then there is a strong clue in the story: just "read" the dog's behave – it will tells everything about the coming happenings...).

Before I would say "Go and watch it!" only one small remark connected to the style of the cinematography. We are in 1941, in the year of the 'big' Citizen Kane, which adored because of its camera technique. No doubt, Gregg Toland is one of the biggest reference points in the history of the film style. But if we look closer the camerawork of the High Sierra, we may recognize the similarities between Toland's and Tony Gaudino's way of using the deep focus (the earlier Oscar-winner Italian shot the cultic Hell's Angels (1930) for Howard Hughes too...). Let me show some examples from the film:











This last one reminds me considerably to the famous and cited angle from the Citizen Kane... I don't want to judge in the question who used the first time the deep focus motivated by dramaturgical reasons, but I'd like to point out one of my intuitions in this case: I think Toland became the reference-figure of the film analysts, because he used the technique extremely way, where the word 'extremely' refers to its recognizability.

Now, as I promised one thing remained:
"Go and watch it!"

8/10

15 November 2007

Redacted

"A fictional story inspired by true events, REDACTED is a unique cinematic experience that will force viewers to radically reconsider the filters through which we see and accept events in our world, the power of the mediated image and how presentation and composition influence our ideas and beliefs. A profound meditation on the way information is packaged, distributed and received in an era with infinite channels of communication, REDACTED utilizes a variety of created source material-video diaries, produced documentary, surveillance footage, online testimonials, news pieces-to comment on the extreme disconnect between the surface of an image and the reality of ideas and the truth, especially in times of strife." (source)

In general I'm fed up with the growing number of feature and documentary views on the war of Iraq, but according to this above info and the director, Brian de Palma, I'm getting more and more curious...


14 November 2007

American Gangster (2007)


This is the hit now at every box office in the States. Only this fact made me a bit suspicious about Ridley Scott's epic movie, otherwise every leaked out details enforced my expectations.

American Gangster. That's a statement already. Sounds like The Godfather, the Chinatown or the Gladiator. These titles occupy geographically or grammatically a certain, quite broad area with their clear aim: to visualize, to summarize our views on some wider fields. They stand for some kind of values and common knowledges. They are using and reinforcing these knowledges of ours. They vindicate their place in the history of these knowledges, in the history of film.

And we are not far from this registers: I mean the film is some kind of 'Black Godfather'. I know it sounds very bad, even the cops didn't believe in its possible existence. And this is the point where the movie can work. When we hear the word 'mafia' our associations provide us an Italian Brando- or Pesci-like "pronunciation". But for sure not Denzel Washington. And this way of thinking and a perfect idea give a chance to Frank Lucas (played by D.W.) to organize an invisible crime establishment.
If we have a mob then we need a cop too. Richie Roberts (Russell Crowe) is definitely the most honest cop in the (film) history. He isn't as good as he was last time in the 3:10 to Yuma, but still better than thousand of his obsessed predecessors. They are together can't reach the level of de Niro's and Pacino's couple (I think on this and not this), but they are far good enough to keep your eyes on the canvas for more than two hours.

The story starts in 1968, the time when in its Vietnam background America turns into a "super fucking discount store", when "you can't find a heart of anything". In this level it's unnecessary to talk about the perfectionism of the set, characters and atmosphere. If you have ever played with the GTA then you know what I am talking about. (If not, check this picture from the film:)


Of course you should watch this movie even with its unavoidable problems, which are coming from its – above mentioned – summarizing efforts. 'The dignity in business', 'the importance of family', 'the unbreakable honesty', and my favorites: the "never forget where we are come from"-attitude and the worn-out "This is America"-bullshit. These and many other already exploited topics and their typical words of stereotypical approaches sound quite funny in 2007. Everything is too direct, everything showed and said as it is. But hey, it's shouldn't be a documentary or an Armageddon-like heroic blabber in front of an American flag (don't afraid it isn't)!

I almost gave 7 out of 10, but the (almost) final conversation between Frank and Richie forced me to give one extra point. With this and even more points on the imdb (8.4 on 15-11-2007) this epic movie is maybe overestimated. At least it shouldn't be at the 107th place of the all time best movies, especially not 7 places behind Scott's much universal classic, the Blade Runner.

8/10

13 November 2007

Premonition (2007)

Mennan Yapo's (whose??) film earned 5.6 points on the imdb (13/11/2007). Despite I was skeptic about this weak result I always found an excuse not to see this. And then Gábi's suggestion explained that the film might fit into my research on non-linear narratives, so I decided.

"I hate surprises" - tells the first sentence, but from a viewer's position I didn't want to agree with this, especially not in a connection of a thriller. At this point I need to add that I'm really irritated by Sandra Bulldog, so the first impressions combined with the very very average and more predictible 'mysticalthrillerlike' music were quite bad. Then the movie started and I felt some hope.

Don't afraid, I won't tell the story, but without killing any jokes I can summarize the idea behind the plot. The idea which is very challenging: I guess the film tried to elevate the premonition as a mental phenomenon into a narrative. Sooner or later the movie industry will exploit all the medical terms - just think on the Deja Vu (deja vu), Memento (anterograde amnesia), Identity (multiple personality syndrome) and so on. Unfortunately the Premonition cannot grow up next to its predecessors. Its biggest mistake: it changes its genre from thriller to romantic drama. We receive our usual portion of visual and any kind of hints. Let's see two examples:

Ok, thank you,
it's really a puzzle narrative...


And do not push into my face: I recognized Velazquez's Las meninas immediately...

Is the premonition connected to the fate? If it is, is there any chance to change our destiny? Do we have an unreliable narrator? Is Sandra Bullock really a bad actor?:) If you need answers, just watch the movie which is still worth because its tricky narrative.

But on the whole my premonitions didn't fail me about this film. The imdb has right:

6/10

(thanks to Gábi for the tip - and I'd like to ask all my visitors to inform me about the possible movies which could be part of my interest on every kind of non-linearity. thanks in advance)

12 November 2007

Southland Tales

This is the way the world ends.
Not with a whimper,
but with a bang...


Finally. Richard Kelly's (Donnie Darko) new film is here!
But you have still time to read the first three episodes here (the prequel saga is available as a comic).
Then you will enjoy much more the film. Because it's coming soon...

11 November 2007

No Country for Old Men

My most wanted movie at the moment. I hope the post is coming soon... Frendo:)

09 November 2007

Confidence (2003)

"So I'm dead." Impressive start from a narrator. We have seen this kind of beginning before (in one of my top ten movies ever), but...

...I cannot continue because I don't want to ruin your entertainment. To tell the truth I shouldn't say a single word about the movie to avoid giving any help or hint.

James Foley's film from 2003 is one of the biggest surprises for me in the last weeks. Just check down my grade and you will see that I mean this surprise absolutely positive. Please don't look after the director' oeuvre on the imdb otherwise you will miss this movie. It's better if I confess the most painful details about him here. The recent Perfect Stranger (Willis-Berry) is a big shit but cannot be as huge as his third film was back in 1987. I'm not even dare to write the title, the brave ones can click here. BUT as I said forgot all these past and watch the Confidence (or if you like CONfidence) - you won't regret, I promise!

So the narrator is dead - what the cinephile says? "It must be a flashback-movie!" Right. The first flashback asks from our condemned protagonist: "Does your life flashing before your eyes?" And the story starts - not the entire life but the last 3 weeks flickering down during the approx. 90 minutes running time of the film.

The parallelism with the noir classic is not a coincidence: Foley's characters have their predecessors in the best genre ever found out in Hollywood. Of course everybody is contemporalized, but the main features are recognizable (ice-cold gangster he and chain-smoker femme fatale she). Even the style is re-formed, if you interested: Bordwell wrote focusing on this film about the special technique (wipe-by axial cut) of speeding up the movie (The Way Hollywood Tells it, page 175.).

It is almost perfect. One minus point because one time (at least out of ten) I was smarter than a screenplay. The rest I was coned as everybody else in the story.

Günther Butan:)

9/10

08 November 2007

First Snow (2006)

"You've been expected me, right?" - what else we could start our conversation with a fortune teller?

Do you wanna know how you gonna die? I bet everybody was thinking about this question more or less. The issue for Jimmy Starks (Guy Pearce) is getting serious, I mean dead serious.

Maybe you don't know too much about the director. Did anybody hear the name Mark Fergus? The First Snow is his first and – until now – last movie, but his contribution as a screenplay writer gave bigger importance to him. The Children of Men was one of the most brainy film recently and I think nobody needs to introduce the next year's big hit. Yes, as one of its writers he is responsible for the Iron Man too.
But what we have here? Fergus delivers a fate-story of Jimmy, the self confident jukebox dealer, who hasn't got too much time left (Fate movie? My clue is: 'your life is predestined, so it's definitely not a jukebox'. Got it?). The more scepticism of a protagonist, the more dramatic effect when he needs to change his mind... Welcome to Hollywood!
"One thing is certain. [He is] safe until the first snow..." I cannot tell more, because eventually I'd like to convince you to give a chance and watch.
I believe I don't need to mention that in Hollywood every fate and destiny has its reason. Yep: Jimmy's search in his past and limited future is about finding out the cause which delivers the deadly effect. Simple, isn't it? I admit the story is not the most complex what I've ever seen, but the directing, characters (Mahone rulez:)) and some well placed jokes compensate enough.
It's not a 12 Monkeys or Ringu-type fate-brightness, but six (almost seven) out of ten is worth to give.



6/10

05 November 2007

Mysterious Skin (2004)



I don't know where to start. Maybe the best would be like this: Do not watch this "movie"! Or maybe it is enough? Ok, let me explain it a bit more detailed.
Gregg Araki's film from 2004 is a typical independent arty-farty big nothing. I have nothing against the indies, I just really sick of those ones which cannot step over their boring, always repeated topics like "the painful beauty of homosexuality" or "the traumatic childhood's haunting" and so on, you exactly know what I'm talking about. (More about the more and more predictable independent movies by Richard Corliss click here, and shoot here for Bordwell's answer.)
What we have here? We are following the UFO freak Brian's and the teenage homo-hooker Neil's parallel lifes from 1981 until '91 or what, which - you won't find out - will collide during the development of the film. Doesn't deserve more, really. Maybe I should give a """huge""" spoiler about the end to be sure you won't watch it, to save your time (and probably your life).
Anyway, don't listen to others, especially not those who gave 8 (!) points average on the imdb (my try was because of this). Bad directing, even worse acting (the bastards even destroyed my positive view on Chloe). The biggest enjoyment was for me to give 2 points for it.

2/10