Unforgiven download

"Unforgiven" may well be Clint Eastwood's greatest triumph as an actor and director. In this grim, dark, and yet strangely beautiful story of former gunslinger William Munny (Eastwood), who comes out of retirement for one last job, Eastwood deliberately sets out to demystify the old West. This is evident in the conversations between Munny and the Schofield Kid (Jaimze Wolvett), who has a romanticized image of the old-time gunfighters, and between sheriff Little Bill Daggett (Gene Hackman) and hack journalist W.W. Beauchamp (Saul Rubinek). Yet the "demythologizing" message doesn't feel forced; it is woven effortlessly into a gripping story that powerfully conveys the human cost of violence.

Moral ambiguity pervades the film, which has no easy resolutions and no customary clear lines between good and evil. Will and his friend Ned (Morgan Freeman), nominally the heroes, have clearly done many bad things in their lives. When they come to Big Whiskey as hired killers, it is ostensibly for a just cause -- to punish two no-good cowboys who slashed the face of a prostitute. Yet, as we know from the beginning, the version of the attack that is reported to Will and Ned is highly and grotesquely exaggerated. While the cowboys certainly should have been punished, we may legitimately wonder if death is a punishment that fits the crime. The agonizing death of the younger of the two cowboys, who didn't do the slashing and clearly felt bad about what his partner had done, certainly doesn't look like justice.

The ostensible villain, Little Bill, is not just a villain. He is a sheriff determined to preserve law and order in the town. One can't blame him for wanting to keep paid assassins out. In a violent society, there's no way he can do his job without using violence. Unfortunately, he also takes a sadistic pleasure in his brutality -- even though he also seems to want a peaceful, quiet life in the house he's building.

One might say that Munny's heroics in the guns-blazing climax undercut the film's purpose of dismantling the mystique of the Old West and its gunfighters. But the truth is, "Unforgiven" is both an homage to and a deconstruction of that mystique. While Munny acquires almost mythic stature in that scene, his actions are still morally shady, and his exchange with the nerdy Beauchamp quickly dispels the romantic aura. What's more, his "rise" to heroism can also be seen as a fall from grace and a reversion to his old ways.

The film may be just a tad slow at times, but at 2 hrs 10 minutes, it remains nearly always gripping. (As for those IMDB reviewers who've knocked the movie because there are too many scenes where Eastwood's character is weak and pathetic, falling off his horse or getting beat up -- why don't you just go see some Arnold Schwarzenegger flick!) Not only are the principal characters well-developed, but even minor characters come across as real people with individual traits; the credit is due both to the excellent screenplay and to the superb cast. The scenes between Will Munny and Delilah, the prostitute who was slashed, are very touching without being at all "sappy." Eastwood is simply superb as the tortured and self-loathing Munny; Gene Hackman fully matches him as Little Bill; Morgan Freeman exudes a quiet dignity as Ned; Wolvett acquits himself well as "the Kid." Add to this a scene-stealing performance by Richard Harris as the elegant, vicious gunslinger English Bob, and terrific work by Saul Rubinek, Frances Fisher as the prostitute Strawberry Alice, and Anna Levine as Delilah.

 

Trainspotting download 1996

IMDB-8.2

It's ironic that I'm saying "many people missed the point" because I did, too. My original review on IMDb gave the film a negative rating. I deleted it months ago because I have since purchased the Director's Cut on DVD and fallen in love with it.

The movie is energetic, imaginative and unique. It's taken from Irvine Welsh's novel, which I now really want to read. It's about a group of heroin addicts (led by Ewan McGregor's Renton) in Scotland who can't seem to live past their addiction...everything centers around drugs.

"Trainspotting" was condemned for promoting drug use, but I agree with fellow reviewer Bob the Moo who claims this was a misinterpretation on the media's behalf - yeah, it may show drugs as being "funny" at times (like Renton's wacky hallucination) but it certainly doesn't glamorize them. Some of the sequences are sickeningly realistic and depressing - like the scene with the baby. That's tragic stuff, and totally unexpected. It's also effective because by that point in the film we care about the characters enough for it to affect us on an emotional level.

The movie was really popular in the UK but never got much acclaim overseas. Americans in general will always be less liberal and be quicker to damn films for their messages. "Taxi Driver" was hailed by Europeans in '76...can't really say the same for US critics - it was a huge split in opinion at the time.

Ditto here. Most Americans didn't really "get it" and the only attention it received was the controversy surrounding the appearance of Mr. McGregor's genitalia. Oh, the humanity! If you haven't seen "Trainspotting" yet, I highly recommend it. Don't be turned off at first by its bleak humor and sick content - I won't lie, it IS a rough ride...but by the end, it's worth it.

La Haine download (1995)

Imdb Rating - 8.1

Moviemakers when filming French based films have traditionally tended to sentimentalise the ‘people' through the celebration of les petits gens, the little people of Pagnol and Clair as well as more recently the fantastical Parisian wonderland environments of Amelie and Moulin Rouge. With La Haine, young director Mathieu Kassovitz took the flipside of this and gave an illustration of the awfulness of life in the depressed blue-collar areas of Paris

La Haine (‘Hate') begins after a night of rioting on a dismal housing estate on the northern outskirts of Paris and focuses on 24 hours in the lives of three close friends aged around 20. They are Vince (Vincent Cassel), an explosive working-class Jew, Hubert (Hubert Kounde), a handsome, soft-spoken black, and Said (Said Taghmaoui), a mercurial streetwise Arab. With little hopes or prospect of regular employment due to where they come from, the trio drift aimlessly, engaging in petty theft, and seething with aggressive resentment against an uncaring world. L'Avenir c'est nous (We Are the Future) is the ironic slogan on the estate's playground, but this is a film about people who believe they have no future.

The quality of the performances from the 3 main actors, their conviction, the way they interact with one another and the vigour and fluency of Kassovitz's script and direction make this a very special movie indeed. Its full of action, detail, unexpected incidents and quirky humour. For instance, the boys have a bizarre encounter in a public lavatory in central Paris with a diminutive survivor of the Gulag that is as puzzling to them as it is to us. Does the story the Gulag survivor tells them have a deeper meaning than on the surface? Of course it does, and importantly this film makes you think as to what the metaphor means. Throughout violence is always on the point of erupting. There are constant confrontations with a brutal, racist police force, and Vince has a 44 Magnum revolver that a plainclothes cop lost during the riots, which we know will eventually be used on someone. However none of this ever descends into mere gratuitous violence like so many Hollywood films

La Haine presents a state of affairs of the alienation faced by many young people in the ‘projects' in France, and all over the world. It doesn't offer any solutions, though the point is forcibly made that in France, as elsewhere, parts of the police force are part of the problem rather than the solution. Of course, much of what we are shown is familiar to us from British and American films .

The strength of the film is that it neither glamorises nor patronises its characters. They hate their life because it's boring, and they despise the society that's created it for them, together with parks, football fields and a few mod cons with which to comfort them. In particular, they hate the police, who hate them right back. The film's other major achievement is to show in a tangible and very expressive way how a cycle of distrust and anger is created on both sides of this awful divide, so that there is very little anyone can do about it. In other words violence and hate breeds more violence and hate.

A criticism that could be levelled is that in the US / UK versions the sub-titles don't help, pushing what is very authentic dialogue into something more like cliché, as well as pointless miss-translations that occur. However this is just a minor thing, and does not and should not reflect at all on the film itself.

This certainly is one of the greatest films of the 1990s. Its one of those rare films that you will think about for the days and weeks after – not solely about the film itself, but on wider issues such as society, poverty and racism.

No Country for Old Men (2007) - IMDB top 50 movies of The Last Decade

You need to call it. I can't call it for you. It wouldn't be fair.
IMDB Rating: 8.4

No Country for Old Men is as exceptional a mix of two creative talents- the Coen brothers, Joel and Ethan Coen, and author Cormac McCarthy (recent winner of the Pulitzer for The Road, his own masterpiece) as one could imagine, as they converge on a story that in lessor hands would be just a B movie. The story concerns an average Joe out hunting one day in Texas who comes across a bunch of dead bodies, heroin, and a satchel with 2 million in cash. He takes it, but without knowing that a true embodiment of a psychopath (Javier Bardem) is on his trail, and as he evades him it becomes more and more clear the fatalism that lies in store, as a weathered sheriff (Tommy Lee Jones) is also on the trail with perpetulally sad eyes looking on from his stolid demeanor.

More than this, it's also about as good a morality play as one could ask for, because it plays and tools and makes very serious questions about what is moral, or what isn't, or what is so ambiguous that it's all up to the toss of a coin or a chance ride out of town. There are a few interpretations to Bardem's character Anton that could be taken, but one thing is certain- he's less a symbol than a real presence, a "ghost" as Jones's sheriff calls him that can come around at the drop of a pin, usually in the dark, and strike the utmost fear (or confusion if you're a clerk) in the hearts of men and women. You'll never look at a coin toss the same way again. Or an air-gun. Or fixing a bullet wound in a leg. Or a hunt at a motel. Or even the aftermath of a car crash.

But at the same time it's the purest time of cinema, recalling Hitchcock and Leone and Welles's Touch of Evil and the best of noir and westerns. There are so many exceptional shots and lighting, so much depth to the perception of the characters through the mis-en-scene, so much tension, that through this it's all up to the actors to make or break the near-perfection that is the McCarthy source. Bardem embodies Anton like no other could- you can't look at his eyes, often steel-cold and horrifically professional (to what professional who can say), which occasional tear- and it's obviously worthy of an Oscar. And Josh Brolin and Tommy Lee Jones are also fantastic; we see Brolin often in the midst of an action scene, a moment of 'save-your-life' going on, and one can finally see an actor of his caliber completely breaking out in a role that doesn't require him to ever totally "emote". Jones, on the other hand, gives a compassionate turn in a film that's about the struggles of desperate men in a land without law and order. He's gone through so much that it comes out completely in his voice and eyes, sorrowful but holding back, and he reaches a level of connection with the character that makes the Fugitive look like simpleton TV. Kelly McDonald, who plays Lleland's wife, is also excellent when called upon, especially in a crucial scene later in the film.

It's gut-wrenching, bleak, violent, super-tense (I clenched many a knuckle during some scenes), surprisingly funny in a darkly comic manner not seen by the Coens in many years, and artistically fashioned to a beat that is meditative (watch the opening moments with Jones's voice-over), simple, and doomed. It's beautiful and terribly tragic, for McCarthy fans it finally strikes at what is truest to his material- even if you haven't read the book itself the Road will give an indication of the mood and atmosphere at hand- and at the moment I can't think of any other film that would be the best pick of the year- maybe one of the best films I've ever seen.

The Son (Le fils) 2002 - IMDB top 50 movies of The Last Decade

The Good Carpenter of Liege

IMDB Rating: 7.5

The rapt watchfulness of this film is almost intolerable.

The minutiae of the woodwork instructor protagonist's drab and solitary daily existence merely repel us at first: his opaque, inexpressive, sulky-looking face (on the rare occasions that we see it, as opposed to the back of his neck) seems to confirm that there is nothing here for us, nothing but the muffled dullness of a dead-end existence, nothing but the droning of power tools in the sullen workshop and the heating-up of tinned soup in the bare little apartment.

Then the film's remorseless attention to the mundane starts to hint at some turmoil of this man's inner life, which is being kept rigorously in check by everyday rituals: the conscientious painful sit-ups, the critical measurement of the trainees' clumsy work. Something unbearable is being borne. Some terrible price is being paid. Olivier is like some powerful caged mammal, ever darting just ahead the camera's reach. We fear for the boys in his domininion -- especially for the new trainee, whom he stalks with a feral intensity.

And now we learn the awful sadness of what ails Olivier, and what has brought everything to a head. Now the camera watches his every move with mixed dread and wonder. Now every little thing he does matters, as we struggle to gauge what he will do next. Now the details of just what nail to use, of the trick to carrying a heavy wooden lintel (so like a cross), become utterly compelling -- not as displacement activities, but as things that can be relied upon, as tangible truths.

And finally, on long drive to a timber yard one late-autumn weekend, we watch a miracle unfold: halting, clumsy, almost wordless, although there is a sort of confession, and a sort of catechism. Wet leaves still stick to the boy's back from a momentary struggle in a wood as the newly-cut planks are stacked, silently, in the trailer. Master and apprentice are joined by the mystery of their craft. A father without a son has found a son without a father.

And now, at last, we understand that the film's watchfulness has been Olivier's own: his need to observe, to assess, to measure up (something for which he has a peculiar knack), in order to decide how the right thing is to be done. For only then is it done decisively, deftly and truly.

That a film of such simplicity, unflinching honesty and moral intensity can be made today is itself little short of miraculous. In both its symbolic language and its belief in the possibility of grace, it is firmly rooted in a particular north-European pietistic (and specifically Catholic) tradition. But never mind about that. This is a genuine and beautifully modest masterpiece of humane realism.

Lost in Translation - IMDB top 50 movies of The Last Decade

Breathtaking and beautiful - improves on second viewing

IMDB Rating: 7.8

I was just like every other curious American filmgoer a few months ago when I went and saw Lost in Translation for the first time. That's right, I wanted to know what in the hell was so great about the movie that critics were calling possibly the best of the year and a modern masterpiece. I saw Translation for the first time and liked it, but didn't really know what they saw in the movie that was so beyond-belief spectacular. But alas, I believe that every movie deserves a second chance (i.e. - the miracle of hating Moulin Rouge on round one and having it shoot near the top of my favorites of all time a year later), so just recently I sat down and experienced director Sophia Coppola's Lost In Translation again.

Lost in Translation tells the story of Bob Harris (Bill Murray in a role tailor-made, if not even Heaven-sent for him), an American movie star that comes to Tokyo to film a whiskey commerical for which he will be paid 2 million bucks. Staying in the same Tokyo hotel is Charlotte (Scarlett Johanssen, radiant and mature at only 18), a newlywed tagging along with her rock photographer husband, John (a typically awkward Giovanni Ribisi). Along the way, Charlotte and Bob run into each other and begin a 'brief encounter' that profoundly affects them both.

When the movie hits you right, it's a pure pleasure from its unassuming start (a beautifully lit shot up Johanssen's underwear-clothed behind) to its ambiguous but meaningful ending. It begins as a comedy of culture clash, Harris sarcastic and confused at the Japanese when entering his hotel, and even more befuddled in a hilarious scene where he shoots the whiskey commerical (and one later during a photo shoot). Coppola delivers Bob into her movie with the impression that it'll be all about him (he has plenty of great scenes, even at just the beginning), but Charlotte enters the story, and we're never quite the same. Scarlett Johanssen plays Charlotte with just the right amount of emotion that her initially morose and soul-searching character doesn't seem silly. At one point, she tearfully admits over the phone, "I don't know who I married." This may come off as silly, but consider her position: far away from home, newly married, in a big intimidating city, and her husband is away on a photo shoot. Bob, on the other hand, seems to have it made, but Murray lets a current of loneliness run across that memorable face that seems to hint at something more. He gets comical faxes from his wife about bookshelves and carpet samples, but he gives off the impression that he's come to the point where he doesn't even care anymore. Bob is certainly alone for a time in Tokyo, but Murray gives off the impression that things at home aren't too hot either.

For the first third of the movie, director Coppola displays her first brave choice in filmmaking by keeping Bob and Charlotte apart. During this time, the smooth, languid pace of the film falls into place, and by languid I don't mean 'boring.' Upon my first viewing of Translation, I wasn't convinced of Coppola's choice to keep the movie so predominantly low-key, but I've realized that there's a reason for it. The movie sustains this amazing vibe that doesn't stunt its progress, but propels it with a driving fluidity. A few times, though, Bob and Charlotte do see each other without officially meeting. One time in particular occurs in a crowded elevator - the two glance at each other, faintly smile, and possibility is born. The first section of the film doesn't just serve to show its two characters completely apart - it makes you think of how many life-changing connections you've missed in the past by just being passive and solitary.

Coppola successfully juggles Bob and Charlotte apart, but when they do meet, it's pure magic. They begin voyages out into the hustle and bustle of Tokyo, and the film almost takes on a perspective that differs from its earlier view. Before, we saw Bob Harris and Charlotte, respectively, at their most private and vulnerable. While out on the town, the film seems to sit back and just let them have fun. Thank God, for Bill Murray's rousing rendition of Elvis Costello's "(What's So Funny 'Bout) Peace, Love, and Understanding" is a blast. During this time, it seems that Bob and Charlotte have forgotten their insomnia and loneliness, but it's not gone forever. Even during their night on the town, we see moments where they sit silently, pensive and confused. The movie is a comedy in some sense, but it escalates into a pervading tragic feel. At one point, Charlotte says to Bob: "Let's never come back here again, because it will never be as much fun." I was struck deeply by this because, well, they had fun, but only in the sense of putting off more loneliness and desperation.

The movie takes a while to truly glean out the deep-seated motivations of both of its characters, but they become fully-realized in a marvelous scene where Bob and Charlottelay fully-clothed in bed together. Here, they handle the 'big' questions in life, and not "Where did you go to college?" or "What did you want to be when you were little?" but "What is my purpose?" and "Does marraige get easier?" I was amazed at the honesty of the character's responses. Bob relates to Charlotte the experience of having children and the ongoing struggles of marraige, but a tinge of fear and apprehension runs through his speech. Charlotte hasn't really figured things out for herslef yet - she says she's tried just about everything but hasn't found that niche. Coppola's screenplay takes these two separate beings, far apart in age and experiences, and makes a profound statement - both are in the same exact emotional limbo. Charlotte is confused and worried, but Bob is regretful and washed-up. In a way, these two are some form of deeply odd soul-mates. That is the heart and soul of Coppola's amazing work.

I couldn't end this review without mentioning another star behind the scenes of the movie that is nearly as effective to the film as Director/Screenwriter Sophia Coppola. That is cinematographer Lance Acord, who should just start writing his Oscar acceptance speech now. He has worked on Coppola's husband's (Adaptation, Being John Malkovich director Spike Jonze) films before, but this is his finest, most beautiful work yet. He captures Japan, and the film's characters, with such a soft-but-colorfully-abstract flare that it's nearly inexplicable. I often wondered why, beyond the fact that they have so much to think about, Bob and Charlotte (especially her) are seen staring out windows so much. If they see Tokyo with the same awe-inspiring glow that the film does, they have no better reason.

Perhaps the movie didn't sit as well with me the first time because I kept attempting to figure out what the movie was. It has great comedic flair with Murray's wonderful work, but it's also perhaps one of the saddest and most moving films I've seen in a long time. It's some form of a romance, too, but it's not about when they'll kiss or when they'll hit the sheets (one kiss on the cheek becomes unbearably awkward). It also has that Affair to Remember vibe too, where the journey of two souls that find comfort will eventually have to come to an end. Its end, though, defies classification, as does the rest of the film. Many times during the film's quaint, quietly moving finale, I expected lush music to start playing to underscore the escalating sadness of the film. It doesn't. Coppola simply lets her two amazing leads do the work. When the film does arrive at its final, ambiguous moment, it all just seems perfect. The catchy Japan-pop soundtrack that runs brilliantly throughout the film begins to play, and I find myself with a huge regret: that I won't be able to savor the subtle chemistry of Bob and Charlotte, and that a flat-out masterpiece in American film is at its end.

Beau Travail - IMDB top 50 movies of The Last Decade

An effective study on what military life does to human expression. 

IMDB Rating: 7.0 

Claire Denis' Beau travail, alongside Bruno Dumont's L'Humanité, is a French film I wouldn't suggest to those who get easily bored in a movie theater. But if one is willing to forget the conventions of narrative cinema and accept the sometimes documentarian, sometimes corporeally poetic way Beau travail approaches it's subject, this should be a true treat for both the eyes and the mind.

The story of the movie is thin as paper: Galoup, a sergeant in the French Foreign Legion, has to deal with his jealousy when a new recruit called Sentain becomes a hero in the eyes of his men. Alongside Galoup's soldiers, the only other important player in this bizarre drama is Forestier, Galoup's superior, who he obviously admires, but who doesn't share his resentment for Sentain. Gradually, Galoup's envy for Sentain becomes too much for him to take, and his downward spiral begins.

Denis depicts, with great sense for details, how the military routines dominate every aspect of the legionnaires' (and especially Galoup's) life. This is portrayed effectively in the beginning of the film, when the soldiers' crude attempts to dance in a disco are compared to their beautiful, elegant movements during physical training. To Galoup, military discipline has become the only form of self-expression, and for this reason he hates Sentain, who tries to bring a little more humanity to the camp. Or does he? A curious aspect of the film is that we never see any of the things Galoup, in his narrative, accuses Sentain of. Only in the end Sentain acts against Galoup's strict orders, and this could be seen as counterreaction to Galoup's obvious hatred and unreasonable forms of punishment; the humane deed Sentain commits is something any soldier who isn't thoroughly programmed would do. So, since the story is told from Galoup's point of view, it could be argued that he has become paranoid, that as soldier without a war or an enemy he is only looking for an object to his emotional output (which the military life has distorted into hatred and envy), and Sentain, because of his one act of heroism, happens to be an apt target.

The above, however, isn't the only way to interpret the story. It is quite possible that Sentain acts the way Galoup says he does, and this turns the movie into a triangle (or a rectangle) drama between Galoup, Sentain and his men, possibly even his superior. The only thing Galoup's seems to (or is able to) care about is the military, and disciplining the legionnaires is his way of showing his affection. But this balance is broken by Sentain, whom the men admire, and who's actions are approved by Forestier. Since Galoup fears he is about to lose the very substance of his life, he reacts the only way is familiar with: by tightening his rule. Galoup's behaviour is, of course, bound to have repercussions, but there is no other option he can possibly think of.

Besides the way military life takes control of the men, Denis' other obvious point is to show how absurd and pointless the army routines seem in the eyes of an outsider. During the film we see countless training numbers and war excercises and witness the soldiers dull everyday life, but never do we see them doing anything useful. At one time the legionnaires build a camp in the desert, but the only reason for this seems to be Galoup's desire to get some action to the bored men. Beau travail's antimilitaristic theme becomes even more obvious, when the legionnaires' life is shown in contrast of the Africans who neighbour them. These people shepherd their herd, weave mats, sell things, make food, and watch with astonishment as the soldiers dig a hole in the middle of nowhere. The personal drama in the film becomes even more tragic, when Denis shows just how meaningless is the system that produces these kind of human beings. In the terrific final scene of the film we see the whole scale of Galoup's desperation as it becomes obvious, that he could never be anything else than a sad, retired army officer with no chance of fitting into the civilian world.  

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind - IMDB top 50 movies of The Last Decade

"Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" is a bizarre but wonderful movie, a very strange and remarkably tender experience.

IMDB Rating: 8.4

"How happy is the blameless vestal's lot! The world forgetting, by the world forgot. Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind! Each pray'r accepted, and each wish resign'd." - Alexander Pope

Michel Gondry's "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" is a bizarre but wonderful movie, a very strange and remarkably tender experience, which I suppose is only to be expected from screenwriter Charlie Kaufman, the man behind "Being John Malkovich."

The film was produced by Focus Features ("Lost in Translation," "21 Grams"), a company which strives to offer original, quality films to the true cinema lovers. If the company keeps producing films this good, they may become hugely successful in the future, if not already.

The previews portrayed the movie as a bouncy, cheery comedy in the vein of "Adaptation," the last film written for the big screen by Charlie Kaufman, when it is really a tender movie about love and romance. This is Jim Carrey's best performance to date, and may open the eyes of his prejudiced haters who have only imagined him as Ace Ventura and a certain cable guy for his entire career. No snippy quotes, outrageous humor or bizarre antics in "Sunshine" -- Carrey plays a true, realistic, three-dimensional character named Joel Barrish, who plans to have memories of his girlfriend, Clementine (Kate Winslet), erased by a new company called Lacuna, after he discovers that she herself has had the procedure performed only a week before. Joel meets with the company's founder, Dr. Howard Mierzwiak (Tom Wilkinson), and is informed that the procedure -- although "technically" brain damage -- is on par with a heavy night of drinking. "Nothing you'll miss much," he is told, as he plunges into a bizarre world of long forgotten memories.

The entire process of the operation is quite fascinating, really, if a bit reminiscent of an idea founded by none other than one of Kaufman's favorite writers, Philip K. Dick, who wrote the source short story for the Ah-nuld movie "Total Recall." All items relating to the person you want erased from your brain are assembled together, and the technicians at Lacuna (Mark Ruffalo and Elijah Wood) then "map" an outline of your memories, which are supposedly stemmed together. I have my doubts about the seriousness and remote possibility of such a procedure being performed, and the explanation is quite simply utter bull, but we don't care because the entire erasing of Joel's memories serves as a backdrop for a deeper meaning: If you could forget about past romances, would you really want to? And if so, would you be willing to sacrifice all the good ones, along with the bad ones?

The conclusion that "Sunshine" arrives at is, to be totally truthful, as honest as can be. During the procedure, Joel's subconscious realizes that it doesn't want to let go of its memories of Clementine, and so begins a strange labyrinth of fragmented memories, constantly changing surroundings, and mental materializations of Clementine. The movie is like a very bizarre dream, when you're trying to interact with people, but they're not responding, and you shout and try to get their attention but they don't seem to notice. Joel's entire odyssey of the interior of his mind makes "Being John Malkovich" look normal -- but as I didn't like "Malkovich" very much, and thought its strangeness was unjustified, it fits perfectly in "Sunshine" -- there are some great special effects, such as when Joel is wandering through his own memories, drifting in and out of sleep, hearing the voices of the technicians erasing his memories and watching as objects and areas around him vanish and deconstruct. It's so bizarre but yet also so beautiful. Gondry was a former music video director (his complete works are available on DVD) and he is the perfect candidate for this project, having worked with Kaufman before on the 2001 flop "Human Nature." It seems that he has finally found a unique directing style that ties in perfectly with the underlying themes of the movie.

There is a very deep message in "Sunshine," and it is arguably Kaufman's deepest film to date. Love and romance and memories of both have rarely been examined as thought-provokingly and tenderly as they are in this wonderful motion picture. The movie has a very profound message that all viewers should pay attention to. There are many small intricacies in the film, surely picked up on more thoroughly on repeat viewings, and the entire construction of the movie is completely enthralling and intelligent. I saw two people leave the rather empty theater during the screening I attended. It tanked in the US and I predict it will do the same in the UK, which is a shame, because this is the smartest film of 2004 and has the most to say about our lives than any other film this year. While everyone flocks to see the new Denzel Washington action movie, "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" is forgotten, which is quite depressing -- people would rather spend their money on forgettable entertainment than view something unique that has something important at its core.

I think what the movie finally asks us after its long, emotional journey, is would we want our own memories erased? And if so, what would the consequences be? A lesser film might examine this idea poorly -- "Sunshine" is not. It is perfect in almost every conceivable way, and anyone who complains that it is not original must be joking -- in my entire lifetime, this is one of the most unique film experiences I have ever had.

"Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" is a beautiful movie, eloquently voiced by Gondry, firmly constructed and rooted in an eerie nightmarish fantasy land where anything is possible. It's beautiful, it's bizarre, it's exceptional, it's funny, it's lovely, it's touching, it's witty, and it's one of the best movies I have ever seen. 

The Lord of the Rings Trilogy - IMDB top 50 Movies of the last decade

Never before in my life were my cheeks more aching.....,

IMDB Rating: 8.5

..but oh was I thankful for it!!! All through the movie I kept on having this big large smile sculpted into my face. For the record, I'm 25 years old, and I've read "The Lord of the Rings" in three times for the first time when I was six or seven years old. Ever since then, I read it at least once or twice a year - therefore you can count me as a fan, for I follow the same cult fan procedure with "The Hobbit" and "The Silmarillion" as well. Now onto the movie... Gosh, I saw it more than one time, and I keep wanting more of it. It just never gets boring! I really enjoyed the little stuff that is found throughout the movie for fans of the books (the map on Bilbo's table in his house comes to mind, it is exactly as the one in "The Hobbit" book that I own), and I also incredibly enjoyed the intro sequence with the re-telling of the battle against Sauron from the Silmarillion, never has an ultimate evil being been so well depicted on the screen. It truly is Sauron.

Those who argue the movie cuts too many parts or that it changes the story too much are totally wrong. This movie could not have shown the whole first time in its entirety - keep in mind that the audiobook version of 'Fellowship of the Ring' lasts well over ten hours, making a movie this long would, well, make it way too long and besides, how would you financially sustain such a project? I've read a reviewer saying he'd make all three books with the time allowed for the first movie alone. I think it would be a very fast-forwarding experience of a movie with 'Alvin and the Chimpmunks' kind of voices, incredibly stupid to say the least.

Ok, so there are changes in the movie - well, this is Jackson's vision of it. All of us have our own visions of the books, which may or may not be compatible with that of Jackson's, but I can safely assume that nobody can say they have a hundred percent the same vision of the story as Tolkien; that's the thing with books: each reader has a different vision of it. As for me, I was blown away. Never before have I felt so much at home in a movie, it is as if I had taken a walk in the town where I grew up, the Shire, Rivendell, Moria, Lorien, everything felt so much like home, I was moved. I cannot tell of another movie that had me shed tears just by seeing a landscape on screen.

As for the changes, well, I found good reasons behind all of them, and let me tell you right away, I was happy that Arwen saved Frodo, yes, maybe coming from a fan it will look like absolute heresy, but I enjoyed the scene a lot. I did not enjoy it because it was supposedly politically-correct to do so, or that I find Liv Tyler to be absolutely attractive; it was just because I felt like even though it was a big change from the book, it was a very good one indeed, it makes you discover the power, determination, and courage of elves and the fact that even elven women, although great in their beauty and seemingly fragile in appearance do not have anything to envy to their male counterparts. And beside, as Arwen is to become a Queen later on, it was pretty good to see her have a great first appearance.

The actors were great, they were a lot into their characters, and for the first time, I saw elves as they were, quick, agile, terrifyingly effective in battle - just look at how Legolas dealed with the hordes of enemies without a single hint of fear in his eyes - these are elves as they should be. Gimli was great too, I know people seem to think many characters were not developed enough, but by the actions you can learn a lot. With Gimli a lot can be learned about the dwarves, their pride, deep sense of honor and family, their mistrust of elves, their love for strong beer and a good fight against anything bigger, and their sheer hatred for orcs and the likes. Aragorn was totally the ranger character, the ending scene as he walked toward the horde of Uruk-Hai warriors was great, his attitude, his clothes, everything about him just cried "ranger". Boromir was very well depicted, desperate to save the people of Gondor, by any mean necessary, robbed of all hope, yet in the end he redeems himself by showing his true valour, deep down, he's willing to die to defeat evil, and when he recognizes his king in Aragorn, on his last breath, I felt like watching a hero die, it was moving. The hobbits were all great, Frodo is deeply sad and fatalist, and Sam is just the 'best friend' everyone would like to have, just as it should be. Finally, we have Gandalf, quite frankly, he looks mighty, Ian IS Gandalf. The faceoff against the Balrog in the Moria is a memorable sequence, and just shows how strong he really is, to be able to vanquish such a foe. I can't wait for his return.

Quite frankly, I can't wait for the two other movies... In the meantime, I'll watch this one over and over again. This movie has everything that a good movie needs to have, and more. Plus, it just might bring more people to actually read books that have more pages than the average little 25¢ novel that has no value in it, which is great. Parents, maybe some scenes will frighten your kids, but this movie has almost NO blood (even though it has a good share of battle) and the foes are undeniably evil, plus it has good values in it - friendship, courage, responsiblity, sacrifice for a good cause, and the belief that anyone can help to change things. This is worthy of Tolkien, this is a movie that will go down in history as being one of the best ever, for sure. 

Almost Famous (2000) Download - IMDB Top 50 Movies of the Last Decade

One of the favourite movies of all-time

IMDB Rating: 7.5

Finally, a movie worth the full price of a ticket! Almost Famous is Cameron Crowe's semi-autobigraphical story of an aspiring rock journalist who goes on tour with a band in the 1970's. If it sounds familiar, it's probably because the story is hardly new. There have been dozens of movies made about the rock and roll lifestyle: the drugs, the sex, the fights, and all the bumps on the road to success.

So what sets Almost Famous apart? The acting, for one. Frances McDormand was brilliant as William's (newcomer Patrick Fugit) well-meaning but overbearing mother. Fugit, for his part, had a convincing performance as the shy, awkward teenager struggling to be a journalist but at the same time aching to belong. Kate Hudson, in her breakout role as groupie "Penny Lane", gave her character depth beyond what might have been a limiting role. And Billy Crudup, as band Stillwater's charismatic lead guitarist, shines. Jason Lee is always good, and as Stillwater's lead singer, this role is no exception. And I can't review this film without giving a shout-out to the chronically and criminally-underrated Philip Seymour Hoffman, who steals every scene he's in with his portrayal of legendary rock journalist Lester Bangs.

The writing in the film also contributes to its effect. Many of the great lines belong to McDormand but there are plenty of others to go around. In addition, the music of the era can't be beat. Everything from Simon and Garfunkle to Alvin and the Chipmunks shows up at some point in the movie's extensive musical score.

The plot may not be particularly original, but it rings true. I of course am approaching this review as a music fan and someone interested in the industry. Nonetheless, I believe that even people who couldn't care less about rock music will enjoy this movie, since it's not so much about the music as it is about life. A central theme is the conflict of William: Should he remain a detached but lonely outsider so as to be an impartial journalist, or allow himself to make friends with these people and feel like he belongs? Aside from bringing up questions of journalistic ethics, this dilemma mirrors much of what people in all wakes of life deal with daily.

Almost Famous is realistic, funny, touching, and one of those rare movies that makes you feel like you've gained something just for having seen it. It's too bad that they say rock and roll is dead, cause we could sure use more movies like this one!

The Bourne Ultimatum download HD print

The Bourne Ultimatum concludes the trilogy that started with Bourne Identity in which a man (Jason, the eponymous Bourne), shot and left for dead in the sea, found himself unable to remember who he was, and so started a quest to find and recover his lost identity, as well as to discover his own past and attempt to remedy the wrong done. Thus began a thrilling series which featured relentless action and frenetic chase scenes that covered three continents and which, once started, never let go of you as a viewer.

The Bournd Ultimatum is to my mind the best of three, it features some of the best action sequences seen, for example, the tight, well-paced, and supremely well-done scene at the Waterloo station. It brings a satisfactory conclusion to the trilogy that leaves you exalted, but still somewhat saddened at the journey he had to undertake, his discovery and the cost to him. If I want to nit-pick, I'd say that the Tangier chase and fight scenes went on just a little too long, and the relationship between Nicky and Jason was never fully explained. The Bourne Supremacy is I think the weakest of the three, primarily because of the sheer illogicality of the plot - if Abbott (Brian Cox) had a secret so grave that he would kill his own man and himself over it, then surely he would have killed Jason Bourne when he have the chance to do so in the first film. It does, however, feature the best car chase sequence (the Moscow one) I have ever seen. Many people have complained about the shaky camera technique, but apart from a couple of moments which I found irritating in Bourne Supremacy, it had worked pretty well in general, especially in the Waterloo scene as it heightened the confusion, agitation and tension of the moment.

If we want to see the point of the film, it is what Jason Bourne said to the Paz who asked him why Bourne didn't shoot him when he can - "Look at us. Look at what they make you give.", echoing the same words said by the dying Professor in Bourne Identity (a rather nice link back to the first film). He was asking Paz to reflect on what he has given (his whole life, his own judgement, and above all, his humanity) for the cause he has undertaken, the unquestioned surrender of his self to a higher power to be used as it so wished, and implicit in it a question if this is the right thing to do. Bourne himself discovered the limits of how far he can sacrifice his humanity when, at the assassination attempt of Wombosi, he was faced with having to kill the children (since there must be no survivors who can bear witness to Wombosi's killing). This, he decided, he would not give, and is what ultimately saved him as a person even if his hesitation nearly cost him his life.

Some may read the film as a very specific (and I think, very parochial) attack on the CIA, however, I would see this as of more general relevance to someone in the service of any organisation (perhaps a governmental or secret service one on one side, or a terrorist organisation on the other) that demands certain sacrifice of their humanity for what they do. Read the terrible events in the news that occurred regularly all over the world (perhaps another bombing in Iraq, or Burmese soldiers killing monks) and wondered perhaps if the ones who perpetrated the dreadful deeds at the behest of their organisation would just reflect on this - "Look at what they make you give"?

The film also questions whether any organisation, given untrammelled power, would exercise their power in a responsible way. And if you are prepared to give your all to that organisation, would your trust be abused?

But let's not get too carried away with philosophising. This film is, ultimately, an action-packed entertaining film, and as such, it is a great success. It is a fitting end to the Bourne stories, but, do I want another one? Well, perhaps yes. There is the risk any new film may ruin what is a near-perfect series, but I think these three will stand on their own as a discrete trilogy, and anything else will be a bonus.

Amélie 2001 - IMDB top 50 Movies of the Last Decade

She'll make YOU fall in love too!


IMDB Rating: 8.5

To start off with, I heard a lot of good things about this movie when it was on the big screens but never got around to see it before it disappeared. Sitting here, long after in the aftermath, I might never forgive myself for missing that opportunity. Eventually I did get around to see it, though a small TV never does a film the same justice a theater does, and being a bit sceptic about the small hype this movie caused made me prejudice about it, but I must say I have never been so wrong before. And I am happy saying it.

This movies biggest crime, and yet its biggest asset, is that it is in French. Subtitles just does not bring full justice to a movie like this, and it is bound to scare off most of the audience not used to subtitled movies. Sad to say so, but I believe it is the truth. I do not know any French at all, but I sure wish I was fluent watching this movie!

Compared to most other films "Amelie" (and I will stick to "Amelie" since "Le Fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain" is a bit long to write) is based on a rather ordinary and plain story everyone can relate to, but it is given to us in a very special kind of way, mixed with wonderful little subplots and an almost chaotic amount of details. We get to see and experience the world and especially Paris through the filtering eyes and fantasy of Amelie, A Paris that might feel small and limited on the screen but in fact is just as big as it is in the eyes of Amelie.

Director Jean-Pierre Jeunet brings to life the world of Amelie with colors, masterful camerawork and a few special effects (Well, I have certainly felt like melting a couple of times too in my life!). Some people I spoke to before seeing "Amelie" criticized it for being too childish and unrealistic, but I believe it is an essential part of the movie since Amelie herself is a very childish and imaginative young girl. She just happens to fall in love one day when she decides to embark on a quest. Jean-Pierre Jeunet manages to bring us along without losing control of the set or the plot. It is exactly this kind of movie that could easily be overdone and lose all of its magic in the hands of the wrong person, but Jean-Pierre Jeunet never slips a single time. For you who think you never heard of him before he is actually the same man who brought us "Alien 4" back in 1997, (I still refuse to believe he was involved in that horrible film...), and the wonderful "Delicatessen" in 1991.

Audrey Tautou could not be overemphasized for her importance in portraying Amelie. I am a bit embarrassed admitting it but I was almost falling in love with Amelie myself, forgetting she was only fiction on the screen. However she does not carry "Amelie" solely by herself. The cast makes an excellent whole and it is hard imagining switching anyone without affecting the whole outcome. Everyone manages to make the most out of their role and even though we only get to know some of them briefly they come alive just as much as Amelie herself does.

I could go on forever about "Amelie". It contains so many details and switches in tempo and camerawork it has to be seen more than once to take in and understand everything. Damn it, "Amelie" made me happy, laughing out loud at times, and very few movies affects me like that.

I very rarely give movies a 10, and I was indeed considering a 9 for a while, but for me this is one of those movies I will come back to time after time. Long after the CG thrills of hyped fantasy movies and big budget Hollywood productions have faded and been forgotten, Amelie will still be jumping around in my heart, doing all those silly and charming little things I wish I dared to do too...

Inglourious Basterds download

I must admit when I saw the preview for "Inglorious Basterds" I gave myself big expectations. THIS FILM DID NOT Disappoint.

Rarely when I watch a movie with such high-expectations do I have those expectations met or exceeded; this film did that and more. Even more rarely do I clap at the end of a movie, this I and everyone else in the theater did.

I have to say I am a little biased towards Quentin, I grew up with "Pulp Fiction." I watched it when I was 12 and it is still my favorite and most influential film.

However, since then Quentin has not really lived up to his billing. His style was getting a little predictable instead of familiar, the quality honestly wasn't there (I never watched Jackie Brown, and then there's Grindhouse). That is until "Inglorious Basterds." What Quentin did was exactly what was needed for the war genre, a spaghetti western feel that could only be done by Tarantino or Sergio Leone, but seeing how Leone is dead, Tarantino's the self appointed guy on this masterpiece.

So let's look at the movie which I won't give away. The writing was spot on, a beautiful transition between using not one but four different languages in this movie. Not to mention this movie was set up in the classic Tarantino mold, great scenes of rich meaningful dialog and sudden shocking action.

The acting was superb!! Christopher Waltz deserves an Oscar, seriously. I don't say that often, but honestly the man should get one for this movie, he spoke every language in this movie, and delivered with such amazing touch and poise. He stole the show in a movie that everybody was amazingly impressive.

I have no problem building this movie up, because this movie is the best film I've seen all year, and probably all of next year. Quite frankly the more I think about it, this movie may crack my top films of all time, and is Quentin's best movie since "Pulp Fiction." Take it from me, watch this film. I loved it doesn't do this movie enough justice.

I watched it yesterday and I'm still blown away. Thank you Quentin from the bottom of my heart for you making this movie. You're back on top again buddy. I can't say enough for "Inglorious Basterds!"

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade download

Indiana Jones And The Last Crusade was, in my opinion, the best movie of the Indiana Jones trilogy. This movie featured the same type of humor we have become accustomed to from Jones, as well as another beautiful woman (also probably the best Indy girl) and lots of great action scenes! This movie starts off with a teenage Indy (River Phoenix) which gives us a look at an event that molds his life and character as well as his relationship with his father, Henry (Sean Connery). We also learn he is a "Junior" and that he hates to be called that.

Back as an adult, Indy's father is kidnapped and he must set out to find him. His only clues are his father's diary notes, which were mysteriously sent to him earlier that day. They lead him to Italy, where he meets the gorgeous blonde, Dr. Elsa Schneider (Alison Doody), who becomes an integral part of this story.

Once again, the grown up Indy (Harrison Ford) does battle with the Nazis. Apparently, Adolf Hitler is after the Holy Grail, which contains the blood of Christ. So Indiana and his father team up to get there first. Along the way, there is a great action scene where Jones fights a few Nazis on board a moving tank.

Overall, as I mentioned earlier, I believe this to be the best Indiana Jones movie of the three. This action movie was good long before movie studios learned to make the great CGI and special effects. It's effects were pretty good anyways but back in 1989, things just did not look as good as they can make them today. Still, highly recommended and worth your time. 9.5/10

City of God - IMDB Top 50 Movies of the decade(2000-2009)

Stunning - in every sense of the word

IMDB Rating : 8.7

Cidade de Deus seems to have a lot of praise on the IMDb boards, and with good reason too. It simply is, in my opinion, one of the best contemporary films ever made.

Based on true events and characters who live in the overlooked and poverty stricken slums in the shadows of Rio de Janiero, where life expectancy doesn't reach the 30's and drug dealers are kings.

The tale of the City of God, and its myriad of characters is told by Rocket, a young man who struggles to make something of his life, other than to wind up another victim of drugs or gang wars.

Not only are the characters in City of God absolutely fascinating, and also very endearing, but also convincingly acted by groups of young and unknown actors. The stoies are well-told, and at times, funny, and at others, brutally shocking.

The cinematic style of the film gives a nod to Tarantino, with some clever time-jumping, freeze-framing, and texts indicating another chapter of the film. In every sense, a bit of a Brazillian "Pulp Fiction" or "Goodfellas", but with its own unique flavour to it.

The City of God is a marvel, and a highly recommended film to watch, but not recommended for the over-sensitive or easily distressed.