THEMED ESSIESPICS? WHY NOT?

I seem to have had a little brainwave about this weeks entries.

It's just that I honestly just spew whatever I have watched the previous week and I realised that I had watched alot of old black and white movies this week. So I decided to call them the Black and White soiree entries. I may do this "theme" thing every once in a while. It won't be a constant thing though. I mean, where 's the fun and spontaneity in that?

Oh and just incidentally, Merry belated Christmas and Happy New Year! ^_^
Essie

BLACK AND WHITE SOIREE 1 : A TRUE CLASSIC "CITIZEN KANE"

So, the first black and white classic I want to discuss with you is one I think every cinephile should have watched at least once. And it actually sits rather well after the previous weeks entries – you remember I was griping about directors who play the lead in their own films, right? Behold Orson Welles and / in Citizen Kane. Surely one of the best films ever made, Mr. Welles wrote, directed AND played the lead in it (talk about multitasking). But I need to stress one thing though, THAT was Orson Welles – a cinematic genius. Not all of us are or ever can be Orson Welles. Just so you all know that even though I think this film and The Town were good, I am NOT contradicting myself. I am not (just for clarification) comparing Ben Affleck to Orson Welles either. I have every respect for Mr. Affleck but there is a VAST difference between his directing and his new film and Mr. Welles and the film discussed here (there are FAR too many “and”s here and my Mom (who is an English teacher) will probably murder me when she reads this, just in case you were wondering). The similarity is of course that by the time he made his debut as a director (aged 25 to be fair), Mr. Welles was an acting SENSATION (imagine that spelled out in bulbs on Broadway) in the theatre. Which kinda, you know, gives you clout and artistic freedom. Oh and money. That, however, is another story.

Citizen Kane is a man in the US of A. He is a media tycoon, a grand public figure and he has just passed away. Now, the newspapers all agree that there are many things to say about Mr. Kane, and all are fixed on finding “a new angle” on the matter. One newspaper chief hits on a true mystery: Mr. Kane’s last words. Or rather word: Rosebud. No one can make head or tail of it; it is a bona fide mystery. “Talk to everyone who ever knew him!” orders the chief. “Find this Rosebud”. So off we go along with the reporter on the job. With him, we interview his ex-wife, school friend, business partner, legal guardian, household staff and many, many more… They all have truly fascinating stories about Mr. Kane but still no one knows who or what Rosebud is… Is there a way of discovering Rosebud? Or will Mr. Kane take his secret to the grave with him?

Ok, so it doesn’t take much to realize that this is actually a very VERY good detective story. But it isn’t just that. Yes we track clues, interview people and search for Rosebud, but there is a second story, delicately poised within the story of “Rosebud”; the life of Citizen Kane. Now, the film in its day caused a grand furor for many reasons. First, the technical inventions and innovations brought by Welles to the cinema. I will not go into those very technical details – it’s hardly the point of this blog but there is AMPLE material on the internet on this subject if you are interested. Secondly, there’s the genre. The film was actually a “film noir” which came as a bit of shock in 1941 seeing as the genre hadn’t been invented yet. Thirdly, the story of Kane’s life bears marked resemblances with the life story of real-life media tycoon of the 30’s William Randolph Hurst. The resemblances were so great that Hurst tried desperately to actually stop the film from being aired so sure he was that the film was about him. Honestly, the list of resemblances is rather staggering, but the point is that at the time the film gave the feeling of almost being a documentary a “true story” kind of effect. You should watch this film because it is brilliant, way ahead of it’s time and a damn good yarn. You will leave the proverbial table replete whether you are a scholar of the trade or just an attentive viewer in search of some good quality entertainment.

P.S. interesting footnote : I was struck when watching this film by Mr. Welles’s good looks. I was therefore rather amused to find out later that Mr. Welles complained bitterly about how much he had been “made up” to play the young Mr. Kane and that he had to “live down” the fact that he never looked that good for years to come… Such, my dears, is the acting trade for you!

BLACK AND WHITE SOIREE 2 : THERE'S NO BUSINESS LIKE SHOW BUSINESS! "ALL ABOUT EVE"

There really is no business like show business… Honestly. On stage, the PERFORMANCE is sheer magic. The stars truly shine. Then, they gracefully float out of sight, the grease paint comes off, the claws come out and production assistants and runners are thrown flying through the air like toys (I can personally vouch for the last part being true metaphorically true and wouldn’t swear that it didn’t occasionally happen physically as well). Now, it is almost exactly 10 years after Mr. Welles turned the world cinema stage upside down. We are now in the hands of quadruple (counting his win with this film) Oscar® winning director Joseph L. Mankiewicz. Ok, he was a bit before our time so what else might you have heard of that he did? The Barefooted Contessa? Yeah, come on, you’ve HEARD of it even if you haven’t actually watched it. Anyway, Mr. Mankiewicz takes us backstage. Not to the backstage of his own movie (DVD’s, Extras and “Behind The Scenes” wasn’t invented in 1950) but backstage in the theatre. Come, come, the real “drama” is just beginning…

Margo Channing (Bette Davis) is a diva. There is no other way to describe her and she would tear you to pieces if you tried. She lives in that rarified atmosphere – “the art circle darling” – populated with playwrights such Lloyd Richards and his wife Karen who is “theatre by marriage”, theatre critics such as Addison DeWitt, directors such as Bill, Margo’s long suffering boyfriend. Margo is so famous and such a success everyone puts up with her “ways”. She brings in such big crowds she’s allowed to play parts of 25 year-olds even though she’s pushing 40. And she has fans. Oh hundreds of fans but none so devoted as Eve Harrington. The mousy young woman attends ALL Margo’s performances, every single one, rain or shine. Karen is touched by the young girl’s attitude and devotion. And she is very old friends with Margo so she decides to do the poor little thing a favor and introduce them. Well Eve even melts Margo’s heart and soon she is living with Margo as her personal assistant. She has so many qualities, is so efficient… She’s just the perfect assistant for Margo… Or is she?

Now, I am a movie buff. I have worked in television, I am still heavily embroiled in the media and hope to become even more so. I love everything to do with showbiz and “behind the scenes”. I, therefore, watch one heck of a lot of this sort of thing. Rarely in my life have I seen a film where the intrigue was so cleverly constructed, Plot twists fall out of thin air, Bette Davis is brilliant, Anne Baxter who plays Eve is brilliant, everyone is brilliant. Everyone, incidentally, includes Marilyn Monroe who has a small part in it. Small, but brilliant. Like a diamond. The other thing is, of course, this movie is chiefly about acting – and I don’t just mean the topic. This was 1950 people, no special effects, no 3D, no HD, no adrenalin-pumped car chases or whatever. There is, however, acting. Bucket loads of the stuff in the best quality as well… Which is very fitting seeing as the topic is, basically, us. Even in your average office, all of you will know, there is intrigue, back stabbing, plots… Ok, put it in a theatre and showbiz, glam it up, it becomes more “dramatic”, but this is basically the kind of thing that happens all the time. You witness it and partake in it every single day. This is precisely why this film is a timeless classic. You’ll know what I mean when you watch it. And you will “recognize” the story. Immediately…

P.S. Ok, I love a bit of trivia. And I want to share this little morsel with you simply to show you how true to life this film is. When this film was shot, Bette Davis was a star, Anne Baxter was just starting out. And apparently Miss Baxter actually managed to influence the authorities into nominating her as “Best Actress” along with Bette Davis. The word is, this move divided the votes and definitively prevented Bette Davis from winning an Oscar ®. So there you are. I told you the film was realistic ;)

BLACK AND WHITE SOIREE 3 : "BICYCLE THIEVES"

Ok, I may not exactly be an esteemed critic, but I am a movie buff. An “amateur academic” as it were, a student of the trade. This is why I try and vary the type of film I watch as much as I can. This is also what has prompted my new “themed week” – black and white classics. Well, to understand a story fully, you must start at its beginning and persevere to its end. Naturally, watching every single thing is impossible but I am trying to broaden the spectrum as much as possible and you all seem to have tagged along with me. (For which, incidentally, I am eternally grateful.) Anyhow, this film I watched mainly as part of an educational process. I liked it a lot and I quite see how and why it became – and is – a classic. It also is, however, tough viewing in one sense. I enjoyed it and found it fascinating for instance but it isn’t your average Saturday night entertainment. You should watch it however. I mean there is more to movies than just “entertainment”, right?
Our last film of the week is not so much the work of a great artist (well it is of course but there’s another side to it) it is an excellent showcase for Italian neorealism. This was an almost extreme form of realism, aiming at portraying life as it was and finding the beauty therein as opposed to the escapism provided by Hollywood. The storyline itself is a good example of the genre. Antonio Ricci is a poor father of two. He lives in post WW2 Italy, he is not an educated man and he has been out of work for almost a year. Just when both his hope and his meager resources are about to run out, his luck turns: He gets a job. It is not “great” but the pay is good. He must take his bicycle around town putting up posters. He must provide the bicycle himself and he simply cannot work without it. On his very first day however, his bicycle is stolen. Antonio is in the depths of despair – the police aren’t helpful; neither are his new employers. He is, basically, on his own (apart from Bruno his young son) in his quest to get his bike back. He is hungry and desperate. And he is ready to do anything, simply ANYTHING to get the bicycle back…
This is a story of economic hardship and desperation. It’s especially pertinent in modern times, the market crash, people losing jobs… And I mean the story of how poverty and desperation can push men to extremes is as old as the hills, think of Les Miserables by Victor Hugo. Same difference. Here Antonio literally puts everything on the line for a bicycle. But this is not just a bicycle of course; it is hope for his young family… Anyone who has reached the point in their lives where they must budget for themselves cannot fail to sympathize fully with the film and be moved to the roots of their boots.
Technically speaking however, the neorealists are a tough bunch to deal with. Crude filming, natural light and real locations being used... All well and good and all integral parts of most of the realist movements (from the Dogme 95 group in Denmark for instance) and I’m fine with that. I mean I like the idea that films should be similar to real life – though I personally would throw a “sometimes” in there. I LIVE a real life I don’t necessarily need to see it on TV the whole time as well. Anyway, that is not my gripe, my gripe is the actors. You see the other “signature” of the movement – and most movements like it - is the use of amateur actors. Such is the case with this cast, a reporter who stopped by the set to talk to the director, a kid who was lolling around to watch the filming… All thrown in willy nilly to form a cast. To be fair, Lamberto Maggiorani who thus made his acting debut as Antonio Ricci and went on to star in no small number of films does “warm up” as the film goes along. I knew very little about the film when I started watching it though and it took me all of five minutes to realize it was an amateur cast. Now I have boundless respect for amateur actors. I don’t even have the talent to act even as an amateur – who am I kidding ? However, even just being at your ease in front of the camera requires a certain knack, never mind actually acting. I am not saying Mr. Maggiorani didn’t posses that knack nor have I seen him in anything else he starred in, however… I don’t know… I missed watching the “acting” if that makes sense. There were a lot of times I frankly found him awkward not just him the whole cast had “their moments” and that decidedly pulls you away from the film. Which is just as well really; because the aim of the film is to make you think about poverty and inequality and the desperate situation of those who are more unfortunate than us… It certainly succeeds but see, it isn’t a “movie” either in one sense. In another sense, it’s an absolute classic. I don’t know it’s a strange experience, watch it and decide for yourselves…
P.S. I mean, I know I sound kinda lukewarm about this one but please don’t let me put you off, the film was nominated for an Oscar ® for Best Foreign film and won a BARREL LOAD of prestigious awards, it’s not that weird…

THIS COULD ACTUALLY BE “THE” FUTURE : “SCOTT PILGRIM VS. THE WORLD”

I love “feel good” movies. Come on, admit it, we all do. Sometimes, you just need it – you don’t have the mental energy or the enthusiasm to take on something heavy and / or depressing. But the trouble I find with feel good movies is that they tend to be a little too… You know… Light. I mean, finding an actual good quality film that will give you a barrel of laughs and make you feel brilliant is in fact no mean feat. Just think about it, you’ll see what I mean… This is why I say that Scott Pilgrim might JUST be the future on that count alone. Excellent quality, brilliant actors and a hilarious movie that doesn’t take itself too seriously. You’ll feel light and warm and bubbly at the end – plus the stomach cramps from laughing. No kidding folks, I am in LOVE with this movie! I mean, I loved Michael Cera anyway – you probably had that one figured. Kieran Culkin I was curious about – like a lot of people of my generation I was crazy about Macauly his older brother (shame he burnt himself out eh? I reckon he could have been great… Oh well he might do a comeback I suppose but we’ll probably never know…). Mary Elisabeth Winstead, our female lead, I had never heard of but oh well… The director? Edgar Wright, director of such British classics as Hot Fuzz and Shaun of the dead (and if you’ve never heard of them fear not; reviews are coming your way VERY soon). I should now get on to what I’m actually raving about, right? Right. Here’s the story.

Scott Pilgrim (Michael Cera) is a normal 22 year-old living in Canada. He is in a band, he lives with his gay roommate (and landlord)Wallace has a pretty average life. His love life,however, is complicated (does that sound familiar or what?). Ever since his BIG ex dumped him, he has been unable to get his love life back in gear. There is progress though; he can just about get himself to date 17 year-olds. But then Ramona breezes into his life. She is mysterious, charismatic and beautiful; Scott doesn’t stand a chance so to speak. Even better, his feelings seem to be mutual. There is, however, one problem. To get to date Ramona, Scott must defeat her seven evil exes in battle. For the quiet and mild mannered Pilgrim, this is going to be interesting…

Ok, I will not go into great detail and give the “game” away. But you may have gathered from that short summary that the film has quite a few “fantastic” elements. First, there are the special effects. Dear God, the film has some of the best / cutest special effects you EVER saw. Then there is the editing. Very quick, very funny, VERY witty. It was pretty much the same story in Hot Fuzz if you saw that one. I mean, it’s fast but not like Magnolia where your head starts to churn after a while. Still, the editing is so damn clever it has an actual presence in the film along with the special effects. You’ll get what I mean when you watch it. (Yes, even if you’re not sure what editing is….)
This film has two very obvious aims, to amuse and entertain; boy do they succeed – down to the smallest touches and details (AGAIN for those of us who saw Shaun of the Dead or Hot Fuzz). And naturally, no opportunity at getting a laugh is missed as far as the characters are concerned either; these are some of the funniest characters I have ever seen on the big screen. The straight faced and sarcastic Wallace as portrayed by Kieran Culkin was by far my favorite. (I seem to have a “thing” for side characters this week). Scott’s 17 year-old girlfriend Knives Chau – priceless. One might of course (quite rightly) say that Michael Cera is getting slightly typecast. This part is almost identical to Nick in Nick and Nora’s infinite playlist. The two films, however, could not be further apart stylistically. And besides, Cera is so damn good at the part anyway; it won’t do anyone any harm to see him do it a second time… This film is worth it…

(P.S. You may need basic knowledge of video games to “get” one of the plot twists, have someone like that handy if you don’t. It’s not rocket science either however, I mean even I figured it out without help and I’m computer-game illiterate… )

EVERYONE IS TRYING TO GET OUT OF "THE TOWN"

Have you noticed everyone’s a director these days…? Actors, producers, screenwriters, film critics… I find that slightly annoying because sometimes it works but quite often it doesn’t. I don’t mean people shouldn’t write and direct like Tarantino or someone, no, what I mean people who have acted – for instance – for years, and who suddenly decide to make a go of directing. And guess who will be playing the title role? Themselves of course! Polanski or Tarantino in side roles of their own movies, Alfred Hitchcock and his obsession about being in the film, OK, I can take that. Not the TITLE role though. It comes across as if they wrote the bloody thing for themselves personally. And that annoys me – most of the time. It was with this particular prejudice I sat down to The Town by (written – collaboratively – and directed and acted in by) Ben Affleck. I was actually getting ready to sit down and tear it apart but I actually have to hand it to the guy. OK, he may not be (and in fact isn’t) my favorite actor in Hollywood, but he CAN direct…
“The Town” is Charlestown, an area in Boston. It is infamous in the U.S.A. because it has single handedly produced the largest number of bank robbers and car thieves in the entire country. The focus of our film is one such gang. Doug MacRay (Ben Affleck) and James Coughlin (Jeremy Renner) are childhood friends. Their current area of expertise is bank robbery though they have been in and out of trouble their whole lives, especially Jim. They work for a big boss, Fergie the florist and lead pretty routine, albeit pretty unlawful lives. Until one bank job, where James insists on taking Claire Keesey, a young pretty bank manager, hostage. They let her go, but then become rather afraid she might be able to identify them when it turns out she actually lives pretty close to where they do. Doug decides to follow her and “finish her off”. Instead however, he falls in love with her. They start a relationship – Claire of course doesn’t know she’s dating one of her captors – and Doug is so deeply affected by the whole thing, he decides to change. He likes his new life and his new persona. The thing is he has to get rid of the old one first…
Now, when you look at the subject matter you can see why I didn’t have much hope… It isn’t the most original story in the world. But there are true gems in there, James for instance. He’s just a side character, true. He is violent, he is a thug. But in his own way he loves Doug as if he was his real brother, and is doggedly loyal to the bitter end, I adored the entire story line never mind the acting. FYI, I am not the only one who is impressed with James – Jeremy Renner has just been nominated for a Golden Globe for this performance. The other thing is, Mr. Affleck has learnt well from all his action movies; the robbery sequences, the chases… Phew, talk about adrenalin! Well planned, full of just the right kind of surprises… And then there’s Doug and Claire’s blossoming relationship it’s just sweet… I mean yes, it is basically the story of a “bad man” finding the “right path” and searching for “love, acceptance and redemption”. Yawn? No. There are A LOT of bad films that are made following those lines but this ain’t one of ‘em. Yes, we have to admit it is not so “deep” but exciting. Gripping, even. Perfect to kick back to on a Friday night – I really wouldn’t miss it if I were you…
By the way I forgot to mention, all you Mad Men fans - check out Mad Men’s Don Draper John Hamm as the F.B.I. agent who is hunting the gang down! Oh, oh and check out Oscar® winner Chris Cooper as Doug’s ne’r do well father.

CAUTION - NOT FOR EVERYONE'S TASTE! "MY SON, MY SON WHAT HAVE YE DONE?"

Ok, let me come clean, I am not all that familiar with the works of Werner Herzog. I saw one film of his – Rescue Dawn and“Grizzly Man”, a documentary on the life of grizzly bear activist Timothy Treadwell. This was an excellent and fascinating documentary, and all this gave me very little to go on as far as Mr. Herzog artistically is concerned. I heard that he is into “dark” films and that he is a director you either love or hate. You may have guessed by now that I was full of curiosity and enthusiasm when I read this. And that I was TRULY excited to get my grubby paws on “My Son, My Son What have ye done”. Not only did I love it (even though I was half asleep when I started watching I woke up pretty fast!) it also qualifies as the “true story” of the week (Ok, I haven’t actually been keeping tabs but they do pop up quite often). So here we are.
Now, this is based on a true crime. A young man from San Diego who was “heavily” influenced by his part as Orestus in a play murdered his mother with a sword. This is the basic story of the film. This young man (Brad) then proceeds to barricade himself into his house, claiming he has two hostages with him and demanding things such as pizza and a getaway car. We watch the proceedings and listen to the police interviewing the young man’s loved ones who try to explain how things got to this point and how, well, ever since he came back from Peru he was… Different…
I honestly don’t know how much of the rest of the film is based on actual fact. The story the film tells however, is hilarious in a very dark way, if you like that kind of thing. Brad is, from the start, a psychologically underdeveloped young man whose relationship with his mother is complicated enough within itself without the added influence of Orestus. There is then the addition of his fiancé Ingrid who is understandably baffled by the same relationship, and as time goes by, their own. Plus there is the events of Peru of course, the real place the whole thing begins. Then there are the flamingos. And God, who has taken up residence in Brad’s mother’s kitchen. When you add a samurai sword and a Greek chorus to all this, tell me honestly, how can a person not be driven to murder? And how can two cops or even a whole swat team make head or tail of it?
It sounds like absurd comedy right ? No. Dead pan. And not “in your face” either, there are so many minute details and hilarious characters, I agree with other comments I have heard / seen that it warrants a second viewing at least. I have discovered, I feel, “something” (albeit rather dark) in Werner Herzog’s style and look forward to exploring it further. Stay tuned to hear my progress ;)

YES, PEOPLE RANT ABOUT IT FOR A REASON! I GIVE YOU "RAIN MAN"

Now, come on you know this film… I mean, I was “re-visiting” the other day and it occurred to me; even if you don’t know the film you surely know its soundtrack… So many of the songs from the soundtrack are famous now in their own right and completely independent from the film! And I’m SURE you have all heard some variation of the phrase “Dustin Hoffman was BRILIIANT in Rain Man”. You may even be slightly jaded by the phrase – understandably. The fact that he actually won an Oscar ® for the performance however, should make y’all reconsider. A blast from the past (one doesn’t get more 80’s than 1988!) with multiple awards, world class acting, a VERY young Tom Cruise and a wonderfully touching story, what more do you want… I mean, really…
Charlie Babbit (Tom Cruise. He’s good in the film and a good actor but apart from Interview With A Vampire I somehow never warmed to him… He IS good looking but… I don’t know… Anyway, moving on…) is a car salesman. He is driven, egoistic and interested in no one and nothing except himself and his own well-being. Even his girlfriend is more of an ornament than a companion. His bugbear is his father, they never got on and they haven’t spoken for decades. Then, his father dies. And leaves his fortune to a mysterious “trustee”. After some digging Charlie finds out that he actually has a brother, Raymond (Dustin Hoffman). A brother he neither remembers meeting nor has heard of before. But the real sting as far is Charlie is concerned is the fact that his brother is actually a high-functioning autistic with no concept of or use for money… In desperation Charlie “kidnaps” his older brother and starts bargaining with the authorities. Half the money or they don’t get Raymond back. However, as the two brothers spend time together, Raymond, as maddening and unable to communicate as he may seem, starts “getting through” to Charlie… However, will this be enough to turn him into a “human being”?
You may think that the saga of the great capitalist who grows a heart and conscience has now grown rather old. But the thing you have to remember is that when Barry Levinson (director of Sleepers who also won an Oscar® for this film) shot it, the saga was still quite fresh. The “yuppies” had just been born and quite apart from a touching movie, there is criticisms of this err… Institution? You may say “Oh but that was in the 80’s”, well, yes, but are we so different from the yuppies now? Are we, in fact, still yuppies? Consumerism, capitalism they are both still going strong, it’s good to see “the other side” from time to time, even if Besides, forget about the rest, the film is WELL worth watching for Dustin Hoffman’s sake alone… No wonder his performance in this film keeps coming back to “haunt” us, it’s just such great acting, how can you not want to talk about it! And besides, shall I tell you something else? Charlie’s transformation (that’s hardly a spoiler come on now…), long lost brothers reuniting and a plethora of other subtle touches throughout the film simply tug at everything in us that cherishes soppiness… You’ll love it. And you’ll rant about it. Stop resisting and join the club =)

TRUE LOVE CAN COME IN ANY FORM... "M. BUTTERFLY"

Now, this film is one I had to watch for a completely separate project I was working on. But the film BOWLED ME OVER. I had high expectations of the film (David Cronenberg is by far one of my favorite directors and Jeremy Irons is… Well, Jeremy Irons) and trusted the opinion of the person who said I should watch it but I really did NOT expect it to turn out to be one of the most striking love stories I have ever watched… Add to that, although I couldn’t verify it 100%, this seems to be inspired by real events – and Madame Butterfly.

Rene Gallimard (Jeremy Irons) is a perfectly average government official working in the French consulate in Beijing. The year is 1964; China is still “the mysterious orient” albeit with slight communist tendencies but nothing too serious. Rene has a very average life. He is in accounts; he is known as more of a pen pusher than anything else, is married and attends consulate events, pretty much like everyone in the French consulate. But then, one such event introduces him to the opera and a quite extraordinary diva. A Chinese artist, Mademoiselle Song, sings excerpts from Madame Butterfly. Rene later snatches a moment to talk to her – her beauty, her voice and her independent spirit charm him. He goes to the Beijing Opera to watch her perform, finds out where she lives… And she seems to respond to his feelings in the same way… Rene will be transformed; his love for Mademoiselle Song makes him confident and strong. She has strange and rather backward views on sex, (she will not let him see her naked among other things) but her feelings are without a doubt real… However, there are many things about Song that Rene doesn’t know… One of them is that in traditional Chinese theatre female parts are principally played by men… But it is not the secret concerning Song’s body that will be Rene’s downfall…

If you thought that this seemed similar in topic to “The Crying Game”, you would be right. Indeed that is the other film the same person advised me to watch. I did watch The Crying Game when I was younger and I was deeply affected by it but not as much as M. Butterfly. Irons brilliantly portrays the straight-laces Gallimard who is first transformed by love but then transformed again as he finds out the person he loved never truly existed on more levels than one… And John Lowe (who you surely will remember as the adult emperor in The Last Emperor) is stunning as the enigmatic Song Liling. It is this sense of lies and loss, of truth and illusions, that makes the film a true rollercoaster. I mean yes the sexual tensions, the acting, the whole atmosphere of the film were all absolutely stunning but the thoughts and feeling it left me with at the very end were the things that truly bowled me over... What is real? What is illusion? Does what makes us actually happy matter more than either sometimes? A film with great depth that I most strongly recommend…

Oh and by the way, if you reckon by hinting at one of Song’s many secrets I have ruined the film for you, do not be fooled. I knew this before I started watching as well… And it still succeeded in bowling me over…

WELCOME BACK TO RICK'S - IN "CASABLANCA"

“Here’s looking at you kid”; “We’ll always have Paris”; “This could be the start of a beautiful friendship”; “Play it again Sam”… Even if you haven’t actually seen Casablanca I’m sure you’ve heard all these quotes before. It was the case with me when I first watched it. I jumped at the chance at re-visiting Rick’s the other night (funny how we all seem to end up there, no?) And frankly, before we even get down to brass tacks, if you haven’t seen it, you simply HAVE to see it. If you have seen it, see it again. It’s the kind of thing real cinema is made of…
Casablanca 1941… Port in Morocco and one of the last footholds of free France. Although, of course with the Vichy government and the Nazis breathing down their necks, it’s not as free as one might wish… Escapees from all over occupied Europe flood here and wait… What do they wait for? A rite of passage to Lisbon. From Lisbon they will head to America: Land of hope and new beginnings, far from the horrors of war. Of course rites of passage are hard to come by and sometimes the wait might take years, yes years… Luckily, there is plenty to do to occupy one’s time, and the most prestigious place to pass one’s time is Rick’s. Rick (Humphrey Bogart) runs the place, he is charismatic and mysterious. He has his own rules and rule he does, like a king. He is however, a king in exile, he can never return to his native America… That doesn’t matter though because the world comes to him… And one day a rather special part of the world comes to him: A Czech resistance fighter and hero – Victor Laszlo - trying to make it to the U.S.A. with the Nazis hot on his heels. With him, is Ilsa Lund (Ingrid Bergman), his wife. The “problem” is this is not the first time Rick and Ilsa have met… Lives are at stake and enemies are all around as the two face their past… And a very difficult decision…
This film is, in a word, breathtaking. There is a reason a film from the 40’s is still up in the imdb TOP 20. I’m not even going to begin about the acting. Bogart and Bergman, Jesus what a pair… What a couple… Bergman’s beauty and Bogart’s charisma… I am, as you know, quite loony about a lot of modern day actors but these two are true legends for a reason… And I mean, the story is quite original too, I mean yes it is a WW2 film but it’s about an aspect of the war none of us run of the mill folks know much about. (Come on, admit it, when someone says Second World War, Africa is NOT the first, second or third thing you think of). But I really REALLY don’t think you need a reason to watch Casablanca. I mean, OK it’s not AVATAR. No 3D no HD no “D” s at all except for “Delightful” . You may or may not be a fan of old black and white movies. You may simply not be familiar with them. I cannot think of a better way of getting introduced… So, step on down to Rick’s… You’ll like it there – and you’ll be back. I promise.

MILK - NOT THE KIND YOU DRINK!

Now, this one has been on my mind for a while. It’s quite a phenomenon of a film to watch – Sean Penn shines in his role as Harvey Milk, the first openly gay politician to be elected in the U.S.A. and one of the founders of the gay rights movement. The story is truly one worth telling and Sean Pen does do a brilliant job but I will say it again and again, Mickey Rourke should have got Best Actor that year. Really. Not that anyone actually listens to me and I try not to bang on about it but I think he deserved some kind of accolade for bringing himself back from near self-destruction and addiction to Oscar® nominated acting. I think the effort alone deserved an award, never mind that fact that he was brilliant. Oh well though, life goes on and so must my blog entry, so I will now reign myself in and concentrate solely on Sean Penn and Harvey Milk.
“Today” says Harvey to the young man he has picked up at a subway station and has decided to spend the night with “is my 40th birthday. And I have realized that I have achieved absolutely nothing.” He is a government official in the Water Board, he has an OK career, a life with nothing to complain about but nothing to gloat about either. So when moving to San Francisco with the young man (Scott Smith who will actually become his lifelong lover albeit with ups and downs and histrionics and tantrums) and starting all over again comes up Harvey just says “why not”. And does it. They open a camera shop in the Castro area of San Francisco all seems to be going well. But the year is 1972 and even in San Francisco (that was considered one of the more liberal cities even back then) anti-gay feeling is rife. Harvey being gay takes this very personally. And decides that the time has come to do something about it…
The rest is, of course, history. Now, we live in a world of multiculturalism and openness or so we claim but still prejudice of many kinds is rife. I mean, I’m sure you or I are not particularly prejudiced. But the thing is most of us don’t do anything to prevent prejudice spreading either… That’s why it’s important to honor and remember the people who do. And Harvey Milk was a first. He may have done “nothing” until he was 40, he then went down in history… By the way, I like that kind of story – people who “become” something later on in life, gives one hope if you see what I mean. In the same way, Beethoven didn’t finish his first composition until he was 30. Mozart, who met him, deemed him a waste of time. Haydn was the only person who realized the young man had talent and well, he was right… Good Heavens I’m off on one again but surely you see how it was vaguely connected?
The film itself is absolutely brilliant. (It did NOT win the Oscar® for Best Screenplay for nothing). It transports you back to the 70’s… And it’s not just Harvey Milk, all the characters are brilliant, the actors as well but the characters themselves – hats off to Gus van Sant, some do say that his films are slightly “themed” but this one’s a good-un. It’s really a story worth finding out about. I mean it is true, the likes of you and I don’t actively do anything to prevent prejudice – but at least we can be well informed about such things… That in itself is something too you know…

FIND OUT HOW ALL THE FUSS BEGAN : "INTERVIEW WITH A VAMPIRE"

Now, I don’t know what your stance on this matter is, but I am personally glad the whole “Edward” craze is finally subsiding. I don’t particularly dig vampires, and although Robert Pattinson is an admirable young man I don’t find him drop dead gorgeous. Well, when I say I don’t dig vampires, that isn’t strictly true – I just don’t dig those particular vampires. And before you say anything, nor am I a fan of Buffy the Vampire slayer or Angel – I don’t dig those vampires either. But there are a group of vampires that were particularly cool. Old school stuff, with real classic actors playing them. You surely remember Interview with a Vampire? Now, Old Moon, New Moon; Second Hand Moon - not my thing. Anne Rice? Interview with a Vampire Trilogy? (Yep, THREE books, Interview with a Vampire, The Vampire Lestat and Queen of the Damned) NOW you’re talking. The classic movie I want to talk about today (I assume you have at least heard of it!) is based on the first book. Rather a good adaptation I may add. There was also an adaptation of the third book, Queen of the Damned a TOTAL disaster as far as being faithful to the story is concerned… (just possibly because they skipped the second book and moved to the third because there was a sexy lady (the afore mentioned Queen of the Damned played by the late Aaliyah) in the story and they thought it would be a better crowd pleaser). Now, my view, stay away from that one, but watch Interview With A Vampire. Then read the book – there are a lot of details in the book that are overlooked in the film – an understandable situation, the book is a tad long – but I say do both. It is a classic in its own genre and I would hate you all to think Edward and Bella are the best modern fiction has to offer as far as vampires are concerned…
Louis de Pointe Du Lac (Brad Pitt by the way) was 24 in 1791. He is the owner of a large plantation but having lost both his beloved wife and newborn baby in childbirth he has lost the will to live. One night, as he is sharing this predicament with a chance drinking companion, he is faced with a bizarre choice. His companion – Lestat De Lioncourt (Tom Cruise just incidentally) is a vampire. A vampire who has not had his dinner yet and would be only too glad to kill him and put him out of his misery. However, Lestat has taken a liking to Louis; therefore he will give him a choice, for Lestat can turn Louis into a vampire. A new life as a creature of the night leaving all mortal toil behind him is tempting to Louis and he accepts. The new life is good. It is complicated, as Louis finds it almost impossible to kill people even though that means being almost starved or living off rats but it is good. Heightened senses, immortality and Claudia (a pint sized Kirsten Dunst), a little girl Lestat “turns” for Louis to assuage his loneliness… Louis and his new family are happy; the sky seems to be the limit… Unfortunately, Louis is about to discover that there are other things that don’t have limits: the darkness in Lestat’s heart and his greed…
Now, this is indeed a vampire film. It is not, however, merely a silly time filler either. Authorities back in the 90’s took this film so seriously they nominated it for not one but two Oscars ® and although the big names in the movie are admirable it wasn’t for the acting but for the score (music) and art direction. So this, my children is a “bona fide” film no moony nonsense here; new or otherwise, (sorry Mom – and any other fans - I know you love the series but they just GET ON MY NERVES!!). And the whole story itself is wonderfully constructed. It’s like a good romantic novel, will just sweep you off your feet, back to the 18th century, you will live with vampires for 200 years then be back in time to get the supper ready and the dishes washed. The acting is good, as you might well expect and the film is seriously good quality. Oh and by the way, the director of the movie is Neil Jordan, Oscar ® winning director of “The Crying Game”… We are, as you can imagine, in the domain of good quality entertainment. Your life won’t be changed by this, but then again I assume you don’t expect your life to be changed by a movie about vampires. I recommend this film to all vampire lovers despite my scathing words about the series. Think of it this way, if you like this genre so much, you might as well know a bit more about its “history” and classic examples. And who knows, after you watch it, maybe you’ll see what I mean even if you don’t agree.

TAKE A MOMENT TO CONSİDER THE "LIVES OF OTHERS"

I occasionally check out the “IMDB Top 250”. I mean, not that often every once in a while, it changes with votes that’s true but not THAT often… Anyway, I saw this little gem as number 56 in said list and my hear t literally jumped for joy. I remember being on an absolute emotional rollercoaster as I watched this film. It’s a funny little European number with quite a political sub text but I really don’t care. The human story in it is just so touching and the overall message so powerful I simply couldn’t let it slip by. The Oscar® committee certainly didn’t it won the Oscar® for Best Foreign Language film in 2006 among other prestigious accolades. Oh yes, for those of you (Mom, I’m talking to you too you know) who think watching films in any language except English is just “too odd” you will have to get over that one. Apart from the fact that you are missing out on what is in my mind at least 50% of all films that are worth watching, this particular film is in German. So there.
The Lives Of Others is the story of life in Easter Germany. It is the year 1984 and Gerd Weisler is a Captain in the Stasi – the East German police. He is loyal to the system and very dedicated to his job, to the point that his job is his entire life and world. Everything he does is tainted by his job and that’s why when he is detailed to set up a full-scale surveillance of a prominent East German playwright Gregor Dreyman he thinks of it as nothing but duty. He sets up “shop” in the playwright’s attic and is soon in possession of the intimate details of both his life and the life of his long-term partner Christa-Maria. However the more Weisler listens, the more confused he becomes. The playwright and his partner aren’t the “dissident artists” he thought they would be. Christa-Maria seems to be trying to fight off the unwanted attention of the Minister of Culture himself. And the minister seems to be intent on destroying Dreyman at all costs… Added to that, the lonely Weisler has grown fond of the couple. With his new “friends” under increasing pressure from the government and faced with the fact that he is actually no more than a pawn in a political game centered round the ministers libido Weisler is faced with a tough decision. Close his eyes and be the dutiful public servant he has always been or destroy a shining career built up over a lifetime by doing what he has a terrible feeling may actually be “the right thing”…
Now, you may see this as blatant anti-communist propaganda, and sure there is some of that thrown in. However, you will not find it hard to see past it once you sit down to watch this one. You are drawn into Weisler’s personal drama pretty quickly, you watch him transform from a caricature of a political officer to an actual human being. The braking down of habits and ideas that have surrounded him his whole lifetime, his loneliness and his discovery that he has in fact possibly been on the wrong side all along… It is also a brilliant allegory of shyness. Watching and observing “the lives of others” down to the minutest detail without being able to participate in them. Actually wanting to participate but being faced with insurmountable barriers. And change. Changing oneself and the pain that sometimes brings…
On another level, the film was actually general culture for me as well, I knew very little about East Germany and the Stasi and the film gave me ample chances to “brush up”. This is a film though, principally I feel, about the fact that there is something human that unifies all of us, even if we seem to be on completely opposite sides. And even though it may be, in some cases, painful and surprising to realize this.

POSSIBLY ONE OF THE BEST TURKISH FILMS EVER MADE : “MUSTAFA HAKKINDA HER ŞEY”

My job means that I watch many different films from many different countries. Turkey isn’t famous for its cinematic prowess as a general rule but in the last couple of years some truly world-class works have begun to emerge – take singer turned director Mahsun Kırmızıgül’s latest work “Five Minarets in New York” – there was a massive gala opening in New York and everything, it was ALL OVER the news… A couple of months back Semih Kaplanoğlu’s film “Bal” was honored at the Cannes Film Festival… That is why I decided to share with you “Mustafa Hakkında Her Şey” – translated as “Everything About Mustafa”. It’s quite a bit older than the “Five Minarets” and it’s not a showy action movie with special effects. However, anyone who wants to steer clear of flashy effects will tell you that THIS is one of the true masterpieces of Turkish cinema heralding many more great works to come…
Mustafa is, all in all, a happy man. He is the successful owner of an advertising agency. His marriage was a love match and he and his wife Ceren are very happy with their young son Kerem. At least, this is what Mustafa thinks when, on what starts off as a perfectly normal day, his wife Ceren is killed in a traffic accident. This tragic event proves a Pandora’s Box for Mustafa – his wife is killed returning to İstanbul from some distance away from the city; from a place where Mustafa had no idea she had any business. There is a young man with her in the car called Fikret that he has never seen and who is gravely injured… Mustafa must know the truth about his wife’s secret life. And he can see only one way of accomplishing this. He kidnaps Fikret out of hospital and takes them to his family’s abandoned summer house. He ties him to a chair and begins questioning him about his relationship with his wife. As the hours go by, the conversation becomes stranger and stranger. Soon, one thing becomes clear. Fikret isn’t the only one with something to confess…
This film is no less than an assorted plate of the best Turkey culturally has to offer. The director Çağan Irmak is one of the most successful Turkish directors to date. The three leading actors (whom you wouldn’t have heard of if you live outside of Turkey but Fikret Kuşkan (Mustafa), Başak Köklükaya (Ceren) and Nejat İşler (Fikret) ) are among the best of their generation and present truly world class performances. Mor ve Ötesi who are responsible for the soundtrack are among the most successful bands of modern Turkey. As for the story itself, it is very cleverly constructed and we are glued to our seats as we watch the strong and successful Mustafa slowly but surely unraveling as both his marriage and his life are destroyed. It is by no means easy viewing but a true-blue psychological thriller. And by the way, don’t worry. This is not the domain of Quentin Tarantino or Saw – no gore. Just the human mind and soul laid bare… And that is possibly more frightening than any number of monsters or missing limbs…

A CLASSIC YOU SIMPLY HAVE TO WATCH... "SLEEPERS"

I was in two minds about sharing this film on my blog. Not because I had any doubts of its quality – quite on the contrary, it’s a classic. The director Barry Levinson won an Oscar® for his other great classic “Rain Man” – that alone speaks for itself. Then there is the cast: Brad Pitt, Robert De Niro, Dustin Hoffmann, Kevin Bacon, Minnie Driver and Justin Patrick. But the subject matter is slightly tough (to put it mildly) and then there is the small problem that anyone who is ANYONE has watched this… But then again I myself only got round to it later on in life and my mother got round to it later still so, well, maybe you haven’t seen it yet either. If you haven’t you most definitely should…
Ok, this is by all accounts a true story. It’s a story that starts in the 60’s in Hell’s Kitchen, New York. Lorenzo, Michael, John and Tommy are four friends who live in the area. While priests and gangsters duel it out to draw the inhabitants to their side, the boys have a happy, normal childhood, doing what boys to best – getting up to mischief. One fateful summer’s day, however, their prank goes a step too far, landing them in juvenile detention – Wilkenson Center for a year. It is an experience that will change their lives forever, for inside head guard Sean Nokes lies in wait, waiting to give them… Let’s just say a lot more punishment then anything anyone could deserve… The boys eventually get out of detention and swear never to talk about this again but then Mr Nokes crosses their paths again, this time quite by accident. Naturally, there is no way the boys can let him just “walk on by”…
Now, this film is undoubtedly very VERY tough viewing. My mother for instance, is particularly sensitive about violence towards children – she just can’t stand to watch that kind of thing… I was cautious as I told her she should watch it and she was duly shaken but didn’t regret it… But I mean, with some of the best acting talent of our time crammed into one film, how can you possibly regret it? The story, as I said, is claimed to be true. It is based on the memoirs of Lorenzo Caracatera – memoirs that have been strongly disputed by all the institutions cited in it who swear blind that the events are fictitious. I will not comment on this because I believe it has been the subject of lawsuits so I will leave “that jazz” to the courts.
However, I will say that it is a story that will shake you, disturb you but at the same time keep you glued to your seat. I will also say that cinematically, it is by far one of the greatest films of our generation. Levinson’s directing, Dustin Hoffman and Robert De Niro the two masters, a young Brad Pitt at the height of his talents, Kevin Bacon – who makes a SUPERB bad guy as Sean Nokes. Even Jason Patrick who seems to have faded off our radars these days. Just steel your stomach and watch the film - it will change you too…

A VERY DARK COMEDY INDEED : "LIFE DURING WARTIME"

This is another one I had serious misgivings about. Well, I had misgivings about it from the beginning actually. People who saw it before told me repeatedly and with utter conviction that the film was the most boring thing they had ever seen. “Nothing happens” they told me with a certain amount of glee “good luck with that one”. I may have enjoyed the film purely out of spite but no in all honesty, it’s a good film. It’s subtle. It’s a little too close to real life for comfort. It isn’t entirely pleasant in the topics it chooses. All in all, I can see why my colleagues called it “pointless”. For me, it is full of delicate touches and dark humor – some of it truly priceless stuff.

Families. You can’t live with them and you can’t live without them. And relationships – who gets those? Life During Wartime is the story of a family. Trish is now separated from her husband Bill – a pedophile who is now in prison. She is getting ready to marry her new lover who she hopes will both make her happy and be a role model for the boys. Bill, her eldest, is off at university although he is the most traumatized by the whole event. Then there is Timmy, (who thinks his father is dead, as do the rest of the neighbors) who is preparing for his Bar Mitzvah in the middle of all this madness. Chloe, the youngest, is almost completely pickled in medication so she seems OK. Then there is Trish’s sister, Joy, bringing herself and her troubles to visit. Her husband Allen has… Problems… Then there is Helen, their other sister, who is “a writer” and who has cut all communication with the family – however Joy will search her out too… Between Timmy trying to understand whether his father is dead or alive, not to mention the exact meaning of the word “pedophile” and Joy trying to put the ghosts of her past to rest, many questions concerning forgiving, forgetting, life, sex and relationships will emerge. With mixed results.

Now , on reading the synopsis, I can quite understand if you have your doubts. I’ll address those possible doubts first. No, we are in no way made to sympathize with Bill the pedophile. He does figure in the film but the film leaves us in no doubt that what he has done is disgusting and horrible, the consequences this has is in fact kind of the point. And no, there are no “details” (the lack of details in general is in fact one of the main themes of the film).

Now for the film itself. Well, I liked the idea of dark comedy about sex. I mean, when you combine the words “sex” and “comedy” it shouldn’t necessarily equal “American Pie” (I hate the American Pie series by the way and I have been unlucky enough to be forced to watch quite a few for professional reasons so I DO know what I’m talking about). There can be a dark side to sex and dark comedy is thus born. As for including something as shocking as pedophilia (and some other stuff but I don’t want to give the plot twists away) well, one of the best ways of defeating something like that is to laugh. Maybe not “forgive and forget” as the film claims but accept and move on. But forgiveness and forgetting are discussed at length in the movie. My “comic” highlights are Trish (the multiple Emmy and Golden Globe award and nomination bedecked Allison Janney I personally remember her from JUNO but she seems to have obtained fame in a US series called The West Wing) and her interaction with her son Timmy (Dylan Riley Snyder – who should go very far indeed if this performance is anything to go by) and her new boyfriend Harvey (Michael Lerner – Oscar ® nominee for his part in Barton Fink). Joy (Shirly Henderson who I saw in “Wilbur Wants To Kill Himself” and absolutely LOVED) is the more serious half of the film but she also had her moments. Oh and there is a “remix” of “Hava nageela” (if I misspelt that please correct me) towards the end that I personally found priceless…

Yes the film is about forgiving and forgetting, yes as the director Todd Solondz says it is a “dark comedy about sex”. But the theme of the film is I think, above and beyond anything, is that if you look closely enough, you can find something truly touching and funny in the darkest corners… That’s what it made me think of anyway…

AN UNUSUAL BUT REWARDING LITTLE GEM : "NATURAL NOVEL"

Ok, it is time, yet again, to update the “literary” side of my blog. Now, I read this interesting little number a while back. Now, I love reading but since I have a 9 to 5 job to hold down it has become a bit of drag for me. Not because I enjoy it any less but because I am tired when I get back from the office and cannot for the life of me concentrate on reading anything. Natural Novel proved an exception to this rule however. Once I got into it, no matter what I did I could NOT put it down. Which was slightly bizarre, because I started it almost by accident and had no great illusions as to whether I would like it or not… Now, Natural Novel is a very VERY “modern”. It has a storyline sure, it has a beginning a middle and an ending too. Well… After a fashion.

Natural Novel is the story of a man whose life has just fallen apart. Our narrator tells of his failed marriage and his wife, who, he has just found out, is pregnant by another man. He then goes off on a tangent. Several tangents. The book is presented in chapters, the longest of them two or three pages long and they can be best described (in fact I saw the description in another review on the internet) as a series of vignettes. Each one may or may not be related to the initial topic or indeed the “vignette” that came before it. The story emerges, disappears, changes direction. Oh it develops and ends all right but in the true “modern” style the line is as far from linear as you can possibly imagine.

Now, you might think this would make a book almost impossible to read. I only started reading it because it was part of some volunteer work I was doing a while back – and had the exact same prediction. What I hadn’t factored in however, was Gospodinov’s talent. Each snippet, each vignette is a masterpiece in its own right, and besides, the style of the book dictates that one is perpetually left with the nagging curiosity as to “what comes next”. Plus, like I said the “main” story itself does actually advance you’re just never quite sure when it will start doing it. Plus, I have to say, it gives a VERY accurate picture of post communist life in Bulgaria. (I seem to have forgotten to mention this but the author of the book is Bulgarian) In fact, one of the main aims of the book seems to be the description of life. Personally, I liked the fact that we are almost in the mind of the distraught narrator – we rollercoaster along with him as his mind rambles and he jumps from one topic to another. I personally finished it in a matter of days and found it both fascinating and humorous. I also feel lucky in my discovery of Gospodinov. I strongly recommend you step into his world…

A STORY WE ALL REALLY SHOULD KNOW - THE STORY OF THE SOCIAL NETWORK!

For whatever reason, I very rarely seem to review films that are actually on in the cinemas. That is because my job dictates that I watch a large number of films a couple of months after they are in cinemas. I don’t like seeing films twice (except for the classics naturellement) and thus my blog ends up being slightly “willy nilly” and all over the place – and also largely dependant on my mood at the time. However, I will break with tradition this week and discuss something that is actually on / or was on very recently – David Fincher’s film “The Social Network”. It’s a fascinating idea of course I mean Facebook is pretty much the phenomenon that defines our generation. Even not being on it is considered a sort of statement… Naturally, Mark Zuckerberg – the youngest billionaire of all times – is a valid point of interest. And his story is interesting to say the very least…

It’s a story a lot of us know somehow but let’s run through the basics again. Mark Zuckerberg was a highly successful student at Harvard University. He is a genius computer programmer even if not the most popular student on campus. He then comes up with the idea of a social networking website or allegedly he steals the original idea from Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss we don’t know and I don’t want to comment as it was part of a very VERY large lawsuit and the film doesn’t particularly comment on it either. Suffice to say that Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg – of whom I had heard of but funnily enough never seen in anything) with the financial aid and support of his best (and only) friend Eduardo Saverin (Andrew Garfield – remember I told you about him in the Imaginarium Of Doctor Parnassus). As we all know, the whole thing was a HUGE hit and began to grow, attracting the attention of many people, among them Sean Parker (Justin Timberlake – now I don’t know which camp you’re on and I’m not a fan but credit where it’s due the guy CAN act). Sean Parker is a bit of a loose canon with great ideas, charm and charisma. Mark and he seem to be almost made for each other and Sean is very soon part of the company. There is one person he doesn’t charm however – the company’s C.F.O and main founder Eduardo. That is where things start getting… A little awkward…

Now, the film is, I think, brilliant. Then again, I’m biased – I think the director David Fincher is brilliant (Fight Club, Zodiac and Seven are among my favorite films of all times). I am also a healthy addict of Facebook so who am I to complain? The film is honest; our hero Mark Zuckerberg is by no means a “huggable” character. Jesse Eisenberg does a brilliant job of portraying the socially awkward but amazingly intelligent Zuckerberg. Plus Andrew Garfield is growing on me – kinda like a rash. This film is a very good example of why I love true stories – films about real life. The characters are not “perfect” they act emotionally; sometimes they make bad decisions… I know that these guys have achieved fame and fortune and now live lives far beyond most of our means; HOWEVER, the film is completely approachable for this reason. And this is also why it’s different from the 10 a penny “American Dream” movies out there. The film is REAL. Not just in the sense that it is a real story but emotionally real and grounded and easy to relate to. But then again there is nothing I loathe more in a film than “perfect” characters which is why a) I’m slightly biased b) 15 minutes into the film I had a broad grin all over my face and was thinking “Ok, this is gonna be interesting.

What else? Well, you would be wrong to think this film is going to be very “geeky” and “computery” and incomprehensible. Yes, Facebook is an online phenomenon but it is also a social phenomenon that has taken over the world in case you hadn’t noticed. It is about people. In this case, specifically about the people that created a website that is a concrete part of our lives… Which is why on one level, it can be said that one may consider knowing this story part of basic general culture.

A WOMAN WHO CALLS THE SHOTS - JACKIE BROWN

As I start my review, I just want to share a weird fact with you guys. Whenever I think about this film the song “Ma Baker” starts going around in my head. No idea why – no connection to the movie. The human brain is weird… Anyway, this, my dearest readers, is another Tarantino movie. One I hadn’t watched until recently. Now, I love Tarantino but this movie isn’t my favorite. It proves one point though: Even the worst Tarantino movie (I’m not saying it is the worst; it’s just that it’s the one I liked the least) is better than a lot of people’s best movies out there… Sorry guys but that’s a FACT…

OK, so who is Jackie Brown? She (Pam Grier) is a flight attendant for a tiny airlines flying between L.A. and Cabo – Mexico. She doesn’t make much money; therefore, she needs to take on a couple of extra jobs. Like acting as mule for arms dealer Ordell Robbie (Samuel L. Jackson * swoooon * ). This is all working just fine until the cops bust her. They are not after her, however – but Ordell. The problem is that Ordell has been so successful in evading them and covering his tracks (you’re dead if he so much as suspects you MIGHT talk to the cops) the police (Michael Bowen and Michael Keaton) don’t even know his name. Hence Jackie finds herself in a VERY tight spot. She must either go to jail and risk losing her already modest job for good or collaborate with the police and risk losing her life. But then Max Cherry the bail bondsman enters the picture. He is a sweet guy who falls madly in love with Jackie and with him she hatches a plan to play the police and the gangsters off against each other and walk off with A LOT of money. It’s risky. She will have to get passed Ordell’s henchman Louis (Robert De Niro) and girlfriend (well sort of) Melanie (Bridget Fonda) and of course thwart Ordell himself…

So it’s basically a heist movie. But WHAT a blast from the past. First up it’s the 90’s. People buy cassettes (are you old enough to remember cassettes? I am and realized how long it had been since I had seen one as I watched this). Then of course, no cell phones. The hair and clothes. Then, the actors. I mean, naturally, barr Samuel L. Jackson and Robert De Niro but ask yourself WHEN did you last see Pam Grier? Michael Keaton – I mean he was BEETLEJUICE for Heaven’s sake!! He appears to have tried his hand at directing and voiced over in Toy Story but when did you actually see him in something? In my case, I’m thinking years… Robert Forster was nominated for an Oscar® for this performance – but I honestly don’t remember seeing him in anything else… The film isn’t just a “brainless American flic” either – even the Berlin Film Festival nominated Mr. Tarantino for a Golden Bear. Samuel L. Jackson actually made off with a Silver Bear. And that’s only a tiny snippet of awards and nominations it received…

If you find Tarantino movies overly violent this one is good news. It isn’t as violent as his other stuff – not by a long shot. I mean sure there is violence (this IS a gangster movie you guys beef up a bit!) and sudden deaths but not in anyway that would upset… Let’s say your average cop drama viewer. And it contains all those other things that make me swoon over Mr. Tarantino’s work – a smart plotline, A LOT of excitement and witty repartee (and that last one you HAVE to admit is a rare gem in films today!)

A TRIP TO END ALL TRIPS OF ALL KINDS! "FEAR AND LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS"

Time for something a little more “hard hitting”. We centered around the emotional traumas of war, the 60’s and even the 20’s last week, but this week , I’m going for the “tough stuff”. Quentin Tarantino will feature heavily in the proceedings but before we get to him, I want to discuss another of my favorite directors. Terry Gilliam. Now, to say I love Monty Python would rank among the great understatements of the century… Terry Gilliam is the one in the band who did the animations. A graphic artist by trade he did those beautiful surreal animations that sort of wound out of one absurd shape into another without so much as a “by your leave” leaving the viewer completely befuddled as to where he began in the first place… In a strange way, I feel his work as a director has a lot of the same surreal quality… Not the photography but the storytelling… Did you watch Tideland? Or The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus? Did you like either? If you said yes, you will LOVE Fear and Loathing…
Meet Raoul Duke (Johnny Depp). He was a newspaper reporter somewhere down the line. He still is, thanks to his large Samoan “attorney” Dr Gonzo (Benicio Del Toro). Dr. Gonzo and Duke do a lot of traveling together. They also get into A LOT of serious trouble together. They are usually loaded on every kind of drink and drug imaginable, and they surrender to the drugs, let it course through their bodies and take them wherever the f.ck it feels like. Most of these adventures are fuelled by Duke’s sporadic work as a journalist. And this work sends our weird duo to Las Vegas one fine morning. Mayhem being both Las Vegas’s and Duke and Gonzo’s middle names, the combination is… Highly combustible…
Ok, think of the Big Lebowski. It’s the same kind of film. It is most definitely not suitable for kids. And I hear some of you tut – tutting at the idea of a comedy about drugs saying “maybe we’ll give this one a miss”. No. Do NOT give this one a miss. As far as comedy is concerned, Mr. Gilliam’s talent as a director and Mr. Depp’s acting skills alone make for an unforgettable experience. Raoul Duke, his mannerisms, his way of speech… No wonder the character became a classic… Plus, guest appearances are abundant – Cameron Diaz, Toby Maguire, Christina Ricci… The quality of acting is breath-taking… You may have slight trouble distinguishing a beginning and an end – you would not be wrong. The film however, has content. You will be surprised to find out it even has a political message. Duke harks back to the 60’s when flower power ruled, when the world WAS going to become filled with peace and harmony… He criticizes America of the 80’s and what it became (Gilliam is the only American python so it’s appropriate really. Let’s not forget however that this was actually adapted from a short story by Hunter Tompson but I am yet to read that one…) Duke and Gonzo are degenerates – they are also caricatures… Maybe what Gilliam (and Tompson) are looking for is present with its absence so to speak… You really should watch and give it a good thought… I mean even the dudes at Cannes thought Mr. Gilliam could be worth a Golden Palm (he was nominated didn’t win it thought)Even if you don’t come up with any philosophical or political conclusions, I guarantee you one heck of a ride…

FOUR MEMORABLE STORIES FROM "FOUR ROOMS" -

Now this is an interesting project. It’s one of those things you wish you had thought of yourself, you know? I’ll give you the tagline for the film: “Twelve outrageous guests. Four scandalous requests. And one lone bellhop, on his first day on the job, who's in for the wildest New Year's Eve of his life.” Set in a hotel, an old rambling hotel – so down on its luck that the entire staff is down to just the manager and the bellhop – four rooms tells the story of, well you got it… Four rooms. Now, each “room” is directed by a different director and is about 20 – odd minutes long. The writer /directors are Allison Anderson, Alexandre Rockwell, Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino.
Ted the bellhop (Tim Roth) is stuck at work on New Year’s Eve. The hotel isn’t exactly what you might call full, but there are quite a few guests (twelve in total) knocking around… They are possibly the last handful of guests the hotel may have, so he runs hither and thither to assist and serve… However, not everything will quite go his way… There is a group of very strange ladies (among whom we can spy Madonna) gathering in the honeymoon suite. A rather rowdy couple in 409 who will prove more trouble than they first seem to be. A gangster (Antonio Banderas) and his wife who desperately need a babysitter for their two rather spoilt children will squarely land on Ted in 309 and just as he is ready to pack the whole thing in and leave, the famous film star in the penthouse (ironically played by Tarantino himself) rings with a rather bizarre list of requests.
Now, I love the idea of this film – and it’s really funny in bits, especially the Rodriguez and Tarantino segments (the gangster and the star in the penthouse. By the way, don’t you love the way Tarantino casts himself in his earlier films? Does anyone know why he stopped doing that?) . But, without presuming to be an expert, I may well have done a few things differently. For instance, the four stories DO NOT interact at all if you don’t count Ted. Except once – and even that was, I felt, a slight push. I kind of like the Balzac approach, you know, he will be talking about a character in a novel and just then another character from another novel will come walking by… Not necessarily for any reason in the plot, just as a cameo as it were. They could at least have done that in my opinion – this result is just too cut off… Tim Roth is VERY good to give him his due. However, there were times where I could swear that he was just trying to be Basil Fawlty from Fawlty Towers and only just failing (you’ve heard of Basil Fawlty right? John Cleese’s character from the British sitcom? Oh never mind, just click here) Thirdly, well, not all the stories were, in my view, that interesting. I mean, the first one is well and good; but I wouldn’t have persisted with the rest if I didn’t know that a Tarantino performance was coming up in the end… However, persist I did, and ended up positively howling with laughter in bits and remembering why it was that I adored Mr. Tarantino. I have also developed a healthy interest in Mr. Rodriguez and will proceed to dig a film of his out of my “to watch” pile for next week… You’re going to have to be patient for that one though ;)

"ADAPTATION" OF A LIFETIME!

Those of you who have made my humble blog a place of regular visit may have noticed I enjoy writing. I only wish I could find more time to do it in! However, as someone who LOVES movies and loves writing, when I saw Adaptation – a film about writing – I had to see it. Technically, it was the second time I saw it, but the first time was years ago and it doesn’t seem to have made much of an impression on me (I couldn’t remember a thing about it) although God knows why… It’s a truly magnificent film on almost all counts…

Now, this film is based on true events. But please put an emphasis on “based”. Although there no doubt are real events it is based on, the film is by and large fictionalized by its scriptwriter Charlie Kauffman. The film is about – Charlie Kaufman. After gaining critical acclaim with Being John Malkovich, Charlie Kaufman (played here by Nicolas Cage. Funny, didn’t we see more of him in the past? Where is he now?) receives another commission. He is to adapt a book – The Orchid Thief by Susan Orlean (the acting legend Meryl Streep) – to screen. Doesn’t sound like a challenge for a professional scriptwriter, no? Well, yes in this case. Try as he might, Charlie can’t adapt the book; meanwhile, his infuriatingly outgoing and smooth twin brother Donald (also Nicolas Cage) decides to take up screenwriting as well and plunges ahead. Between his personal life that is crumbling at the edges due to Charlie’s timidity and pressure from the producers Charlie, begins to become slightly obsessed with Susan Orlean and the real life character of her book John LaRoche (Chris Cooper who won an Oscar ® for his performance in the film). As he struggles with the script and follows his obsession – with help from his twin brother Donald – he will make many discoveries… A lot of self-discovery but a couple of scandals as well…

Now, between Chris Cooper, Meryl Streep and Nicolas Cage, one isn’t surprised to come across some of the best acting of our times… Spike Jonze is well known as a director anyway, I’m not going to go on and on about him… And with a scriptwriter like Kaufman (Yes you DO know him actually. He wrote stuff like Eternal Sunshine on the Spotless Mind and Being John Malkovich) it is one HELL of a yarn… But it is interesting on another level as well – I mean this is a master talking about his trade. He even brings in one of the great academics in the field of screenwriting – John McKee in for a short spurt. But it’s not bookish in case you’re wondering; it’s HILARIOUS to start with. And then it takes a surprise turn and becomes INCREDIBLY exciting… It provides plenty of laughs, plenty of food for thought… All in all very similar to a good meal executed by the best of the profession for every course… And what about the reality of it? Well, just to start with Charlie Kaufman DOES NOT have a twin brother called Donald. And although the book The Orchid Thief does exist and Kaufman was supposed to adapt it, he couldn’t exactly – the book was too void of structure so he wrote his own frustrations in, and lo and behold “Adaptation” was born – bringing a trail of BAFTAs, Golden Globes, a Silver Bear and a Golden Bear nomination at the Berlin Film Festival for Spkie Jonze and much, much more… You will not be disappointed…

KEEP THE TISSUES HANDY... IT'S TIME FOR "THE KITE RUNNER"

I have been bitterly BITTERLY neglecting the “literature” side of this little fellow… This is why my update this week will be based mainly around books – there will even be an actual book in it! But before that, let’s cast our eyes over this little gem. Now I had read Khalid Husseini’s absolutely marvelous work “The Kite Runner” a while back – though why I never put it on the blog escapes me – and loved it. It made perfect sense that such a touching and emotionally rich work should be adapted to the big screen. The only surprise is that I had never actually heard of it until I was sheltering from the rain in a foreign country in a large bookstore. I didn’t speak the language; however, that DVD cover could have only meant one thing… A quick scan of the credit block behind (always has to contain the original name you see) confirmed my suspicion. And that is how me, my mother and my grandmother ended up watching said film a couple of weeks later… I am happy to let you know THIS is an adaptation that worked out at any rate…
I suppose I should give you a quick scan of the story. Luckily, the film adaptation is very faithful to the actual book, so if you have read the book, you can watch it in peace… Now, we are transported back to Afghanistan in the late 70’s. Before all the troubles began, before the Taliban, even before the Soviets… Amir is a little boy of around 10. His mother died when she was giving birth to him and he is being brought up by his father, a rich and powerful man who believes in “tough love” and all other things “manly”. Amir is a sensitive soul –even a bit of an artist, he tries to write, does not like playing rough with the other kids. He even gets pushed around a bit but his best friend Hassan, who is the son of his father’s servant Ali, always comes to his rescue, much to his father’s disgust… Their peaceful existence will be disrupted by two events… One that bitterly fractures the two children’s friendship (which I will leave you to discover in detail) and a second that threatens their very existence: The Soviet invasion. Amir’s father is known – renowned – for hating communists so he takes his son and everything he can realistically carry and leaves for a new beginning in the new world – America. The two will get there and even have their fresh start but then one day, the past contacts the now fully grown Amir on the phone… “There is a way to be good again” says the voice… “You need to come back”…
Approach this film with PLENTY of tissues. No matter where you look in this film, you will find a deep and real emotion that touches your soul. Add to that it's Oscar nominated soundtrack and you have nowhere to hide basically... The day to day life in Afghanistan before the troubles began. The relationship between Amir and his father – who often fluctuates between being proud of his son and wanting to give him a firm shake to “man him up”. I won’t even begin on Hassan and Amir. The film gets its name from a tradition of the area that I honestly didn’t know about before – kite tournaments. It’s a big thing apparently, every year the children of the area get together with carefully and lovingly prepared kites… The strings are reinforced with broken glass and glue paste. The aim is to use various tricks to cut the strings of the other kites and be the last kite standing. Kite running is the act of catching the kite that has been cut – finders, keepers. In our case, Amir being the master of the house, Hassan is the kite “runner” and the best in town too… Another fair warning I should give you is that you will find this film tough viewing on some counts – and there are many possible “counts”… A modern classic all the same though – not to be missed…

THE PLACE TO GO WHEN YOU GET THE MEAN REDS! "BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY’S" – THE MOVIE!

If you recall, I have actually reviewed the book this is adapted from on the blog (click here!). I was dubious as to whether I should or shouldn’t put it here a second time but then I watched the film and realized something: They are literally two different works of art! I didn’t know what to make of this discovery (not that it’s anything too extremely new for anyone further immersed in the cinema than myself of course). Honestly, if Audrey Hepburn wasn’t such a DELIGHTFUL, no scratch that, PHENOMENAL Holly Golightly I would write the film down as a “disappointing Hollywood makeover”. As it is, well, the whole thing is based on a novella – not even a book – and OK artistic license is an acceptable thing but still… There is such a thing as too much of a good thing: S
The story is basically the same as the book. A young writer called Paul Varjak, his neighbor the inimitable Holly Golightly and her crazy life and her nameless cat (poor nameless slob). (The cat is second only to Audrey Hepburn in the film as far as artistic achievement is concerned in my humble opinion). ..
There are, however “little” additions and “subtractions” from the film. Here, Paul Varjak is the “kept man” of a rich and married decorator lady (in the novel, he’s just a starving writer). Naturally, the fact that he is torn between his true love, Holly and his “patron” make a nice Hollywoody twist but I found it slightly pointless and stale. A lot of the action is thus based around the patron – Ok, I get that it has to be “tied in” and it makes it very convenient; HOWEVER, there is nothing at all forcing them to squeeze the film into a shorter timeline, they might have let it flow a tiny bit longer… What else? Mag Wildwood is almost completely axed from the film (she has one short appearance and that’s it). Joe Bell’s bar is axed. Oh and just incidentally, the end of the story is completely and utterly turned on its head. I need to check and see whether Mr. Capote was alive at the time this was filmed (my common sense tells me probably not) but I would be fascinated to find out what he made of this…
“Then why on earth” I hear you exclaim”are you reviewing this in the first place? I thought we had agreed you only wrote about things you liked…” The thing is, I did like it. It’s great. It’s sweet. It’s worth watching for Audrey Hepburn and the cat alone(The film was nominated for 3 Oscars one of which was Best Actress so I'm not alone in thinking this. The other two nominations were Art Direction and Writing. It won a further 2 Oscars - Best Song and Best Music). If you haven’t read the book, you will LOVE it and think I’m mad. It’s a lovely, quintessentially 60’s Hollywood film. (Infact the director, Blake Edwards is also someone you probably actually know. If the name doesn't seem familiar he directed most of the Pink Panther films!) However, if you read the book and enjoyed it, just… Think of it as a different work of art all together… Then you should be all right…

THE GREAT GATSBY

In my neighborhood, conveniently close to my house there is a bookstore. In that bookstore there is a section where they sell vey reasonably priced modern classics that I often haven’t read before. It’s a pretty small section, the bookstore is dedicated to the “newest thing” more often than not but I tend to check it regularly for bargains. On one such occasion I came back beaming armed with two such modern classics. One of them is the above mentioned Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald. I wolfed the book down in a matter of two days (to give it it’s due my edition is only a 172 pages long). By the time I had got through it I felt as if I had been hit by a bus…
Nick Carraway is a rather reserved young man living in Long Island. He is a realist with feet firmly planted on the ground, leading a very “normal” life and going down to work in the city every day. Next to his modest home is a stately mansion, filled with all the riches a man could desire. It is the setting of lavish parties everyone who is everyone goes to – regardless of whether they were invited or not. The owner of this house is Gatsby. Jay Gatsby. He is something of a man of legend, no one quite knows his origins or his business, all they know is that he is ridiculously rich, mysterious and never drinks at his own parties… He does however, have a secret. A secret Nick Carraway will become privy to, entangled in and changed by…
I was absolutely bowled over by this book… A lot of people, I have been surprised to find out, have a slight prejudice towards Fitzgerald. My grandfather who is a literature professor benignly said “Well, light fiction is also necessary of course”. My grandmother refused to read it point blank – deemed it a waste of time. However I think this is a grave misjudgment of the novel. You will have to get to the end to truly understand the deep and tragic message underlying the whole novel; basically it is dreams, it is real life, it is pursuing a dream at all costs and truly fighting for it… Nick Carraway seemed rather constipated to me all through the novel if you will. I got so aggravated with him I wanted to give him a good shake. I know see that he had to be that way – there is a Carraway and a Gatsby in all of us, the question is of course which one gets the upper hand…
I read a little (a very little mind you) about Fitzgerald’s own life after that… He died tragically young at 46 – and I am sure he had a lot more to offer us. And his beloved wife Zelda was prone to mental breakdowns that shook their marriage and them both individually… I can’t help thinking Fitzgerald’s battle between dreams and real life is in fact heavily influenced by this… I know I am being rather tiresomely underhand about the whole thing but I really want you to unravel Gatsby’s secrets for yourself. Let it suffice to say that even those of us with the teeniest hint of a dreamer hidden in our souls will find a little piece of ourselves in this novel… And be truly moved by it…

MORE CHANGES!

Howdy folks!

First of all, I appologise for my seemingly declining number of entries (I am well aware of the fact that I started out at four a week). It has been a busy time for me and I will make it up to you, things are starting to slow down over where I am... More films (greater numbers of them) coming your way soon.

Secondly, do check out that handy little "Labels" section on the right! It'll help you search for films by categories. Most of the titles are pretty self explanatory - "festival /award winner" is where I have grouped those who got attention from the prestigious festivals or awards - could be Grammys or Sundance. "Classic actors" are films with the "big names" of Hollywood in it. I did think of putting individual names but I don't want to have favorites (hehe) and secondly there aren't enough actors (or actresses even) with more than one or two films it would look "untidy"... I will be playing around with this, adding new categories and the like - do let me know if you think I've missed any!

much love and have a great weekend!
Essie

THERE IS ONE IN ALL OF US - COME "WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE"

We all read this one right? I don’t think it’s that old as a book – my Mom doesn’t remember it - but I most definitely had a copy and I LOVED it… I was intrigued when I heard it was being adapted to film as well – the book is only about 15 – 20 pages long if I remember correctly! However with Oscar® nominated director Spike Jonze at the helm (director of “Adaptation” and the rather surreal classic “Being John Malkovich”) I was excited aswell. Then I saw the trailer and was desperate to watch it. Then I finally got my grubby paws on the film. I’m in love with it. I’ll go as far as saying I shed a little itty-bitty tear at the end…

Meet Max. He’s I would say around 10, he lives with his mother and older sister. He’s a bit of a loner and tends to throw tantrums and “act up” from time to time. He also has a very active imagination to make up for the loneliness… One day he runs away from home (his mother has a new boyfriend and his father is not around – I seem to have assumed the father was dead but there are no real indications in that direction) . Well, he runs and runs and runs, jumps into a little boat and crosses oceans and arrives at a mysterious island. This island is inhabited by monsters – big huge monsters with fur and horns and tails… They usually eat people but they don’t eat Max, in fact they end up making him their king… Max is a good king for a while and makes his subjects very happy. He becomes particularly close to one of the monsters – Carol (Carol’s a boy by the way – don’t question it, so was “Winne” the Pooh) the others are nice too though… However as we all know with that with great power comes responsibility and soon Max’s kingdom starts to unravel…

This categorically the MOST touching film I have ever watched – almost anyway… It is a children’s book it’s adapted from of course but I have a hard time classifying it as “fit for the whole family” – I mean you CAN show this to the little ones but a lot of subtleties of the film will be lost on the younger audiences… There is Judith and Ira – a monster couple, Alexander who no one ever listens to and who is the smallest, then Carol who tends to break things when he’s upset and who is pining for his “special friend” K.W (a girl in case you’re getting confused). In case my explanation was ambiguous this is very obviously a land of Max’s imagining – and the little details (I’ll leave you to discover them yourself) are endearing. The way Max and Carol learn to cope with life, the way they both “grow up”… And the cast doing the voiceovers is ASTOUNDING : James Gandolfini is Carol (I racked my brains as to who the very familiar voice was all through the film and had to check imdb), Lauren Ambrose (from Six Feet Under) is K.W. , Forest Whitaker is Ira and Oscar® winning actor Chris Cooper is another one of the monsters I didn’t mention (Douglas for those who watch – by the way don’t you ADORE their names). This is the story of a very imaginative little boy (The talented Max Records – who is 12 in the movie apparently – I got the age right!) thrashing out life and the whole “growing up” thing. Highly recommended to anyone with an imagination…

NOT AN AVERAGE FLOWER - MAGNOLIA

Magnolia is just “one of those films”. It has to be actually seen to be understood. “You have to have been there.” I watched it – and loved it - which was good, because I sat down to it with high hopes of adding it to my blog. (It’s so disappointing when you sit down to a film and go “Oooh, now, I wonder if this will make it to the blog?” and then fall asleep half way through…) I have decided long ago that I will only add the films I myself enjoyed – that was the point of the website. There are of course a lot of films I watch and get bored witless – I do watch films for a living you know – but this was never the point. I seem, however, to be getting a little off topic. Let’s get back to Magnolia and the critique thereof…

Now, what of the story? This is a story about choices and life, and how we are all a lot more connected than we might first think… Earl Partrdige (Jason Robards) is dying of cancer. His young wife Claudia (Julianne Moore) and Phil (Philip Seymour Hoffman) are caring for him. Earl’s dying wish is to make contact with his estranged son, Jack (Tom Cruise). Jack however, is now a self-help guru and wants nothing to do with his father… Jimmy Gator – a TV host - is also dying of cancer… He has not led a model life and wants to reconcile with his daughter before it’s too late. His daughter is a depressed cocaine addict and wants nothing to do with her father. In the meanwhile, the current and past child prodigies of Gator’s TV show are both facing battles of their own…

If that sounds complicated it is a bit. But unconnected ? No. This is a supremely intelligent film about life, the choices we make and how much the “little” things count… There are many scenes that will move you to the marrow of your bones and many that will fascinate you – but the whole story is so cleverly woven I couldn’t possibly “take a piece out” to show to you without “knocking the rest over”…Technically speaking it’s a very fast paced film. The story goes quickly from time to time and so does the editing. I’m kinda used to this kind of thing and it was ok but you might find it a touch difficult to follow at first, so choose a calm day for it. Another thing : The cast. I mean, who isn’t in the film?! Tom Cruise, Philip Seymour-Hoffman, Julianne Moore, double Oscar®winner Jason Robards, William H. Macey… And the film is an Oscar ® nominee to boot – Best Original Screenplay, Best Muisc and Best Actor in a Supporting Role for Tom Cruise. Lastly, please don’t let the fact that the film is three hours long “upset” you. I would like to remind you at this point that “The Godfather” is just as long and an absolute and utter cult classic ;)

IT'S CLASSICS TIME! "CHINATOWN"

Now, I make no pretences at being a big cinema connoisseur as you all know. There is a lot in the world of film I have yet to explore, a lot of great directors I have yet to “re-discover”. Roman Polanski was one of them. Now I have heard a lot about him – well haven’t we all – and a few of my colleagues (especially one with a six year-old daughter – you know why I specified this btw, right? If not just Google the guy.) say that they are so prejudiced and disgusted by what they have heard that they would never watch his films. That it would turn their stomach. Maybe you share this opinion, I honestly don’t know. I personally have, over the years, somehow managed to separate the artistic side of someone and the “personal” side. What I mean is, there are several actors, directors, writers who I dislike personally (well Jesus, when I say personally – you get what I mean, right?) whose works I thoroughly enjoy. Take Wagner for instance. A thoroughly unpleasant and arrogant man by all accounts but did that stop him being a great composer? Same difference here. And no matter what you may or may not think of him, Mr. Polanski is without a doubt, one GREAT director. I am looking forward to getting my grubby paws on more of his work. In the meanwhile, however, welcome to Chinatown…
Now, our hero is J.J. Gittes (a mind-blowingly young Jack Nicholson. I won’t go as far as saying he hasn’t aged well but he was A LOOKER when he was younger, no?). Mr. Gittes is a private investigator. Unfaithful spouses are his main bread and butter and he thinks very little of the whole event when a woman claiming to be the wife of Hollis Mulwray one of the senior officials on the Water and Energy Board of L.A. comes to him, asking for proof her husband is unfaithful. Mr. Gittes does what he does best, and obtains photos of the gentleman with a young woman – not actually risqué but intimate. These leak to the press, there is a SCANDAL. Mr. Gittes is ok with this – it’s just publicity for him. So imagine his shock when he enters his office and comes face to face with the REAL Mrs. Mulwray (Faye Dunaway) absolutely irate and threatening to drag him through the courts… Now Mr. Gettys may have few principals in his line work but being made a fool of is a MAJOR dislike. So he starts investigating what on earth really happened. He will find himself in the middle of intrigue and scandal on a national basis. He will also uncover a rather horrible secret of a very personal nature…
This film, I have to say, is not for the faint hearted or faint stomached. You won’t “get” what I mean until you reach the end (and the film is two hours long so if you get that far, you will undoubtedly watch the end) and by that time, it will be “too late”. I mean it starts off (if you can with a clear conscience call 90 minutes of a film “starts off” – I evidently can! =)) as your typical whodunit from the 60’s. Charismatic hero with a slightly shady past, beautiful damsels in distress, secrets, intrigue… I was amused to note Mr. Polanski actually cast himself as a “mobster” (if you watched and are unsure, he’s the one who cuts Jack Nicholson’s nose). Then, suddenly, the film derails into something else. Nothing “psychedelic” but well, disturbing… Some might say “what did you expect from a guy like that” and carry on being prejudiced. Personally, I admire a director that can twist the plot like that at the end. Admittedly, the direction he twisted it in was not actually “pleasant” but hand on heart, I never expected it. Never saw it coming. And, for those of you to whom this matters (my dear Mother is one of them) no, it most certainly does NOT have a happy ending. It starts of as a whodunit and ends in a film noir in fact – a successful yet slightly disturbing combination… Not to mention the fact that the film actually won an Oscar for Best Screenplay (and 10 nominations from everything from Best Director to Best Sound)
And what of the title, Chinatown? Well, although the film ends in Chinatown, Chinatown itself features very VERY little in the film physically; it is very present though, despite that. It is more of a symbol: It looms all through the film reminding us that life is in fact very unfair, that the good and innocent do not always triumph and the baddies WILL get away with it if they have the means and the connections. That’s why the last line of the film has become something of a movie classic “Come on Jake, this is Chinatown…” I understand completely if this brand of realism is not something you want to think about on the precious evening you have to yourself or your weekend – so be warned… None the less, the film deserves respect, NO two ways about it.

ÜÇ MAYMUN / THREE MONKEYS

Now, I am fully aware that the film I am about to review is a supremely “niche” affair. This is a Turkish film by one of the most famous Turkish directors Nuri Bilge Ceylan. Now, as a person I honestly don’t know the guy. As a director one either loves or hates him. Well such is the case for most of his tribe – he’s a minimalist. Now don’t get scared by terminology, you know the kind of film I mean : Minimal dialogue, minimal camera action, minimal special effects if any. Editing is merely a means to go from one scene to another, in short there is very little of a lot of things to the point that it’s surprising there is a “resulting film” at all. Add to that the fact that in quite a few of these films symbolism features quite heavily and the resulting concoction can prove “unwatchable” for a lot of people. I sympathize: I am one of these people. Most of the time. I am also open to change and new information which is mainly why I try my best to attend seminars, classes and the like concerning different areas of the cinema it was during one of these classes that I was introduced to a novel way of looking at the film. Now, I am VERY far from being an instant convert to minimalist cinema but after being introduced a new point of view to the whole affair I decided to try and express my emotions on the matter to you all and see if I could get you to give a go as well.

The story is that of a driver, a modest man and the personal driver of a local politician. One night the above – mentioned local politician has a traffic accident, killing a pedestrian. The elections are approaching and he doesn’t want to “dirty his name” so he asks the driver to take the fall for him. He will pay good money, take care of his wife and son… The driver is a poor man – and accepts. Life in his little home goes on pretty much as usual until his son fails his university entrance exams. Ismail – his son – doesn’t want to re-study he wants to buy a car and be a shuttle driver for a local school. Since the mother doesn’t work and the father’s employer is their only means of support she goes to him for the money even though she’s pretty sure her husband would not approve. The local politician will not only give her the money but professes that he will “do anything for her”. This will have devastating results on each member of the small family…

Now, the thing to bear in mind while watching this film is that it is the story and the story-telling that is in the foreground here. Nothing more, nothing less. Even the story itself is not that original. That’s why I only recommend this film for those of us who actually enjoy the technicalities of a film (and like I said I am not necessarily one of those people!) What is original – and what jars about this film – is the fact that a lot of the theoretically key moments or “big events” of the film are actually shown on screen. We are led up to them and then we focus on the results, leaving the larger part of the work to our imaginations. The other thing I like about minimalist cinema – or rather the examples of minimalist cinema I have actually liked – is the closeness to real life and real people. The story, the surroundings the acting… For all the world you are in a lower middle class household in Turkey not a film set. It gives one the spooky feeling of eavesdropping – this is a little odd but also connects with the voyeur that exists in all of us. Admittedly, being a “new convert” I still find some of the sequences “too long”. Especially since “action” as we are used to is at a minimum and the whole affair is above all psychological. However, if you feel like something different, this is a good quality example – with , I hasten to add, no symbolism. I also want to add that the guy didn't get chosen best director at the Cannes film festival for nothing... Recommended for the adventurous…