"Serenity" (2005) - Movie Classics

Having heard so much about the “Firefly” television series I immersed into it over couple of days. Here is quick history lesson on this cult following. This series like several forgotten good ones got cancelled after one season due to ratings I suppose. The people with sincere following began lot of buzz of this atrocity and tried several attempts to reinstate it without any success. Though they managed to create enough word of mouth publicity that Universal Studios green lit the film as the sequel to the series. While I did like the TV series which in itself has abundant of uniqueness in ambience and characterization, “Serenity” distinguishes as a much powerful, entertaining and a moving science fiction film.

Writer/Director Joss Whedon explains how we humans explored other solar systems with bunch of planets and moon due to necessity and making them inhabitable as we enter this world. The Alliance became the governing body providing central administration of the civilization. There was of course the opposition to this administration, the Independents. War between them resulted in a hard and tragic end for the Independents leaving them to fend in space and become scavengers. One such is Captain Malcolm Reynolds played with a timing brilliance and panache by Nathan Fillion. Mal has managed to fly high with his ship Serenity and other crew members.

As the series ended, it had Mal’s appetite for sexual tension Bonafide Companion (meaning high class call girl) Inara (Morena Baccarin) leaving the ship, a Shepherd Derrial Book (Ron Glass), pilot Wash (Alan Tudyk), his warrior wife and second in command Zoe (Gina Torres), a rather moronic muscle Jane (Adam Baldwin), a skillful mechanic Kaylee (Jewel Staite), her love interest and a doctor on a run from Alliance is Simon (Sean Maher) as he rescued his unpredictable and telepathic sister River (Summer Glau) from Alliance’s mind experiments over her. We are never really sure what caused River to be like this but we always know that she is nothing but trouble.

The film begins with the Operative (Chiwetel Ejiofor) an absolute delightful addition as the complex villain for Mal. Much like the mystical and dangerous bounty hunter Jubal Early (Richard Brooks) in the series finale, the Operative is philosophical and carries the role of a Samurai (with the obvious use of his sword as his prime weapon). Acceptance is such a beauty in human existence. Acceptance of oneself regardless of their nature is what makes a person at peace despite the horror and pain he or she may cause on others. The Operative is the man assigned by Alliance to find River and kill her. His character is highly successful in most parts in the film.

Despite a low budget the film has abundant great visuals. The titular ship gets a thorough make over in look and feel from the TV series. The first entry into the vessel through the cockpit and Mal walking through giving a short tour talking with the crew members puts a physical believability for this ship. Wash and Zoe are still married and Mal is still hiding his feelings for Inara and he is on for a job. Having provided home and hideaway for Simon and his sister, Mal takes River on a job in the lieu of getting aware of her psychic and ass kicking abilities. That job in itself is a high octane chase.

The film has many other spectacular chases, stunts and moments of surprise. It has all these futuristic people being so human and so unpredictable. The flair of Mal has been his impulse and the quick thinking in shooting people. Take the encounter he has with the Operative who comes with an utmost respect and truce to settle this capture of River. Mal being Mal does his thing and in the end it is so evident that the Operative can kill Mal without any hesitation and yet Mal survives. Of course Inara helps him but that makes us choose Mal to be our hero and develop a thorough respect for the Operative.

The Alliance though claimed as this authoritative administration has managed to run this civilization sans the carnal and blood seeking cannibals Reavers for most part peacefully. As with any political administration Mal is against them and having fought in the war the feeling is only obvious. At the end of the war he has given up any hold on remote sense of clinging on to a value and rides the space chaotically and as pure as a scavenger might. On the other hand is the Operative, quite smooth in his lethality and a firm believer in the intention of Alliance’s need to have a sin free world. The film never falters in distinguishing these two beings. Both are charming, elegant and capable.

I loved “Serenity” for several reasons. One for being the most entertaining science fiction film and second for having no reservation towards obligatory scenes. The love interests never hinders the movie and is there for a reason. The movie has some best lines. Especially a great one from the pilot Wash as he flies through the war zone. More than a good film “Serenity” is a memorable one as it ends. We earn for more. In spite of the TV series being a good show, I could not see how it cultivated such a fandom to follow. I think they would have felt something like what I felt in the end of “Serenity”, the need for this adventure to continue.

"The Art of the Steal" (Documentary) (2010) - Movie Review

One’s Will is the wishful thinking of wishes within his or her bounds with the legality binding it. It holds immense value starting from the best plot twisters in nutty and cheesy films to the real life scenarios. I have never seen any one question it because it is the last sign of respect to the dead or rather they are not there to argue about it. Albert C. Barnes made his with clear indication of what needs to be done with this billions of dollar worth arts in his private art mansion in the suburbs of Philadelphia. What became of it is “The Art of the Steal”.

After the art exploration and manipulation dealt in the street art arena in “Exit through the Gift Shop”, this is another piece of documentary questioning the value attached to the priceless master works. But beyond the beauty, poetry and the experience of these arts Albert C. Barnes immaculately preserved and cherished, the film talks rather rudimentary principles, one’s right towards their property. Here the promotion of greater good and the expansion of the secret treasure of arts were used to hijack these to the city center.

I for one cannot dictate the standard or definition of a painting. Some possess those appreciation like I do for films and I can relate to it. The experience of certain piece around an atmosphere makes all the difference. In a multiplex ruled world I have subconsciously forgotten the rarity of the presence a building could make. Yet I could see clearly the theatres I grew up watching films in. Now I complain when Ebert’s film festival happens in Virginia historical theatre with blocking views. I have been comforted and while I choose the astonishing screen presence of the current multiplex, I still respect and admire the beauty of those old theatres. Barnes’ art mansion is like those theatres and he desperately wanted that to be that way for all his arts for eternity.

Albert C. Barnes from the video footage and the commentary that accompanies it comes off as a strict, terse and a strong man. Adamant and stubborn, it is his way or no way at all. His way was to safe guard the sanctity of the art he possessed and wanted the people to cherish it the way he wanted it to be. I can see how he pissed off people including his near and dear ones. The film is not so much about that side of his character rather his pure sense of love towards the art he possessed. Also his demand of enjoying it the right way.

As Barnes angers the people in Philadelphia and around, he knew that the legacy he is hoping to create after his demise might be affected a great deal. He knew it being a big time capitalist himself. He planned his will and laid strong terms such as no way to sell or move or any kind of sort of his art properties. When you write something like that it is supposed to be iron clad in the eyes of law. You would think so. After his death in 1951, things were in place with an able successor but the eventuality was merely postponed.

“The Art of the Steal” of course argues for keeping this invaluable arts at its long living place. It of course goes all in for supporting that and taking the view of Barnes himself against the establishment. I was constantly divided in the reasoning of moving or not moving these arts. On one hand it is Barnes’ wish to keep his property within his walls and not spoil the experience by making it an exhibition which is considered selling out for him and the purist art world. On the other hand it is an international treasure which has been put in confined spaces and not at the easy access for the public and comes off as selfish and closed minded. This vacillation of the opinion despite the movie’s lack of objectivity resonated strongly in me. The people of the establishment genuinely believed in bringing the art to a much wider audience and for the greater good of the city. I can completely see that. As a public reading news about this I would not hesitate to take their side. Yet what the film offers is the fundamentals of human existence which is to respect the properties of one even after their demise. Especially after their demise.

Directed by Don Argott, as any good documentary, the film has a clear set of agenda and provides it in a convincing chapter format. It helps as an audience to follow through the time and genuinely understand the politics behind the acquisition in the name of art. Beyond art it is about one man’s wish being dragged in the dirty game of politics and in the end concludes so tragically in the eyes of this film’s makers.

"Exit through the Gift Shop" (Documentary) (2010) - Movie Review

Art is a chaotic experimental effect on people’s sociological reaction towards it. People desperately try to find a stable and concrete understanding of a piece. Ignorance might be looked down upon on not receiving that cryptic message. For me it is simply an experience and not much to make of it. The factor of money in anything justifies the fame and a casual art seeker might not see the blockbuster sell out art from a critically acclaimed one. It is all opinions and relative perceptions. “Exit through the Gift Shop” is not alone a witness to a social experiment but also puts through the viewer through it after its over.

Graffiti has brought a judgment of low form of art in this reviewer. No reason than its mere existence in rundown places. But the idea has fascinated me and the cleverness has brought chuckles. Here the film directed by a purist street artist Banksy provides the life story of Thierry Gutta, a French immigrant in Los Angeles. A man with disheveled hair and a solid resemblance of Ron Jeremy invites judgments from the people he meets. Beyond the appearance he follows everywhere with a video camera to add to the creep factor. The obsession to film the details of his life takes him into unpredictable arena of street art.

Thierry got the entry into this strange art form through his cousin nicknamed Invader who pastes and paints tiles of space invaders in random places around the city. Thierry is fascinated by this and these arts pasted in darkness and secrecy needs a witness and that witness becomes him with his camera. He shoots everything and becomes integrated in the process. He comes back to LA and begins collaborating with the well known artists. One such is Shepard Fairey. A young man mildly surprised and suspicious on this new character tagging along to film these adventures of art vandalism.

The first art show I went was in Seattle. There were paintings that meant nothing and there were which like poetry brought in a sensation. I did not make much of it than to say that I visited an art gallery. After couple of years, I went to Denver Art Museum. I truly experienced modern display of art of an unknown kind. Lavish use of colours and daring images making statements getting personal interpretations. All those arts are a reflection of the viewer. You see what you want to see and becomes a personal statement. The true meaning of it which did not occur to me that time happened after the phenomenon of Thierry Gutta went through in this documentary.

Thierry Gutta is not a skilled artist. He was not born with great abilities to move his fingers to sketch detailed and collaborative arts. He obsessed over his instincts and impulses to film these people. He admired and adored them. He worshipped Banksy who remains a secret artist. He gains his trust and blessing. But the people who met Thierry did not make much of him. May be that is the sole reason they let him into this world.

While Thierry does get inspired by these artists, there is something bothering even us as an audience in his sky rocketing success in the end. He does not come across as a talented individual to pull off something like this. I think it is more than that which is he removed the method from the method in madness. He wandered off crazily and made a buzz and hype that structured the stardom to his show. He pulled the screens off to show that despite talent there is programming of people’s expectation in media and publicity. That sociological statement stunned the street artists who were thoroughly against it. The pure nature of their untainted and anti-capitalistic art got dragged into the dirty game of publicity.

“Exit through the Gift Shop” directed by Thierry’s mentor Banksy is not a disgruntled attempt but does a smooth and swift job of the startling nature in which Thierry got into this world as an observer and soon becoming a participant and a star. Even I was not expecting that. It appear to bring back faint memories of “Man on the Wire” in the way the street artists lurk around in dark to express themselves. The film is not about the journey but about the opinion we form of this person and this world. The film has so much interesting pieces to it and it never brought those goose pumps but when it got over I cannot stop thinking about the perception of art.

"Solitary Man" (2010) - Movie Review

What can be a more powerful drug than the great art of manipulation? Reading a person and having that opportunity to spin them however you want is a direct energy storage for ego. Benjamin Kalmen (Michael Douglas) is the titular character of “Solitary Man” living life as he pleases when he pleases at the cost of others. He is 60 years old and does not want to be called grand dad or even dad for that matter. He is the Roger from “Roger Dodger” grown old and running out of fuel. Strange that Jesse Eisenberg comes as his short term trainee as he did in “Roger Dodger” here too.

Car salesperson are annoying helpers, most marketing people are. The best are the people who make you feel safe almost like in a relationship. They make you comfortable despite knowing the game and then you make their decision. Ben meets up with his Doctor and even in his small time gloating of his success in car sales he tries to sell the man. It is his ideology to have that transaction the way he intends it to be. The end of that scene does not go well on him as his doctor informs him that his EKG needs a more closer look at his heart. Six and half years later he is popping aspirins every morning alongside girls of varying age though only younger than his daughter, much much younger.

He has lost his empire of car dealership on an unnecessary scam and now lives off borrowing money from daughter Susan (Jenna Fischer) and trying to make that one final go at another car dealership by sleeping with women having the power to pull strings for him. That would be Jordan (Mary-Louise Parker) a single mom with a typical graduated high school daughter (Imogen Poots) ready to join the alma mater of Ben. This dealership is his last chance in gaining back to the throne but he does everything in his power to screw it up.

Ben Kalmen is a commanding man in conversations. He knows life and he knows people. He has lived by the code where he would do anything and everything he feels like to underline his presence. It does not take much for him to miss his loving grand kid Scotty’s (Jake Richard Siciliano) birthday party. Yet he is the coolest grand dad who can play video games and make the boy’s life the glorious time in his presence. That is his skill as well and the beauty is that he chooses to be irresponsible and callous towards other’s existence in spite of knowing the damages he has caused and causing.

Michael Douglas venturing in to this role sometime after “King of California” provides another kind of miserable father. He uses the charisma in this role to make the other characters fall for it but always is a wide opened jerk to his audience. Despite that we want to follow this man as he seems to dig deeper and deeper in to the abyss of hopelessness and sadness. We have seen Ben in our life where they break hope and come back for more. They are egomaniacal but enthralling when they are at their best in pleasing us. They are the people who have figured out everything about any person except their own.

Written by Brian Koppelman and he directs alongside with his regular writing partner David Levien. Ben is a great character for a film like this and you need an actor that can carry on till the end keeping his next move unpredictable. Michael Douglas is not the man I would have thought for it. It is not because he does not fit the role. In reality he is perfect but I never really saw him as a character actor with spontaneous nature in the roles he undertook despite his roaring presentation as Gordon Gekko. Yet Douglas plays his age and the character.

There are so many wonderful people in this man’s life. A loving daughter, a great grandson, a spectacular ex-wife played by Susan Sarandon and a loyal faithful friend played by Danny Devito. Look at Danny Devito whom I only recognize during the past couple of years as the disgusting Frank in “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia” and here he plays the most respectable and amazing friend of Ben with a heart of gold. One would wonder how a terrible person like Ben have a friend like this. That is the beauty of any relationship which blossoms in the most unexpected places.

“Solitary Man” is a wonderful film and it has gone through thrills and gaps of movie releases in the past year. A film that has a central character with umpteen possibilities for redemption goes through those purposefully unnoticed and does not regret a moment of it. When he ruins his chances and does the worst thing possible of sleeping with his girl friend’s daughter, he comes to his daughter to confide after the break up. Even there he says it with so much conviction that it was worth it. It does not take much to come up with the title for this film, isn’t it?

"The King's Speech" (2010) - Movie Review

Tom Hooper apparently knows very well about the friendships between great men. He did so in the TV Series “John Adams” between the titular character and Thomas Jefferson. Then he thumped the big screen in “The Damned United” showing one man soccer coach Brian Clough’s admiration disguised as a rivalry towards his inspiration Don Revie the coach of Leeds United and his friendship with his long true friend his right hand man Peter Taylor. In “The King’s Speech” he formulates the relationship between a King and a common man.

Colin Firth has been like Hugh Grant for me, in the sense playing the romantic lead part to perfection without variation. And then I saw “A Single Man”. A film which exhibits the urge to achieve perfection by director Tom Ford that makes Colin Firth into a methodical man sobbing internally in total madness. The pain, the angst, the loss and the desperation have not been told with such a precision and arrangement like a photographic painting. In “The King’s Speech”, Firth is King George VI, a stammering, shy and often spewing one lined volcanic temper eruptions, he makes it all so very easy.

The understanding of someone stammering does not help in controlling the impatience of the listeners. The brain has been programmed to listen to an uninterrupted speech, especially a public one. If someone translates the train of thoughts, ideas, opinions and passion into wrecking it in serious pauses then the immediacy in judging them incapable is unavoidable. Being in a royal family and often to address people King George before being the King did not have much of a choice. More the pressure more the stammering and he is constantly being bullied by the physicians. Time for something radical and unorthodox. Otherwise there will be no spiciness in the story, isn’t it? In comes Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush), a man of pencil thin stature fitting his suit with justice and speaks and conducts in a free flow like his speech.

Geoffrey Rush might be remembered as the man in the “Pirates of the Caribbean” franchise but I remember him in “The Tailor of Panama” a simple man playing the players around him with finesse through meticulous speech. As Lionel Logue he understands the nature of the help one asks wherein the healing of the speech wounds lies deep in personal corners. Unfortunately being in a royal family advises to withhold that part to any outsiders while Logue expects that to be the fundamentals of working on improving the speech of King George. Unsuccessfully he settles to treat the problem as a mechanical failure than a psychological issue.

Both Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush devote in their characters. Firth needs to forget his conscious nature to not stammer and embody the full effect of this frustrating and agonizing problem into him. Rush needs to not over do it in his animated dramatization of this colourful and cheerful character. While the film is indeed about the battle of fighting this problem of stammering for King George VI, it is about a man coming out in the open of the society and learning to learn the art of confidence. Born as a superior and taught so, King George has more to be embarrassed and ashamed to admit. To not convey himself properly to his people he questions his ability to govern them.

The life of royal family is as much as flamboyant and luxurious it appears to be is also one of the closed and contained public prison. The resemblance of a private life and one’s wish evaporates and all is left is the expectation of the several nameless entities counting moments to judge and crucify. In between these millions are the most basic problems of all, family. King’s wife Queen Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter) is supportive and authoritative while his brother King Edward VIII (Guy Pearce) choose to mock his brother when he wants to win an argument. His father (Michael Gambon) sees it as the mistake of him rather than a disability. Among these pressures the man has to rise and rise in the worst of the times the world has witnessed among depression and war to name a few.

“The King’s Speech” has one classic great emotional moment when King George comes by for a drink to Logue’s place after his father’s death. Great acting comes when there is an unconditional and involuntary empathy of feeling from audience. When King George disappears and off comes Bertie to his teacher and friend Lionel and confides in him, that is where the symphonic synchronization between Tom Hooper, Colin Firth and Geoffrey Rush blossoms the core of this story. Danny Cohen’s cinematography makes no mistake in capturing those close faces of these two men at that instance and provide that brilliance without disturbance. “The King’s Speech” is no “The Damned United” but it is a damn good film.

"Tron: Legacy" 3D (2010) - Movie Review

“Tron: Legacy” is a shallow piece of work in the field of science fiction but as a visual spectacle it truly paints the screen with breathtaking races and laser colour forms and is nothing short of brilliant. This film is the sequel to the 1982 “Tron” unseen by me. It takes you to the inner world of a program, literally. Directed by debutant Joseph Kosinski, this is a film that kept me charged and thrilled for its unique experience of digitized motor races and disc throwing fights and baffled me with the extent in which it shamelessly empties any iota in having characters or story. The result is “Tron: Legacy” in my fact book comparison lines up in between the lowest in the scale “Avatar” and highest in the scale” 300”.

Jeff Bridges is Kevin Flynn, a successful software engineer turned CEO of a prosperous company ENCOM. Flynn was digitally sucked into a system and his digitized form built the empire in the hopes of having a perfect software. Unfortunately all the software engineers know that there is no perfect software. The program form he created Clu (Jeff Bridges made young by graphics) does not understand that and begins to become the villain for the screenplay written by Adam Horowitz and Edward Kitsis.

I learned that there were not many explanation given about the physical body sucked into a virtual world in the 1982 film which I can live without. Sometimes a phenomenon has to exist to provide clever plot points and elevate the film being the stepping stones to a productive and convincing science fiction experience. “Inception” will be a recent example where they do not go about the actual technology but use it as a tool. “Frequency” is another film that comes to my mind which employs the communication of past to the present and somehow evades the paradox on a surface level. “Tron: Legacy” is not one of those films.

Kevin vanished one fine night and the only logical thing in this illogical film is that he got stuck inside that world. Son of Kevin Flynn grows up to be Sam Flynn (Garrett Hedlund) yearning for his dad to return and finally giving up. He grows up to be an extreme sports guy jumping off buildings and messing up the board of directors during their launch of product of his father’s empire. As the film would not make any sense without Sam getting into this world, the filmmakers need no persuading to make Sam getting into his dad’s old arcade game center and finding out the secret office. He gets in.

Then begins the excellence in treating the audience with stunning animation and effects. It is perfect imagination, if you can call perfect imagination of a digitized world as a blend of electronica and games. Sam gets dressed up with a disc on his back which is like a fingerprint of his identity in the system. That disc can also be used as a deadly weapon to attack his opponent in a game.

While I was being enthralled by this presentation, I took my memory back to “Avatar” experience on how spellbound I was to see this amazing technology opening doors and revolutionizing the film industry. During that film it lasted for 30 minutes and eventually I began to see past the technology and find a good film. It never was found. “Tron: Legacy” does not have a good film either but I have to say it with a guilt that it kept me going through its ridiculous screenplay. Much like “2012” I was awed by the graphics and it had a knack to make it a thrill ride of a unique kind for that time it runs. Even in this unabashed nature of screenplay being a guide to graphic effect filled fights, there is subtlety in their subconscious honesty. Or I conveniently made myself see the other side when the foolishness happens.

“Tron: Legacy” as my experience with “2012” while had me entertained has to be slapped to provide a satisfaction for the confused artistic integrity of mine. As a science fiction it flunked miserably. There is Quorra (Olivia Wilde) who rescues Sam from the midst of a fight and takes him to his father Kevin. Sam never asks who or what she is and why is she along with Kevin in a remote out lands. Jeff Bridges’ Kevin Flynn is aged and they have dinner. Quorra expresses emotions. Does it mean the virtual world is similar to real world? Or how can a program exit out of the system and exist in real world? There can be forgiveness in the plot and logic for any film if it survives the time without reminding of its stupidity. The risk is higher when it is a science fiction as the quest of reasoning grows proportionally. “Tron: Legacy” is a beautiful presentation with some great musical justice done by Daft Punk but it falls into the abyss in giving a film without content in it.

"The Fighter" (2010) - Movie Review

“The Fighter” does not break grounds in a real life story making its way to the screen. It even lays out the plot details snipping out the crucial scenes from the film to its trailer giving me more reason to avoid trailers. What it does though is bring up Christian Bale, Melissa Leo, Mark Wahlberg and Amy Adams at their wondrous best. That makes all worth it to watch David O. Russell’s “The Fighter”, the film based upon the real life events of professional boxer Micky “Irish” Ward (Mark Wahlberg) and his older half brother Dicky Eklund (Christian Bale).

Paul Thomas Anderson’s “Punch Drunk Love” features Adam Sandler as a grown bottled up in his emotions and fighting his place in the family and himself against his numerous over powering sisters. Add those sisters along with a crack addict Dicky and a controlling mother Alice (Melissa Leo) to the mix, you get Micky Ward stuck in the middle of a family doing emotional massacre with foul loud noises and smothering him in the name of love and affection. Even his fighting style is controlled by them. His family is all he knows and he hits rock bottom in boxing when Dicky and his mom lets him get in a ring with an opponent 20 pounds heavier than him. He needs breathing room.

Micky is played correctly by Mark Wahlberg wherein he does not emotionally express on his frustration and runs on a swinging balance of love towards his brother. He has the whole stereotyped Hollywood protagonist life story written on him starting from getting his daughter Kasie (Caitlin Dwyer) a better home. He needs to win fights and he is giving up. He meets a rough and tough bartender Charlene (Amy Adams). Charlene in her own way resembles his family members except she takes the other stand of firing Dicky and Alice from Micky’s fighting team.

“The Fighter” is not so much about the winning of fights. It is the regular pedigree for the movie’s title but the real story is in the drama of this family where love has been conditioned and nurtured into a different form of control game. It is not that they maliciously wants to ruin the career of Micky or provide destructive plans for failure but it is more about their belief that they are making the best decisions at their full capability towards the interest of their kin. This denial and ego makes them this hideous characters coming down upon Micky with no understanding whatsoever.

Charlene is the rational mind and the killer coin to check mate this wrong moves of Micky’s family. She obviously becomes the enemy. In this crazy mix of people is one genuine man by the name of George (Jack McGee), father of Micky and husband of Alice. He ofcourse as Micky is outnumbered both in number and authority by the women in the family. He though tries his hand to find the best for Micky.

Christian Bale as the laborious actor he is does the physical demand his character demands. He is lean and comically irritating. He is gloating on the victory he had fourteen years back towards Sugar Ray and prides on being the person to put his home town Lowell Massachusetts on the map. He knows his stuff but he is coked up and lives a life of trashy existence. His mother conveniently acts oblivious to this charade he puts up. All he needs is a moving comic song from him to forget the crappy things he does with his time. Melissa Leo and Christian Bale share several scenes together and they sparkle with performances. You see how two good actors can shine each other with just being there sharing the screen.

Thankfully the fight scenes are shot with ultimate real punches. It is boxing looking clumsy which the technical person can say as the rhythm but as a spectator it is the closest I have seen a boxing in a film comes to real life. It is not thrilling or motivating yet has a power to it when the moment of explosion happens. “The Fighter” comes through as one of the good films of 2010 due to the actors and the lengths each of them goes through and accommodates each other in providing the space and time to extract the best out of each other.

"I am Love" (Language - Italian) (2010) - Movie Review

Luca Guadagnino’s “I am Love” treats the film, its characters and the subtleties in it with nothing but pure and unadulterated tenderness. It takes up a family, a really rich upper class family in Milan, Italy and slowly unravels the mystic identity burial of a foreign soul. This is Emma played with a daring artistic passion by Tilda Swinton who constantly surprises me with her wide portrayal of complex women.

Being married and leaving everything right from the tiniest possession to the valuable relations to her mother and father and enter a strange place with the only known face being her husband is a terrifying thing for a woman in traditional Indian setup. Similar experience has numbed Emma who is originally from Russia. We do not infer it in the initial family dinner celebrating he father-in-law’s birthday. Guadagnino does it with precision. The house keepers work with hurried fear mingled with respect and love to the family. No one ill treats them but you do not want to find out the hard way. The Rechi’s family assimilate and the story is theirs but the social status becomes an entity in the film.

Grandpa Edoardo Sr. (Gabriele Ferzetti) announces his retirement and predictably assigns his son Tancredi Rechi (Pippi Delbono), the husband of Emma as his successor for the textile company. But he adds a twist by making his grandson Edoardo (Flavio Parenti) another successor as well. Edoardo or Edo is the golden boy in the family as we hear everyone speak of him coming second in a race. He comes smiling and acknowledges that and yet wins everyone’s heart. In this Emma sits and she is very much accepted and belongs in the family. Yet there is something unfitting about the presence of her in the family. We learn.

The man who said to have beaten Edo in the race is Antonio (Edoardo Gabbriellini) a chef by profession. He comes by sincerely and gifts Edo a cake. After few months they become thickest of friends given the nature of their liking to similar passion and Antonio is the kind of person Edo would admire. He is gentle, humble and cooks one darn delicious meal. As their friendship thickens Emma goes through two notable instances which rekindles her buried senses and directs towards Antonio.

Emma finds out that her daughter Betta (Alba Rohrwacher) is a lesbian and then a casual line from one of her sons saying whether she misses her home, Russia. This line of thought wakes her up as though she has learned to subconsciously forget it. She does impulsively acts but begins to think. This thinking process mixes up in our minds without any notice. We know the direction of the story but the treatment of it is organic. She is a great cook as well and tasting Antonio’s food gives her an orgasmic experience. There is nothing more further one needs to convince Emma in pursuing this affair.

Emma en routes San Remo where Antonio plans to open a restaurant business with Edo and follows him to stumble upon him. The eventual consummation of them defines Guadagnino’s style. The sudden upheaval of passion between them is not their first act rather it is shown as a blurry image wherein we are not sure whether it happened. Dreamy with erotic poeticism, Emma and Antonio begin meeting and make his place their love nest.

When this is happening, Edo is facing with his values being challenged and wondering whether his grandpa’s facade of caring for people is unmasking or his dad’s attitude is masking the original intentions of his grandpa. He is confused and betrayed by this and we all know where this is going. The story of an affair is such a cliche but here it blossoms into a being in the film. We confide and empathize the feeling of Emma but when it disrupts the family, we begin to dislike her. For a good reason the director keeps the emotional bottling of Emma a guessing game. When she confides with Antonio, we realize her frustration but when Betta gives a sign in the end, it all becomes clear.

“I am Love” is an exercise of treating a simple story with great care and precision. Tilda Swinton not alone surprised me with speaking Italian but how truly and methodically she embodies this strange character to represent, Emma. On the simple outlook of the family and in her ease with moving around them, Emma is very much an Italian but when she begins to doubt and comes out of it, she no longer is an Italian or even a Russian. She simply comes to term the changes she got herself thrust upon for so many years. “I am Love” is a piece of impressive direction but it is more of great acting by Tilda Swinton.

PS: I would recommend you to watch “Michael Clayton” for which she won the Academy Award and “Julia” wherein she portrays a thoroughly disgusting and dislikable character.

"Manmadhan Ambu" (Language - Tamil) (2010) - Movie Review

Intertwining a string of serious moments in to a never ending cycle of slap stick comedy has been no tough ride for Kamal Hassan and his team in ventures like “Sathi Leelavathi”, “Avvai Shanmugi” (whilst the lift of “Mrs. Doubtfire) and “Anbe Sivam”. The last I saw him was his disastrous single man campaign of shamelessly boasting his talents in the wrong way possible in “Dasavathaaram”. Now with “Manmadhan Ambu” it appears there is a sign of complacency not alone in the role he undertook but also in the story and screenplay he has written.

Directed by K.S. Ravikumar the film follows a cruise ship vacation around Europe by noted actor Ambu alias Nisha (Trisha Krishnan) along with her childhood friend Deepa (Sangeetha) and Deepa’s kids to escape from the media and think about her relationship with her paranoid and suspicious freak Madanagopal (R. Madhavan). Major R. Mannar (Kamal Haasan) is the private investigator assigned by Madanagopal to follow and activities of Nisha and his baseless claim of her secretive meeting with her lover. All is well for the no nonsense comedy the team is known for but the mood shifts into utter blandness to a wasted attempt of emotional exchange.

As the film begins and slowly sets up its first act, I was neither interested nor bored which is a typical first act wherein we get to know the nature of the characters. Madanagopal played by Madhavan is an annoying and spoiled momma’s boy who comes successfully dislikable for the audience. Madhavan in his drunken antics was the only consoling buffoonery coming in the mix of the heavily influenced inspiration from Crazy Mohan’s write up. It does not though surprise me that Madhavan pulls it comfortably as he did in his debut venture in “Alaipayuthey” something similar in getting vested on the qualms of married life.

I viewed “Anbe Sivam” hours before entering the theatre for “Manmadan Ambu” and in that he plays Nallasivam as Nallasivam and not as Kamal playing the role. Not that he realistically embodies and makes every inch of it into a different nature of a person. He plays Sivam as a form of himself who has accepted the mishaps and misfortunes in his life and owns a philosophy of surviving through self deprecating jokes and helping people selflessly. There is a sincerity to the man he played out there with some minor smugness but in Major’s character the smugness completely takes over. He steers the story to delve in to the tragic past of his died wife and gets a close up shot to cry in his stereotypical controlled sadness.

The best part of the film is the song “Neela Vanam” shot with a care for telling a flashback not alone with a soothing melancholy song but with a video having every stamp of originality. After enjoying that momentary glimpse of excellence I was wondering the absence of that thought and effort put in that one song in translating it for the entire film.

Kamal’s Major does not shape up to be a man neither to be sympathized nor a hero we would like to root for. The expected spur of romance from Ambu towards Major is a twist unnecessary. While both of them are reasonably afraid to death in telling their secret, when the secret is out, it appears nothing mattered. If that is the point of their genesis of a romantic relationship, then it did not do that either. While Kamal’s some of the films have been mediocre, his acting has been the bedrock for the worst of the ventures but in “Manmadan Ambu” it is creaking of the man’s attitude in being hailed as the top actor in the field. That spills out and affects the nature of his delivery and failing to convince that it is indeed a sad lonely helpless friend Major.

Adding to this mix are supporting roles from Sangeetha, Ramesh Aravind and Urvashi trusting the actor and succumbing to a lost cause. While the initial parts of the film were at least leading to something, the film takes a sudden turn into nonstop attempt in comedy. The routine in providing comedy of errors and dialogue banters becomes an exercise. I lost track of the plan the crew of unusual people comes to the worst set up for the string of confusion and mix up. “Manmadan Ambu” which would have been a fairly meager attempt in drama becomes into an annoyance in the end ultimately making every character unreachable for admiring their emotions nor to make fun of their antics in a praising fashion.

"Vengeance" (English/Cantonese/French) (2009) - Movie Review

“Vengeance” like any other revenge film ends with a strange melancholy despite the objective its central character achieves. It has a sporadic sense of odd beauty and there are completely messed up lingering side by side. Its strangeness in the actors, material and the presentation makes it accessible at one time and then it suddenly suspends out in the air making the viewers wonder in confusion. Directed by Johnnie To, it has French rockstar Johnny Hallyday and Chinese actor Anthony Wong who gave a spell binding performance in the Infernal Affairs series.

His daughter’s family were targeted and Francis Costello (Johnny Hallyday) promises revenge to his barely alive daughter. He is a stranger to this strange land. He does not know the language, does not have any idea on the purpose of the killings on his family but all he wants is revenge. He is losing memory too and like “Memento”, he keeps record of the people he meets and wants to kill. Johnny Hallyday fits the bill of the new man in a weird town as he did in my all time favourite French film “Man on the Train” but also falls behind in the acting.

He was the man with regrets and remorse in that French classic while here he is a clueless man going for everything to achieve his goal. With minimal clues from his daughter he sets out for finding the killers. There were three men and coincidentally he runs into three other hit men. They are not his targets but he witnesses them coming from his neighbouring room after he hears gunshots. They see each other and he walks by. He immediately offers help to the police who are investigating the murders and lets off the killer walk by too. He knows how to play this game. He gains the trust of these men and assigns them the job of hunting down his enemies.

The music by Lo Tayu runs its theme throughout the film which never gets monotonous. Costello and the men Kwai (Anthony Wong), Chu (Lam Ka-Tung) and Fat Lok (Lam Suet) becomes connected. In these cold hearted hit men, there strikes a chord. Costello after a while reveals that he used to be a hit man. Soon there are odd battle scenes of guns blazing and blood spatters from each of their bodies. The fights are all sometimes comic and sometimes stylish and most of the time random.

Johnnie To’s venture left me clueless as it had a unique presentation techniques on one end while on the other hand appeared disjointed. The emotions are stale and there is nothing much you can make of the characters. Kwai played by Anthony Wong has a presence more than the star value of Hallyday. He comes lean, stoic and with a style. He commands leadership among his men. Without any dialogue we know that Chu is his right hand man while Fat Lok is the side kick he plays around with. These three are rather taken by surprise by Costello. Being a complete stranger, they are pushed back by the daunting nature in which Costello approached them.

The film carries through most of it convincing us through these chaotic experience and arrives at a point where it should have called it a day. That moment is when Costello begins to completely lose his memory and wonders what revenge is. They leave him with their trusted friend (Michelle Ye) and that should have been it. Chu asks what does revenge mean when the man has forgotten everything and Kwai’s response should have brought up the credits. Johnnie To wanted closure in his film and thus the movie continues laboriously after that.

Granted “Vengeance” has an elegance in the madness of the story telling it takes on but Hallyday’s character never settles in. While the character himself does not gets the opportunity to settle in, the oddity in the movie has an expiration date which ends 20 minutes before the actual ending. I went along for the ride and had some moving and freaky moments in the film. Then it all tumbled down.

Johnny Hallyday has the facial structure that is simultaneously scary and powerful. It can bring the kindness with the slightest of smile and the eyes can kill you instantaneously. Yet the stale acting of Hallyday does not fit out here which was picture perfect in “Man on the Train”. Here it is out of place and Anthony Wong steals the show completely from the French rock star. Johnnie To uses special methods to feature the violence in the film with over the top gun fights and blood splatters like powder than liquid. With this kind of presentation “Vengeance” is both a good film and a badly featured one.

"Restrepo" (Documentary) (2010) - Movie Review

How much ever gruesome and realistic a war movie is made, at the end of it you know that it is a film and you move and separate yourself out of it. Yet it feels more guilty to write a review about it doing a futile effort on outreaching in the presumption of relating to it. While most of the films where the hardship, tragedy and brutality is nothing to even comment about it relating to, it is more like survivor’s guilt for a reviewer. “Restrepo” is the film one cannot get themselves out of it because it is on there, right there and you are there.

That last line of the previous paragraph have been said and written by this reviewer and many others about several films and this time around if there is a visceral way to mean it, I would. “Restrepo” is the documentary wherein Sebastian Junger and Tim Hetherington spent alongside the US soldiers in Afghanistan. More than alongside, they were within the Second Platoon, B Company, 2nd Batallion, 503rd Infantry Regiment (airborne) of the 173rd Airborne Brigade Combat Team. The daring risk they undertook for this project to be put in the most active war zone puts me in disbelief on the passion they are towards whatever the things they are passionate about to do. It is uncomfortable for me to say that as their job.

The 2nd Platoon were placed in the Korangal valley in Eastern Afghanistan when they film begins. Being consistently fired on a daily basis they lost their friend PFC Juan “Doc” Restrepo. They advanced towards a vantage point supposedly occupied by the Taliban and set up their outpost. They called it Restrepo. They were stationed out there for a year dealing with the locals and deafened by the artilleries and what not.

“Restrepo” is a film that does not have a heavy purpose as most of the documentary might possibly have to begin with. As journalists Junger and Hetherington were to report the happenings of that year, their report translates into a film which does not get marred by an agenda. For a documentary to go without an agenda is a dare in itself but when the soldiers out there fight to live and sustain one another day, that is the only agenda in their broad scheme of things. The politics, values, emotions and the perspective of everything does not vanish but are buried beneath the ground they stand. Till they head back to the world wherein fear is not the daily cereal, there is nothing in terms of straight thought.

The soldiers in the platoon provide interview opening their soul in the hope of getting some sanity back in their civilian life. The film begins and shudders the notion of film from it when the vehicle they are driving in flat faces an explosion. While documentary itself is clear enough for being real, it does not gets more real until you see this. The soldiers giving interviews give the routines and key points. They talk about how they felt about the situation rather than their stands in war or strategy or mishaps. This does not mean that the war is free from it but this film is not about those.

Eastern Afghanistan is nothing short of beautiful and that makes this even more worse. The snow covered mountains and the lush green vegetation combined with serene water stream amongst the patchy frozen parts of its shore are something the cameras definitely are not bringing justice to it. I can imagine being there and feel the air of course without the smokes, blood and guns. Only a viewer comfortably placed at the palms of his home can see those. May be those soldiers saw those and had their peaceful moments if only for short span of time.

Not even for a moment we see any targets. The soldiers shoot the mountains with all they have got and then some to eradicate whoever and whatever are is out there. The Captain and Colonel have their monthly meeting with the valley elders to have some semblance of peace talks. The towns people see the soldiers as aliens which they are and they hide their helplessness. In between these terrorizing moments they have their offbeat jokes that are the memories they can relive of those days especially the one which involves a cow.

“Restrepo” is a true documentary which cannot get closer and provide a narrow slit of opportunity for the civilian souls the torture of fighting. Every soldier knows before they get on the process of enduring these ordeals and witnessing their buddies bleed out but even with all the information, I cannot possibly bring myself to be in that situation and feel it. If signed up and get posted there, what can I possibly do to protect myself and survive another day? I am sure all these soldiers thought about it and they go through with it. What kept them alive or the ones not is not the question of the film rather it makes ask yourself that. It does not ask sympathy or empathy but the awareness of such experience. “Restrepo” is one of the best documentaries I have seen.

"Triad Election" (Language - Cantonese) (2006) - Movie Review

“Triad Election” is merciless in its story telling. The whole tradition of honour, code and respect are bluntly removed and the ground truth of dog eat dog world is shown without any cover up, glossiness or glamour. The main player the movie portrays is Jimmy (Louis Koo) who is well dressed, terse in his speech and quite focussed on his immediate objectives. How crazy he can get those in focussing we learn as the film progresses. Johnnie To’s this film is a sequel to “Election” unseen by me which I am so curious to look forward to reviewing.

In the gangster community it is two years term for a leader. Leader gets the power and the driving factor of that power, money. Lok (Simon Yam) has successfully reigned and it is time for the election. Jimmy is an upcoming businessperson. He worked his way from pirated porn DVD business to real estate contracts. He has all the ambition to go legit and has no desire to run for the election. Then there is Kun (Gordon Lam), who cannot wait to get the throne. So the thing is simple, Kun can get his job and Jimmy can forget about the triad, Lok we do not know his objectives. So Jimmy can begin his aspiration for normal tycoon life. Ofcourse not.

Johnnie To knows that audience are waiting for the turn to get Jimmy into the race. We like Jimmy because he is the only member in this movie who has semblance of having a peaceful family life and hoping for a better tomorrow for his unborn children. Later in the film we would see how he unleashes his darkness and does it with a stale face. That not alone disgusts us but vigorously splashes a bucketful of icy cold water on our face to say that there is no good soul in this trade.

As much as the veterans of this crime business conduct it in the name of tradition, it is a hypocrisy on its supreme nature. When the film begins, a member of the community explains the reason for such a society to have conflict free and peaceful business ambience. It is an organism of itself and when there is power, there is greed and everything that goes with it. The people running for the election are capable of anything because they are all criminals. Another thing is the legitimacy they have created for generations by having such elections.

There are no smart strategy in dealing the problem of outrunning their opponents. It is pure and simple, kill them. Hence comes the bloodbath on both the sides. Jimmy hires a hit man and he does not respect or fear Jimmy. He comes with the clear agenda, you get the service for what you pay for. He can do unspeakable things and witness those but he needs more money. None of these men are not shown to have any kind of pleasure or fun. There are restaurants and clubs wherein women wander around and sing for the entertainment but no one is listening or seeing. This world is ruled by men.

The violence as much as I speak is not shown in gory details but the awareness are of it is nothing short of visceral horror. Why does Jimmy all of a sudden bursts with a motto to get his job done through any way possible? He does not like to be a gangster but he has to in this scenario to fulfill his dream of living in a serene hill and no one around apart from his lovely wife and children they are going to have. He sees this exercise clinically and assumes that somewhere in the close vicinity he can return to his dream.

“Triad Election” is a story of how criminals have no honour or rules. Their motivation beyond money and power is even not shown. We do not see them having fun or even cracking a joke. They are completely serious in every waking moment and somehow that has become their predetermined way of life. The story goes on to the obvious nature of Jimmy being the better player but in the end there is no celebration.

What I liked about Johnnie To’s film is his attraction and aversion towards this world. In a way he loves this genre with a passion for film making but at the same time he is repulsed by the true nature of these people. Hence as much as he goes for the cool shots and disturbing music to elevate the film aesthetically, he makes sure that there are no heroes, no villains or none to be happy for. It is a sad life and it will always be one till the end for all these people.

"Homicide" (1991) - Movie Classics

David Mamet has his actors speak emotion than happen on their face. It is his strength, style and an elegance he employs in his work. An impeccable screenwriter directs the film which has its undercurrent, undertone and sneakiness of revelations default to a Mamet’s script. But there is more. What begins as a crime story gets Detective Bobby Gold (Joe Mantegna) into the roots he has not sweated to know and the underworld he gets exposed to scares the nature of the force imbibed in each of us. It absorbs him into the forgotten past and then gives right back at him and to the audience in the end to wonder what simple emotions can translate into deadly forces.

In the first scene we are capitulated by the execution of the writer and director. A thorough procedure in busting a criminal. There are no thrilling music or hurried pace of several cut shots. Pure action in these police officers who are nervous as heck reeking through their masked bodies. It opens up to the film wherein we learn that a murderer is on the run and FBI are off the case as they detonated a race war. Bobby and his partner Tim (William H. Macy) had run into this convict even before FBI assigned him as the most wanted man. He speaks up and that segues into a riling competition with a black official wherein Bob is called a kike. Tim goes ballistic and there establishes two things, one that Bobby is Jew and the other being Tim is a trustworthy partner and a friend.

Bob and Tim begin the case when they stumble upon another murder case where an old Jewish woman is shot dead in her store in a dangerous neighbourhood. Bob who assists a rookie on his first day is assigned the case as the son of the woman pulls strings to bring a Jew in solving the crime. Bob is frustrated as he is the golden boy in bringing the FBI wanted man Randolph to the cage. Against the advice of his boss, he begins juggling both with lesser concern for the old woman’s case.

Mamet is so focussed on his writing that the people stand there reciting his dialogues in the way he exactly wanted. They are not great on emotional empathy but damn they are good in tagging their fellow stars with precise timing. It would have been seen as a far lesser valued film for acting but I appreciate it for the actors to do what was told with a faith they can solidly rely on. Joe Mantegna and William H. Macy have been Mamet’s actors for a long time and both are capable and excellent performers. Yet they abide by the rules of the screenplay.

“Homicide” which is a traditional devoted version of Mamet’s writing has more than conning than usual. It has a man getting spurred on the underlying racial jokes, remarks he has dusted off gets confronted in an unusual way. In one of the most outrageous phone conversation of Bobby with Tim, he goes on ranting about the Jews with such a thorough study in stereotyping and mixing it with his helplessness of not being there for his high profile case. He does not notice that the granddaughter (Rebecca Pidgeon) of the deceased is right out there. She asks him, “Why do you hate yourself so much?”. She means his ethnicity, which defines him or wants him to be defined by the atrocities and ordeal they went through. That sparks his consciousness.

The film then takes whirlwind ride into the world of Zionist group and Bobby’s sudden shift to the old woman’s case while the high profile case takes back seat. He begins to invest and becomes increasingly convinced that he has been the man shedding off his roots and forgotten the real reason of his existence. Before he knows it, he is neck deep into a pile of unwanted storm he got himself into. What follows is a tragedy, a revelation and the brilliance of Mamet in syncing everything to a perfection.

In the generation of prolific and thorough screenwriters David Mamet is the reigning King. The plethora of work he gives out and the quality of each of those surprises me personally. The information he puts forth in his screenplay becomes the perfect rule book for operating the film. There appears no improvisations but plain simple magic of words becoming into people and the concept becoming the soul and with all there is a serene completion in the work of a master. This is David Mamet.

"Morning Glory" (2010) - Movie Review

“Morning Glory” is the sort of film I would have easily dismissed to not see but a good recommendation from Roger Ebert (and I differ from his taste very many times on this genre) made all the difference in missing a very good film. Harrison Ford in his Indy flicks is known for his sarcasm and that shows in abundance in this film which has the kind of egotistical jerk Ford does it with a passive passionate vigour.

There is this traditional tale of workaholic woman discovering her work life balance disturbed way beyond repair and then the journey of her experience bringing her back to life before things go bad forever. Roger Michell’s film is no different. Apart from having talented cast of Harrison Ford, Diane Keaton, Rachel McAdams and Patrick Wilson, it has a quasi real story to tell. Becky (Rachel McAdams) is the over achiever getting under appreciated in her work particularly when she gets canned from her very early morning show in New Jersey. She freaks out as her life is nothing but work. After several nicely edited scenes of Becky’s dry streak to give us the market sense of poor job opportunities, she lands at IBS, the movie’s fictional network which has the worst morning show in New York, Day Break.

Becky’s dream job might be to get in the Today’s Show at NBC but given her thirst for problem solving and crisis resolution at untimely hours, IBS job of her being the executive producer for Day Break is the ultimate dream position for her. She has an aging veteran Colleen Peck (Diane Keaton) and a vacant co-anchor for her to fill as she created the vacancy. In comes the legendary iconic news reporter Mike Pomeroy (Harrison Ford), another aging veteran alcoholic (movie does not emphasize on it as a sad note) who has forgotten to be social in his valour achievements in interviewing great leaders and capturing sensational real news.

Do I have to say that Mike dislikes the morning show and more so towards his co-anchor Colleen? Their banters (which Becky consistently asks Mike to do when the camera is rolling which he consistently ignores) are usual as in between to stars fighting for attention. Clearly Mike is the more annoying and antisocial cast of the two. He sees morning show with a disgust and especially being commanded by a late twenty producer is icing to the dreadful cake he wants to smash on the floor. Sprinkle the charming colleague Adam (Patrick Wilson) for Becky’s sanity hold of the reality, you get the formula which I would generally hate and prominently skip. But “Morning Glory” is better than that.

It has Rachel McAdams sincere to her bone in giving Becky as this insanely driven young woman desperate to reach for the skies. In her first day at the job she begins her first meeting with her cast and crew. Every one shoots their question without a chance for her to reply which is cinematically tacky and in another film she would have ran to her room and cried when a friendly veteran colleague would cheer her up to lead on. Not here. Becky replies with stunning clarity to everyone and does the killer blow in the end to her sleazy anchor (Not Mike).

Harrison Ford as Mike Pomeroy is another stereotype in these films that would have been miserably boring. Yet Ford makes it interesting. You would expect him to freak out when the show is on but he is passive. Passive to the core wherein him sitting out there is something he hates about the show. He does not blame him as he has been put forth in this position to not only be a witness to this ludicrous morning show but a participant in the catastrophe. He picks up the moderately serious news while leaving the other cheesy stories to Colleen. Colleen how much ever dramatic and narcissistic she is provides the much needed role to stabilize some existence in the lineup for their morning telecast of IBS.

Slowly and quite convincingly, “Morning Glory” begins to embrace us. It does not make Becky a complete sympathetic lone but a woman clouded by the ambition and has been pursuing it like a mad dog. Her realization of the life she is missing comes expectedly through Mike but how well Harrison Ford does it makes all the difference. Patrick Wilson and Jeff Goldblum whose roles are nothing more than obligatory provide more than that. They trigger at the right times in small notes which makes the whole song in to a different melody never heard before. In the end, “Morning Glory” comes off as not alone a heartwarming feel good film but a very deserving one.

P.S: Roger Michell directed two tremendous films before this - “Venus” and “Changing Lanes”. His “Enduring Love” is odd but a sincere film which might not be great yet a sure worth of a watch.

"Megamind" (2010) - Movie Review

Villains can be cool and likable in a sinister appreciation. Like how universally scary and admirable we were towards Heath Ledger’s Joker or the crazy psychopath Hannibal by Anthony Hopkins. We do not want to be the victim but are glorified by their wicked smartness. Megamind is not one of those but he is not to be taken seriously either. I think that is the reason we can never see him as a super villain but then again it is a movie for kids. “Despicable Me” did a better job in framing that kind of questionable liking towards the main man who was a mean and antisocial character.

In the early days of James Bond battling his super villains, the thought of the villain winning over Bond did not even pass through. In fact that would be the same thing the writers would have had it too. What would happen when the evil succeeds? Indie movie maybe? I am kidding, the possibility of the bad winning was never the case in the films expected to be satiating entertainment value. It is not the same in the current trend, the story continues to see the end for some remote semblance of hope to leave the audience. What would be the purpose of villains if they killed their purpose? That is the best part about “Megamind”.

Megamind (voice of Will Ferrell) has had a rough child hood right from a bad space ride where he has been consistently let down by super hero Metroman (voice of Brad Pitt). In search of finding his purpose, he identifies that him being the outcast is to do bad and he puts his big blue head to the works. The battles begin and always the symbol of good as seen by the Metrocity prevails through Metroman. Megamind succeeds suddenly and perishes Metroman. Now what?

Megamind goes off in being super bad and with his minion (voice of David Cross) but as always without solid challenge, he is bored. He truly misses his enemy. Megamind and Metroman were the sides of a coin and now he is left imbalanced without his nemesis. For little fun, “Megamind” would woo its kid audience and the parents not being superbly uninterested. As a film, it should have had more to offer with a fairly good plot line.

Will Ferrell’s voice does a lot more than celebrity value to this confused individual. He is never unlikable rather cute in his dysfunctional behaviour. His entrances are cliched but fantastic in choosing great songs. His transformation into growing a heart is expectedly effortless. He begins to disguise himself as someone else and runs on dates with Roxanne Ritchi (voice of Tina Fey), a journalist he always held as hostage for Metroman to rescue. Their love is eventual but not the way they fall for it.

In animation film which has developed into stand shoulder to shoulder with mainstream films of critical acclaim and subject matter, it is no more cannot be hiding under kids. It needs more substance than ingenious animation. True that animation is the backbone for it to run but the brains has to be there and the feelings has to be flesh and bones. In “Megamind” it is a routine or step by step procedure advancing towards something we all know and expect in any animation film.

With great names behind those characters destined to be funny, the film lacks deep understanding of those characters. When the idea is elemental, it needs the fillers to be powerful along with it. In “Megamind”, it got the core idea good. When the movie super villain achieves what they want, what can they do? “Megamind” says they will become good out of boredom. I believe in the boredom part for sure.

"Stone" (2010) - Movie Review

The background noise becomes an unnoticeable strong presence in “Stone”. It has a reference and it becomes the end but the idea of that making a larger significance in the life of the characters in the film makes it special. Advertised as the psychological game played by a convict over his correctional officer trying to weasel his way out of the prison Stone’s best thing is that you never know whether you are still being played. It transforms into a serious conversation after a point but still there is this iota of doubt lingering and as faith or belief, you leave with that from the theatre.

Edward Norton and Robert De Niro shared screen in a moderately impressive “The Score” nine years back and here they are here in a well deserving film for both of their calibre. More than Norton, De Niro takes up a challenging role he has not ventured in for a long time. Robert De Niro is Jack, the correctional officer in a marriage with nothing but bible reading and whisky. His wife Madylyn (Frances Conroy) tried to leave him a long time back but more than his threatening, his cowardice spurred more fear in Madylyn. She has stayed with him for forty-three years and there is tragedy and sympathy towards her but no surprise.

Jack has few weeks to go before he gets out of this job wherein all he has heard is the same thing. Then comes Stone (Edward Norton) with an interesting hair do and a typical attitude. Their conversations becomes smoothly riveting. Stone talks a lot and he wants out, desperately. Stone is in for being an arsonist but there is more to it. Jack goes over him as a usual case. He tries to understand his regret not because he wants to but only to satiate his job responsibility. Stone reads it perfectly and needs more on his side than his talk. He has a hand on outside. His wife Lucetta (Milla Jovovich) comes as this adorable angel and she would do anything for the man she loves.

This game of deception and seduction is the tool for a much larger demonstration of character study. Stone is a strange man with strange beliefs. He goes into the core of his being and as anyone with time to serve, he eyes upon religion. He reads through the predominant ones unimpressed and finally a pamphlet religion or cult gets his attention. It has those weird names curious enough to invite for a read but ludicrous enough to stay away from it. Stone immerses himself into it. He reads the book and his catharsis is the key to the movie. We begin guessing on this. Is he still in the game of messing with the boring and hating life of Jack or does he really sees himself as this man completely at peace? This act keeps us hanging and so it does towards Jack.

Jack as thoroughly expected falls for Lucetta. Lucetta is the kind of woman you cannot say no to because you might feel like denying a delicious candy to a sweet kid. More than the need for Jack to want her, it is the idea of him trying to please her makes her the perfect woman. Jack has been a bad husband and he does not even have a shred of regret or remorse about it. He does not love his wife. She is merely there for Jack to have this illusion of marriage to satisfy himself of that feeling to do something in this life as a part of process.

Every character in this film does things because they believe in their nature. They begin as an act and soon cannot continue that to follow who they are or may be it is still part of the game. Stone, Jack, Lucetta and Madylyn are not elements of a plot but people representing our feelings and reservations to this leading of life. Religion is used as a tool or more so as a character in between these people. It is not posed as good or bad and used for its nature as it does with the people in the film. That makes “Stone” something unique and stands out of the films coming out now a day.

While there is no reason to not expect the charms of Norton and De Niro doing their best, Milla Jovovich is the real winner in this film. Her beauty is explicitly mentioned and employed in making these people do things they want to out of their character. Jovovich is more than convincing in giving this basket case of a character who is absolutely stunning on the outside but comes with a baggage you do not want to hold. Ultimately John Curran’s film on the screenplay of Angus MacLachlan is the kind of film we have been missing a while which takes regular plots and makes a spin out of it to present not alone characters to ponder but to ponder ourselves of the very behaviour we go through in our life. “Stone” may not be fast paced or gripping or clever but it has a real property to it which is to make its audience take a look at themselves in the mirror and think purely for who they are.

"Due Date" (2010) - Movie Review

While people may state the resemblance of “Due Date” to a much better film “Planes, Trains & Automobiles”, for me I would state it to anther film I adore. “Due Date” does not comes even close to the classic I would compare it to, “Midnight Run”. Todd Phillips after his humungous box office success and critically acclaimed comedy “The Hangover” comes back with the right pair. Who else could play a sophisticated jerk than Robert Downey, Jr. and who else could be the morbidly offbeat and unpredictably weird softy than Zach Galifianakis? Well, I could find a few name for the latter though.

“Due Date” is the road trip buddy comedy with good writing yet it flounders like a frustrated baby in the middle. Peter (Robert Downey, Jr.) is going back home to Los Angeles from Atlanta to his pregnant wife (Michelle Monaghan) while the disaster ball Ethan (Zach Galifianakis) boards the same plane. With the eventual case of being thrown off board due to Ethan’s simple interaction with Peter, the two strangers are bound by the script to travel together and reach the Los Angeles at the right moment for the delivery.

So everyone agrees upon this plot and all are in for the road trip fun. Ethan as we learn is an aspiring actor who has just lost his father and is also a great fan of the sitcom “Two and Half Men”. Both Peter and Ethan are jerks of different kind. While Peter is sharp with judgments and betrayals, Ethan is a complete mess living in a disillusioned world amongst pot and his dog Sunny. Ethan’s destruction are physical up to accidentally killing someone in worst cases while Peter could learn a thing or two about being nice without condescension and ego.

The best thing about “Due Date” are these sinusoidal trend of being likable and hatable in between these two on several instances throughout the film. Is not that how we deal with people too? We have our worst moments and the best ones leaving us wondering how to judge them. Here it is all in the extremes. An annoying conversation in the plane with Ethan ends with the result of being into the no fly list for Peter while the same guy is also offered a lift by Ethan till Los Angeles. How he spends his major portion of money on pot is a different thing but the guy has a good heart.

The film takes a decently original spin on this often gone trip till it begins to manipulate accidents, jealousy and more accidents to make them take crazy exits to known places. Then comes the legendary drugged experience to make them be standing on the same plane for once in the entire trip. While there are considerably good portion of laughs, it almost seems like watching an old over watched film in a big screen.

Regardless of the niceties both show sparsely on each other, the damages outweighs that and suddenly during a drug trip they unite for Pinkfloyd classic song. And it feels like Todd Phillips wanted to get the things wrapped up and go home. Then the traditional plot flow chart of when things are super smooth and emotional, there comes the ultimate betrayal and the final summing up to all horrible things (which includes a deadly road accident, stealing border patrol car and their trailer, accidental shooting) comes to happy ending.

“Due Date” does what it has set out to be done. It has two actors very good at their act and a story to set them together despite its artificial instances. At the end we get good laughs out of their predicaments, miseries and horrendous mistakes and yet we leave without the remembrance that these two characters are genuinely formed a good bond in the end. Sometimes a good buddy comedy film achieves the greatness by those simple charms wherein we believe in their friendship. We begin to hope to be friends with them however dangerous and destructive they are. In “Due Date” we never want to be friends with either Ethan or Peter not because they are bad people but they do not exist in flesh and blood even in the two dimensional world of cinema.

"Buried" (2010) - Movie Review

If you think buried alive is hopeless then you should watch “Buried” to see the 95 minutes step by step metaphorical burying of hope of Paul Conroy (Ryan Reynolds). It is an experiment, a good one and does not do it for the fun of it but has a character developing in the darkness and possible final moments of his life. Paul Conroy wakes up in a box, buried (duh!). He has is a zippo lighter, mobile phone and some other accessories he will get to find, have and acquire. His only friend and enemy will be the mobile phone with multimedia capability and the voices on the other end of the line. His turmoil will put us in more helplessness but also will be gripping.

Directed by Rodrigo Cortes, this is Ryan Reynolds all in experiment and he does it with complete commitment. The camera work by Eduard Grau works around the actor in the confined spaces and limitations. Reynolds is on every frame sans the time when he is devoid of light source. He is hurt, tired and running out of oxygen. More so he does not know where the heck he is. Who would want him buried and why? Slowly Paul in his few moments of short lived balance remembers that his convoy got hit by insurgents or Iraqis. He is not a soldier but a contract truck driver in Iraq for a corporation.

He finds the mobile and wonders whom to call. Who would you call? 911? Yes, he does that and everyone as expected are not able to make sense Paul’s predicament. He yells, screams, cries and begs. He gets transferred, put on hold, yelled at and told he is rude. He is screwed and there is nothing but the slow sense of getting dizzy and breathing his life out in a box in the middle of nowhere.

With such a bleak outlook towards the central character, “Buried” keeps you hooked. There are no flashbacks or any moment outside of the box. The limitation what Paul has is what we are shown. He has barely any place to move and the zippo is eating up the oxygen. He scrambles around and finally gets a call from the abductor asking 5 million and we understand the reason for providing a cell phone. Paul begins to call the US government and hopes to pay the ransom. In the midst of it is his employer calling to shatter one more news in the most unbelievable inhumanity in this scenario. It happens and I do not doubt people like that exist.

The strong suit of “Buried” is its attitude for not compromising. Your guessing game never ends till the credits rolls on what the hope Rodrigo Cortes is teasing us for. Ryan Reynolds gives a marathon of a performance, literally. He has the film to himself and it needs patience, consistency and endurance. He provides those. Though he does not come through as the gripping character one would hope for, he gives a human being and easily makes us to see ourselves in the coffin like him.

I remember a character in another film explaining that every human needs a measurable distance of space around themselves based on a survey or science. Claustrophobia is imminent in this situation and that dialogue reminded me of its gravity. We fight for space and territory and here there is no fight to be fought as the war is over before even it began. Paul does not give up. He calls his home and hopes to talk with his wife and son as the end appears to be soon.

The only distant resemblance of hope comes from an Englishman over the phone Dan Brenner (voice of Robert Paterson). He is the man the government has assigned for hostage situations like this. He consistently talks with Paul and provides snippets of subtle encouragement. Paul agonizes over him and does not believe him while Dan calmly tells him of other victims he managed to rescue. Paul half heartedly finds the only semblance of friend in Dan.

Despite the deepening and disturbing abyss of a scenario the film draws upon, it marginally stays on the entertainment mode which in any case is not wrong but sucks a little life out of this otherwise engrossing film. “Buried” should start making you feel miserable and helpless and should have ended in a more desolate place than that. It does but the affecting pain is over before you leave the theater. I cannot help but wonder why is that and I think Rodrigo Cortes despite his courageous attempt soft pedaled sub consciously. In no way I would hold that against the film. “Buried” should be watched purely for the way it makes you forget that a camera is rolling around the character. More than that to witness the director and Ryan Reynolds’ hard work.

"Conviction" (2010) - Movie Review

There is nothing more terrible than serving a prison term for a crime one did not commit. The agony is incomparable and the frustration has no limits. All these happens in a place where there is nothing but time to think about this, prison. Sam Rockwell plays Kenny Waters, a man sentenced to life without parole for a murder he did not commit, at least his sister Betty Anne Waters (Hilary Swank) thinks so. The film features two wonderful performances, both of which involves extreme care to make or break this. They make it.

Tony Goldwyn directs this film in one of those “based on a true story”. In 1980 a young woman Katharina Brow is murdered and Kenny is held responsible. Kenny is a wild man. He and his sister stuck with each other when their mother ran around leaving them to several foster homes. The result is two kids with strong bond. They disappeared into uninvited homes and mesmerized on the time between them. As much as their relation matured and stayed intact beyond the prion bars, their childhood has what shaped them to do whatever is necessary to save one from the holds of misfortune. Betty is determined to do that. Kenny gets guilty verdict in 1983 and is losing hope when Betty promises to get him out. Even it requires her to clear off GED, do law school.

Every time Betty meets Kenny, major part of it is breaking bad news or receiving one from Kenny’s hopeless prison life. Kenny begins to descent his slow death in two years when Betty got to give him hope. As long as she is working outside, that gives Kenny a reason to move forward. Betty unquestionably believes the innocence of Kenny even when the audience begins to doubt and her best friend (Minnie Driver). Betty has two wonderful boys doing their best for support but only before they give up or cannot match up to their mom’s determination. At one point in the film, the brothers put themselves in their mom’s shoes and ask themselves whether they would do the same for each other. Betty realizes what she has given up and for a moment goes out of her body and sees herself. She is blown away by her with a humility and scare.

“Conviction” is not a gripping thriller rather becomes a collective film. We question the clarity of the film when it strains the relationship between Betty and her husband without much reason but then the film has so much other things to ponder. We are not explained the toll this war takes on Betty’s marriage but it is only a matter of time and we shoo off our judgements. Every time we wander off in emotion there is always Sam Rockwell coming to remind us of the onus responsibility his sister has and how he draws not a sympathy but a painful empathy. That is scary. We are shuddered by his ordeal. The strangest thing they do not show the grueling prison life Kenny goes through. It is all in Rockwell’s performance. To go through prison is hell and to go through it unreasonably and be helpless about it needs an invention of another hell altogether. In Sam Rockwell’s performance in each milestone both good and bad, we cannot help but cry within ourselves of this man’s hopelessness. To say that to Kenny is the tough job Hilary Swank’s Betty has to do in real life. This is one tough woman and a brother with unimaginable endurance. He slips early but after that there is no going back.

Hilary Swank now officially claims to only take roles which challenges not in the film but also in real life. While she is not being type casted, there appears to be no other way out for her to be pursuing her career. What would be for Swank to play a supporting role? Here while Sam Rockwell does stand shoulder to shoulder and little above, the film is about Betty’s pursuit with all she has got. Swank is a commendable performing artist and there is no question about it. Take her dangerously daring role in “Boy’s Don’t Cry” or the colossal failure of Amelia Earhart in “Amelia”, she carries the mantle and does her best. Here as the Massachusetts resident and strong accented Betty, she does the role justice.

Tony Goldwyn does not go for high risks and plays it cautiously in surprises and endings. There needs to be a happy ending to this hard story even to the point that the post credit does not mention the tragedy of Kenny after the release. When I learned that I did not feel betrayed or felt manipulated. It is sad to know that but the film needs to be said in the way it was told and the triumph is necessary. Sometimes tragedy is no more about mood or emotion for a film, it becomes a matter of justice and in “Conviction” you get it, even if it is after couple of decades.