"The Town" (2010) - Movie Review

“The Town” is a no nonsense story. It falls for the victim of trailer spoilers but there is nothing much to hide either. The genre of crime films based on Boston is more than a genre. As New York or Paris, Boston the city has these neighbourhood and the community becoming a breathing element in these films. What attracts them is the way they differentiate from the set of generalization US gets looked upon. Every one knows the colour, festival and the vibrant culture when one talks about India but the same does not apply to US or the perspective of a unique culture becomes absent. But there is immense amount of it, not in the same sense of magnitude and widespread yet in its own way, it shows out. The coast bears history and it resonates in the close knit community living in it.

We are given in opening information from the magazine quotations about the notorious nature of Charlestown. Nexus for the bank robbers and a place where brotherhood runs like a tattoo. They are good in what they do as this is the business carried on by generation with central operators like Fergie (Pete Postletwaite). Fergie has been running the crew of Doug MacRay (Ben Affleck), James Couglin (Jeremy Renner), Magloan (Slaine) and Desmond (Owen Burke). They are no Ocean’s Eleven but they get the job done. In the opening scene, we see them in action. Blunt, focussed, dangerous and successful. This is the film wherein the central characters being bank robbers are made to be afraid instead of glorifying their knack in the profession. We are feared of them because they show their capability.

They take a hostage, bank manager Claire Keesey (Rebecca Hall) and leave her on a beach. James is the sicko in the group of thieves. Doug is the smart one and a man struggling to leave the town and the profession, unsuccessfully. In the duty of following Claire to make sure they did not leave anything behind, as expected Doug gets involved. Doug is soft on guns too as he has not killed anyone, lest forget his shaky past of fighting and getting into trouble. While he knows what James is capable, he cannot leave behind the buddy who has been with him in thick and thin and the fact that he had a long time relationship with his drug addict sister Krista (Blake Lively).

Ben Affleck is a capable director which he proved in his debut “Gone, Baby, Gone”. Here he appears to like the script because it carries his hometown on the backdrop. There is no doubt that aids the film but at the same time I would love to see him direct outside of his comfort zone. As much as his lead man Doug is trying to leave the town, Affleck appears to not share that opinion with his films. Despite, “The Town” is a good film if not great.

The strong suit of “The Town” are the robberies. They are shot with some raw gritty atmosphere to really let the audience feel the heat of the robbery. It is not adrenaline but blunt force in the way of its execution. While James uses bullets whenever he breathes, the people and the surrounding in the Boston becomes of something more than a usual robbery scene. I believe this is the first time I have felt the energy in those actions without any sides and see it objectively. Not in the view of morality but purely as a spectator.

The film is not with suspenses. The rituals of the slightly better thief gets an opportunity to taste a relationship outside of his community are done with good support from Rebecca Hall and some clever writing from Peter Craig, Aaron Stockard and Ben Affleck. Jeremy Renner as the trigger happy friend with an appetite for temper and violence is the holding chamber for Doug.

I liked “The Town” for not fooling around with what it has. Affleck knows that what he has is a story with angles seen several times on several perspectives. He knows that his perspective has to be personal and thus his Boston background to the rescue. It works well and provides a story wherein good and bad are very clear and yet we root for the redeeming criminal doing his redemption in all wrong ways. And Affleck does not apologize for that in his film. He gives an ending which would have been poorly contrived out of necessity in other films while it has some strength to this one.

"Red" (2010) - Movie Review

When a hit team to eliminate retired CIA black op Frank Moses (Bruce Willis) shatters his house without an iota of smartness in their attack plan, you know what you are in for. Bullets do not rain but flood. So does the cast. If you get the top talent in the business of serious film making and put them in a comedy action piece, you realize they want to do this film for fun. There is a dire need for unwinding film but still it has to live up. “Red” has veteran actors sleepwalking the roles and it is not that they are best at it but the film is an easy exercise and the fun gets a little routine and we see past the cast. It falls apart.

CIA agents especially the kind “Red” has are the best of the best as they survived the job and are alive. Frank as it turns out is alone and tears up his retirement cheque repeatedly to talk with a customer service agent Sarah (Mary-Louise Parker). Joe (Morgan Freeman) is spending his last days ogling young nurse’s back as he waits for the succumbing to liver cancer. John Malkovich as Marvin is the edgy paranoid freak constantly on vigilance to survive. Then the young chap from the CIA Cooper (Karl Urban) hunts for Frank. You get Helen Mirren at her most sexiest form with weapons and lipsticks. There will not be much blood as PG-13 made sure of it while there will be countless rounds of fires shot without thought or indecision all over the place.

“Red” is the film for my lazy Sunday evenings but I would feel terrible about it once I am done. It is like eating junk food till we choke and bleed our brains for that horrible mistake. Well, it is not quite as horrible though. “Red” does carry a charm because of its cast and especially to see Malkovich giving out a funny version of his devilishly twisted Mitch Leary from “In the line of Fire”. Freeman, Willis, Mirren and even the poor Brian Cox have nothing more to offer than their presence but then again that is all they have been asked.

I thought that the insanity of the bullet shooting has died. I am not saying the regular not shooting at a character but everywhere else. I am talking about the army of mannequins with guns shooting straight and sweeping on the object that obstructs them from their target. It is what makes major part of “Red”. It is not parody or homage or comedic. It is to set a tone and that I can take but to use it throughout the film is cheap.

Having good time at “Red” is the cloud of illusion. If you are looking to unwind and not care for the film, why do you want to go for a bad one? Why do not make a reasonable decision and pick something wherein there is a responsibility in film making rather than throwing away money in the assumption of enjoyment of their own? I think many will point out that I do this day in and day out while people go for “entertainment” but please do some justice to that taste of yours and give more credit to yourself. You owe it yourself.

I like fun, frolic and nonsense which takes itself seriously as a film. A film can be a chaotic circus show but it should see itself with something more than a business and accommodate its audience’s brain for some accomplishment of a film well done with full effort. “Red” has characters who speak of love and emotion which is hard to imagine. Take Marvin for example who appears not much is happening in his life other than consistently looking for helicopters and satellite trying to kill him. He has lost his mind and he comes ack to real world when violence requires him. The need for Frank to have a normal life purely becomes old age other than a reason for his connection to Sarah more than a group of romance trashy novels read.

Director Robert Schwentke got a cast that no one could ask for and it is not an obligating to provide a serious drama but use them of their full capability. The concept is the best part in this film wherein the killing machines have evolved into a phase of life that has termed them to rest and wait till they hit the ground. There are funny grandpa references (they dare not call Helen Mirren grandma!) but “Red” does not go beyond that in terms of character or comic relief.

"Hereafter" (2010) - Movie Review

It is funny to read that Matt Damon described “Hereafter” as Clint Eastwood’s French film because that is exactly what I thought of it. This is not due to the fact that one part of the story happens in Paris to a character who is from France. This is a film which takes predictability, tearjerker, obvious plot conclusions into a relatable and comforting enjoyable experience. It does not toy around with your emotions in great deal but at the same time leaves with you a heavy heart. Clint Eastwood is an inspiring man and he keeps on pushing the envelope. After his mediocre “Invictus”, “Hereafter” is the film that could set up for a great next venture.

The film sees death and the small window of doubt and possibilities with great seriousness without religious blanket. It sees it as the experience of coming close to the white light and attain a sense of an emotional completeness. Death, even in the thought of me makes me want to cry, not the death of mine but of my near and dear. The thought of permanent departure is scarily sad and Eastwood instead of exploiting honours it in his film.

There are three stories connected by the phenomenon of death and the after effects of it. Cécile de France is the French journalist Marie Lelay, a Tsunami survivor. In her state of tipping the doors of death, she had a strange suspension out of reality. It meant something to her and she wants to pursue the meaning of it. There is Marcus and Jason (Frankie and George McLaren) tightly wound twin brothers handling difficult situations to get out of from the claws of social service as her drunk mother (Lyndsey Marshal) is hardly in control to take care of them. Yet they all love each other happily in sober mornings.

Then there is George Lonegan (Matt Damon) a genuine psychic who is leading a life of simple man. We can only imagine the strain and problems his ability comes along with. He touches people’s hands and a sharp jolt similar to what Marie experienced provides a capability to listen to the dead. Now if that sounds artificial and skeptical, Eastwood makes it best. Coming from someone who does have much faith on the whole afterlife concept, you might want to go with an open mind. You will sure be delighted.

The phenomenon is simply a material than the contending point in the film. Three of these lives are of course interconnected and there will be the juncture in the film (which you already know by now when) wherein Damon’s character has to connect for the little boy Marcus. Despite all these, Eastwood’s film takes Peter Morgan’s screenplay and makes people out of them and provides a French environment in a San Francisco setting.

The interesting of the three stories is without a doubt George’s not because of the ability he got but the difficulty he has going through with it. His life has gone all wrong with this as his brother (Jay Mohr) clearly has made it a business venture in the past and eager to bring George from the hiatus. But George wants someone with whom he can have pleasant dinner and connect with the living one. He takes up Italian cooking and meets a charming and attractive young woman Melanie (Bryce Dallas Howard). Melanie is in there for a date and George is the eligible single man in the batch. We hope for an end to his solitude and have some companionship.

Marcus and Jason living in London are tough kids. Jason, the elder one is the smart and shrewd one while Marcus follows lovingly the decisions of his brother. In a tragic run of events Jason ends up dead and Marcus is set forth to foster parents. He is clearly alone and his look over brother has long gone. Death, they say provides little bit of peace when closure arrives. How can we explain closure to a kid like Marcus? Damon’s George provides that in the most astonishing and moving scene in the film.

“Hereafter” is not the greatest work of Eastwood but a unique and one of his best for sure. There is homage to the genre of French film making and as the genre itself, it is about the aura of the presentation and the simplicity of people’s character than the bigger agenda. What lies after death will be a doubt till you die and the film leaves it conveniently and deservingly so. This is the way I could tell a difference between a film falling for predictability and lethargic movie making from Clint Eastwood’s, when we hear the unabashedly used line “It is not a gift, it is a curse” in “Hereafter”, we relate and realize to the trouble and discomfort George Lonegan feels with a clarity shining through clear and clean.

"Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps" (2010) - Movie Review

Oliver Stone in his subtle loud manner stomps his chest on how he was right couple of decades back about the financial system. You do not need a movie for that though, yet he did and here we are. The novelty of “Wall Street” was about the danger in this system that has crime with victims not so direct and done without guilt going unnoticed . No one listened and the crash in 2008 happened. The lesson will not be learned as the world has a better tendency to be addicted to gambling than reform on a large scale. Though it did turn around lot of people. But the truth is when things go normal, people go their way. I am not cynical but realistic on the chances of people changing in this game and hope I am blatantly wrong. “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps” sees the crash as a history lesson and in the meantime bring Michael Douglas to do Gordon Gekko. He does not shine in glory or cut through the cake but he is sleazier than he was the first time.

Gekko has served his time and is out selling books to make a living. His daughter Winnie (Carey Mulligan) has never forgiven him for not being there when her brother slowly died of drug addiction. With a very odd ironic obviousness, she is in love with Jake (Shia LaBeouf) and he is a trader in investment bank. Jake’s boss Louis Zabel (Frank Langella) is nearing his end as his final bail out request gets rejected by the US treasury by a strong influence of a Hedge fund manager Bretton James (Josh Brolin). Jake as anyone is intrigued by the charisma and the flair of Gekko. He caves in against Winnie’s wishes and begins to work with the man to avenge the suicide of his mentor Zabel.

As simple it sounds, the film does not invest completely itself in both the main story and the backdrop it is set. This is more than a backdrop as it is a beast which talks through the numbers through the walls of the Manhattan skyline. There are side stories which connect the dots in the scheme of things. Jake’s mom is the slice of the real estate greedy agents unable to understand the eventuality. The global disease of gambling is much more legally polished is sad. I believe the crash of 2008 did teach a lesson or more to wake up the people under the coma of this drug. The rush is the motivation and greed indeed is not so good.

The story grabs the attention of any reader while it left me detached. Jake is not greedy but channeled wrong in his vengeance and his deal with the devil is not so convincing. Apart from his fiancé's dad, the speech Gekko gives for book sale is not burning enough to believe this young man is thoroughly attracted to this veteran killer shark in the trade. Though we play along and as Stone showers us with graphs and numbers, there is no intimacy in accusations on the people who participated in this breakdown.

The idea is to show how the people in and around the financial hub refused to believe the slide and kept on with their gamble hoping everything to be won. Jake’s pet project of his ambition to invest in the fusion project for research and better world only makes it draw short of the distance it hoped to cover. That would have been the story I would have liked to see wherein though the first film shows greed, the market was not going down and is indeed prosperous. As much as annoying and unreasonable the character of Jake’s mom played by Susan Sarandon is, that is the facade people would have been under to talk themselves into going in for more and losing heavily.

“Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps” is not a bad film. It has a very good plot, aggressive players in performers but a situation not being used well enough. For financial ignorant like me, it is the intention to dumb it down but the fact of it is that there is no clue in anyone in that is working out to understand this monster of a mess. Stone who did it sufficiently well enough in the first film does not have the power but has the skill to put together a film to pass by.

"The Social Network" (2010) - Movie Review

“The Social Network” is enthralling not alone due to its audience’s involvement in the Facebook but the character of Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg) unrelenting towards his success and taking anything, anyone and to anywhere. He is not cut throat but driven beyond control. He evaporates into thoughts and dreams and is making his baby Facebook as his personal war. A war towards his inability to claw the fact of being rejected. More so in being obsessively driven to the idea of being identified and belonging in an elite place in the Harvard University. The movie begins with it and setting up the story has not received such a precision on its character as it does out here.

David Fincher like Clint Eastwood is into respecting a story and screenplay rather than his style. They extract a style out of the words than to create and indicate their presence. It takes a magnanimity in them to do that. In “The Social Network” the screenplay by Aaron Sorkin dictates the terms and the editing Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall ties the knots. Linear narration can only make things uninteresting in this story. It is simple, Mark was already on to something with social networking and hijacked the idea of Cameron Winklevoss and Tyler Winklevoss (both played by Armie Hammer) to a level no one could imagine. The team of this film is not alone interested in the genesis of this movement but to read the man, men and the woman turned this thing around.

As it takes on the background on the legal stories and the origins of Facebook, we learn that Mark Zuckerberg is a creative programmer of great kind whose psyche revolves around source codes. He is unquestionably smart but consumed by the details of his own mind. One night of drinking marathon over an upsetting break up with his girl friend Erica (Rooney Mara) makes him vent out in his blog and then go on to post an online webpage to rate the hot girls. He does so by hacking the directories of the several residence houses in the campus and gets the photos of the female members. This particular scene is done like a chef cooking his best meal with a relish and spice to it. He does so with his best friend’s algorithm, with his permission. It crashes the network due to the traffic and then onto the notice of Cameron, Tyler and Divya Narendra (Max Minghella). The battle begins there.

This is a swift and profound story. Finding those two words in a sentence for describing a film does not come often and easy. Jesse Eisenberg is someone like Michael Cera always on the cards for becoming different forms of Eisenberg than the characters he plays. He plays a grown up version of Walk Berkman from “The Squid and the Whale” and it does not surprise me on how he nails it. He is not essentially a jerk but his motivation obstructs his right intentions of his character. He makes the deal with the devil within himself in the idea of achieving greater things or find a satiating experience in redeeming himself from the horrendous posting about his ex-girlfriend in his blog. His march towards making this phenomenon as a cleansing process in gaining acceptance only makes himself digs deeper and uglier.

This is not a film about making statements. Everything that we know about it are out there but it is the manner in which we see this college kids creating and playing with things bigger than anything this generation has seen. Being the power handlers in creating a participation linking everyone around the globe originates from simple human emotion. During that process, we are thoroughly entertained as well. There is emotional viewpoint and a fair one from the Zuckerberg’s lawyer’s junior (Rashida Jones) in seeing things as an outsider and insider. We see the flashy and impressive guy in Sean Parker (Justin Timberlake) charismatic, suspicious and unreliable. And the other part of the suing personalities constantly being asked to adhere to the way they were brought up and the adamance in being gentleman by Cameron Winklevoss is naive, applaudable and in a strange way funny.

It is based on the book by Ben Mezrich’s “The Accidental Billionaires” and thanks to David Fincher for not beginning the film as “Based on true story”. A fact deviates so much away from the here-say and this taking a literary and media form only adds to the mix. The angle on this man’s mind and his actions affecting people around him is fascinating despite the nature of the back stabbing and the betrayal that keeps on flowing repeatedly through the deposition and the birth and adulthood of the company is an indication that we feel and hurt in any form of communication.

Mark loses his best friend Eduardo Saverin (Andrew Garfield) and then universally announce him being the jerk in the process. In everything of these, money is not the factor but the identity is at stake. To be unique and exclusive are the keywords used in filtering friendship. This attitude has taken a shape and form in Facebook and is successful because we are all guilty of it. Now we are obligated to “confirm” a friend of random requests through glances or friend of a friend or the main driving factor of hooking up. The relationship between online friends is the depth of a mouse click and it keeps thinning.

The Girl Who Played with Fire (Language - Swedish) (2010) - Movie Review

It is strange that we cared more for finding the killer of the supposed murder of a girl in 60s in “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” than the primary lead Lisbeth Salander’s (Noomi Rapace) framer in the sequel “The Girl Who Played with Fire”. Lisbeth returns from her outing away from Sweden and she can still freaking kick some ass. Noomi Rapace plays her with the same vigour and persistent from the first film in this Millennium Trilogy with “The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest”.

Mikael Blomkvist (Michael Nyqvist) had a memorable case and encounter with Lisbeth that he is not mad or disappointed when Lisbeth disappears for a year. He knows her pain behind those eyes and knows her withdrawal from social scene. Lisbeth keeps track of her perverted and rapist guardian Nils Bjurman (Peter Andersson) in tags. She hacks his mail and learns that he has ordered a tattoo removal service. Bad idea. She goes back to remind him the drill he remembered being recited with tied hands and gag on his mouth a year back from her. Things happen wherein not alone Nils meets a deadly end but a novice journalist Dag (Hans Christian Thulin) who was about to break a big story about sex trafficking gets killed along with his girlfriend. All three are done with the same gun with Salander’s fingerprint on it. She flees and Mikael tries to solve this frame job.

In most of these investigative films, there is a single source of view point towards these nail biting trail findings. The technique is to keep the screenplay focussed and not stray away and in these two films they digress from this method rather methodically. At least for major portion of these films, there are two people tracking the details and arriving at the same destination. There is no comparison of traditional methods though Mikael’s is something like that while Lisbeth’s is plays technology like a musical instrument.

Sometimes Hollywood submerge into the computer screens which does not look like any conventional Operating Systems but these films advertise and follow religiously the Macbook and its OS. How does Lisbeth hack other’s computers is a different deal but her process is clear and mainly believable as they take you to a screen you know and have seen. Despite these, “The Girl who Played with Fire” does not make you want Lisbeth to exonerate herself. Not that we do not care but we do not mind much about it.

The past of Lisbeth was slit open in the first film wherein she bathes a man in fire. Obvious guess of the man will be her dad. She had a rough life and not because of her Goth and antisocial behaviour but there is a wear in her face that are masked by a painted make up that do not belong. She smokes not with a style but with a despair. She has had it tough and the past does not leave her alone. She escaped from the claws of her cruel guardian but her childhood abuse has left her permanently damaged. That part of it is used as a tool to a plot than to characterize her for more examination.

Given all this, the film never stops to get breath. It keeps on moving and let us not settle ourselves with a cruise control plot. The information comes on without any problem and the fight for it keeps the clock ticking with justified duration. Another great part of this films is the supporting characters owning up to the task not in characterization but in physical endurance and kick ass abilities. Her lesbian lover Miriam Wu (Yasmine Garbi) and Paulo Roberto (playing himself) give their best to the blond giant Ronald Niedermann (Micke Spreitz). Ronald comes as the equivalent of James Bond villain Iron Jaw. The Iron Jaw would automatically bring my intestine to complete stop but this blond giant is merely reaction less and uninteresting villain.

I think I was left unsatisfied despite a reasonably well expedited and executed screenplay. In “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo”, I mentioned the unnecessary need for an explicit rape scene and hoped for a better justification in the sequels to invite and empathize in the dark world of Lisbeth. They do so but not for a character study rather a plot driving equipment. Nothing wrong with it but it fails to connect as the first film did. We are entertained but not moved.

"Wall Street" (1987) - Movie Review

The success of “Wall Street” is the way in which it buys the audience into this scheme. It also succeeds in how it does not let them see the darkness of it so easily until the world crumbles under the young hero of this film Buddy Fox (Charlie Sheen). The system exists and has destroyed several and it continues to do so. The film happened in 1985 holds same till date in an ugly manner to be scared of. For someone devoid of the stocks, finance and the whole dirty nine yards of it, I got educated in the hazy way any one would be getting into this system by director Oliver Stone.

The movie follows the traditional three act screenplay and yet is not a cliche. It has the upcoming youth Buddy aspiring to be working with his hero Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas). Gekko played by Douglas cuts through the chase. As much as he is devious in his actions, there is an honesty when he is with Buddy. Buddy has been trying to get a meeting scheduled with Gekko for several days with no reply. Gekko does not have time for a small time broker in a firm doing research and suggesting it to their clients. Buddy finds the window of opportunity identifying the birthday of Gekko, his first insider information to the doors of facade of prizes. The second step is to succeed in the meeting by impressing Gekko and he sells his second insider information given by his dad (Martin Sheen) union leader for an airline company Blue Star. These two wealthy of information gets him onboard with his hero. The work begins.

Buddy rises and spikes high within quick span of time. Gekko sees him as the protege. The system itself is a broken system built on guesses and games. People like Gekko see this as the smart players in it. If gambling is legal, then why it is putting hard work to do best gambling is illegal? The idea of stocks and its buying and selling is far beyond my realm of comprehension but there is something uniquely sleazy about it. It spins a cranky machine and the work of it is not of much use other than the existence of the parts. The machine needs to be reconstructed or put to rest but Gekko are the people who provides band aid bad fixes to keep it running as it is their livelihood.

Buddy in his third act redemption questions Gekko “How much money is enough?”. With billions, millions and hundreds of thousands of dollars in play what is the eagerness to go after further more? If you have the money, you will find ways to spend it. One could say the expensive arts Gekko buys but that too he sees it as business and talks proudly on the money it elevated since he bought it. Gekko is there for the game and the adrenaline after a while. Money is morale boost than the value of it in the world. Gekko’s high is the Wall Street.

Oliver Stone provides an insight just enough to be wary of to the ignorant person like me out there. In a film wherein the corruption and scandal is so high, there are only few places there is mention of legality. In the end it ties the knot of the cause and effect but the working environment of this business conveniently provides a blanket on this criminal persecution. There is no stealing, no killing, no blood shed and pure transfer of information. Hence there is no crime. The crime scene is nothing but a regular day at work. This disguise it poses and the lives it ruins under it are shared but not shown. We see cleverness in Gekko and much appreciate rather disgusted by his manipulations. But that is how the stock works.

“Wall Street” is the entertaining thriller which should scare you because this is the world you live in and this is how you become numb and oblivious to the situation. Stone pokes that part of you and see how dangerous this can be in the big scheme of things. Companies destroyed, workers out of work and it becomes the genesis of a much bigger wider roots for greater crimes around the country. This he gives so with the balance of a young man disturbed by the glory and glamour of this profession.

Michael Douglas can be an easy player and he plays this man as a perfect egomaniac gloating every moment of his achievements. His narcissism is charismatic and attracts despite that. Charlie Sheen sits there and acts as the puppy Buddy being groomed, praised and disappointed. Martin Sheen does the right job of the ethical and righteous focus to this story. At the end of the film he says “Do not buy and sell, Create”. Too bad “Wall Street” is not famous for that line but for Gekko’s “Greed for the lack of better word, is good”. That tells so much about the world we live in.

P.S. : “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps” is in theatres and I hope (and eager) to see it soon enough.

"The American" (2010) - Movie Review

“The American” takes a traditional assassin thriller and does nothing but put some art to it. It does not glorify the killing machine and the killer does not look for sympathy. He yearns for a calmness as any middle aged assassin would aspire for from what we have learned from the education of Hollywood killer films. If George Clooney claims to have selected this role based on the screenplay then I would have to seriously doubt his sense of observation as the screenplay cannot be more straightforward, simple and a bee line inappropriate in this story. I think he believed in the director and the meeting should have been in that place in Italy where the film happens. May be Anton Corbijn is a good marketing person or his casting director Beatrice Kruger is.

Jack or Edward (George Clooney) has no one to trust and he begins to hate this game. As the film opens an attempt is made on his life as he spends in the hidden snow land of Sweden. He flees to Italy and his employer Pavel (Johan Leysen) asks him to, you guessed it “lay low”. Jack does so in a little small hill town where the clouds can kiss its shadows and it is not the place Pavel mentioned. Edward/Jack does the usual, practicing target shots in a serene hidden place, make some connection with a priest (Paolo Bonacelli) and develop romantic interest with a prostitute (Violente Placido). A typical assassin getaway.

There is an elegance in “The American” which in its used up plot has a charm and depth in the blankness of this killer. George Clooney is an interesting man. In his tempting sharp look, he has a deserving tiredness. His character is getting old for this business as any one would in any career. They would hit the point for some sanity and control. Clooney’s Jack is utterly devoid of permanent relationships. Trust is not the word which runs smooth in his line of work.

The man gets one last job and this is not to take a contract but to provide a perfect equipment for a sufficiently well versed new comer. The scenes with Mathilda (Thekla Reuten) are nothing short of tension. Both killers know that anytime they will turn on each from either of their employers. There is a particularly impressive scene wherein Edward takes her to his “happy” place for testing the rifle. There she turns her back and walks to place her target and Edward looks at her with a suspicion to pull the trigger which is so precise but dismisses. Then she lets him take a shot near her to gage the loudness and performance. This is a tango like no other in the emotions of these two people running through tension, calmness and tons of doubt.

Corbijn wants completion in the simplest act of a scene. He waits for the automatic door to be shut and an arrangement of bullets to be immaculate. I think Clooney wanted to make something new out of a worn out character. As the rule book for contract killers goes, one should not speak and Jack speaks sparsely yet he is able to make a connection with Clara the prostitute with statements speaking clearer than silence. Clara sees the mystery in him and thus the attraction is imminent. Also forgot the fact that it is George Clooney but she is devilishly beautiful.

“The American” could have been a fashion show of beautiful people but it makes them beautiful believable people with secrets and torment. Jack’s trouble is in the misery of his existence in being aloof, completely. As the adrenaline spiked down and the grey hairs caught up to him, he has truly understood the nature of living. As much as cold and brutal he has led his life when “The American” happens, his conscience has grown out.

Even in the soothing sceneries of the Italy achieved with a lovely cinematography by Martin Ruhe, there is a hand of simplicity. In the whole scheme of the film, this nature of being there and not becoming a great statement or trying to make one moulds this predictable twists into forgiving ones. We are not bothered by the end of this man but the story of his intrigues us. Death is at every corner in this stone road town and his day runs by with watchful eyes and restless walks. While his job demands this, for some reason I believe Jack did it without fear of death when he began his career and now he does with every bit of his heart.

"Julia" (2008) - Movie Review

Tilda Swinton is Julia, an alcoholic wrapping her arms around wrong decisions one after another. She is totally out of control but somehow gets around making believe that everything is going to be merry and flowers in her la la land. She is not a ticking time bomb rather a series of explosion that never seem to stop. Tilda Swinton comes with loose dresses that have expired the youth in her and disheveled hair from random sexual encounters in her passed out drunken nights. She is audacious in taking up this role which does not invite dislike but a disgust.

In this reckless soul are some remote miniscule droplets of love. “Julia” will not be an exploration into that deep emotion. It will be the mine bombs she purposefully steps in. She gets fired as her sober time does not coincide with her office time. Her sponsor Mitch (Saul Rubinek) is concerned and given up. As her booze mania begins to bite and break the skin, she is into money trouble. Next thing you know she is listening to a fellow AA member Elena (Kate del Castillo) blabbering about her plan to kidnap her taken away son Tom (Aidan Gould). This is the sweet part which is to demand ransom from the kid’s paternal grandfather as he is loaded with money.

Julia reasonably stays away from Elena but the blood alcohol level beckons to differ in it. She not alone goes and scouts the location where the boy will be but double crosses Elena by taking the kidnap by herself. Before even she is aware of what she has gotten into, she takes Tom, ties him up and treats so bad that she does not deserve any kind of sympathy. This is a step by step exercise of disintegrating human being out of an addiction.

In “Goodfellas” we have seen Ray Liotta’s Henry Hill in the day of arrest goes on performing several tasks on being high on coke. Normal things become tedious, nerve wracking and ultimately tiring. Julia is a film which is an expansion of that day only that Julia’s day to day activities are not normal. She has no clue what to do with the kid, does not have a plan and never looks back on the predicament she is in. There is a voice inside her constantly telling the stupidity she is meditating but those are vented as shivers and sweats. Julia continues.

Tilda Swinton was a surprise winner for Academy Award for female supporting actor in “Michael Clayton”, a beloved movie of mine. Her character Karen Crowder was determined, composed and rehearses like a mad woman before she ventures out in the world of wolves. She is a wannabe wolf entering that dark arena and the nervousness she shows are taken in Julia. She has amplified that performance and gets into this female of self destruction. Swinton takes a dive as Harvey Keitel did in “Bad Lieutenant” and Mickey Rourke did in “The Wrestler”. When you put yourself out here like that, there is nothing but pure work of art and here she gets it in a despicable character.

Erick Zonca’s film also has other characters, the main one is Tom played by Aidan Gould, a kid who knows the situation, scared but not unknowing. Gould’s Tom realizes he is in a bad situation with a woman who is completely out of control. He tries to escape as expected and in the scattered idea of Julia, he is trapped. Julia on the other hand loses him often but retrieves him. This is the single most attempt in getting some co-ordinated action in her drunken spree.

So the end of “Julia” is not pleasant but there is redemption. Call it Stockholm Syndrome but these two characters begin to form a bond which traveled through mostly bitter experience. Tom has every reason to hate Julia but in those few days, he gets an irresponsible mother. The boy has been without a mother and Julia makes up for it. For Julia this is her final hope and disaster. There is no sweet story to follow after the end of the film but I am sure she would go for a prospective AA meeting.

"Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World" (2010) - Movie Review

The outcome of the actor’s job is in the hands of several other people and the team lead of the film, the director. When they pack up to leave for their next job. When they see the film, it would be an experience of what they did became. Shock or happiness is upto them along with the audience. It is unveiling a machine and you are the one who designed the bolt. You do not know where it was about to go but you find it in the product. This most of them are aware but “Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World” is the one where director Edgar Wright seriously makes you think of it. The transitions from a scene to the next one is so random but so in line fitting like a perfect jig saw puzzle. Too bad it did not survive throughout the film. It withers.

Edgar Wright is the young blood from the pool of cool blood. He took on “Shaun of the Dead” his first spoof/homage to the horror genre. He has a knack of mocking and tributing in an ambidextrous fashion. It fizzled personally where he took things literally for dipping his hands to the bone and flesh of the horror. It left a distasteful feeling but horror in its gory form is something I have stayed away from which did that. In “Hot Fuzz” wherein Wright returned with action comedy spoof/homage that played so beautifully and when he did similar indulgence as in his horror venture, I was amazed, self indulged and noted it as one of the best films of the year. After those, it is obvious for him to take on the comic book and then of course merge in the fantasy of gaming world. The idea as always takes off to a kicking start but the key ingredient of what Simon Pegg and Nick Frost brought into those material cannot spring up high in Michael Cera and Mary Elizabeth Winstead.

As the title says it is Scott Pilgrim (Michael Cera) who has to take on the world of evil ex-es of Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizbeth Winstead). Cera tries a little bit out of himself by being the adult he has been shunned off in other films. Not every one in the film are a fan of comics or the game world but Wright definitely is. I remember talking to a film maker in India who mentioned the key element in Hollywood movies which is the fact that the mood is brought right from when the studio names are displayed. It makes an intense difference and so we enter “Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World” with Universal theme played as gaming MIDI format. Sweet start.

Scott Pilgrim gives Michael Cera at least the liberty to cheat. He is desperate to feel good about himself and hence dates a high school Chinese girl Knives Chau (Ellen Wong). He is trying to get over that brutal break up with his ex, now a popular rock star. He is the bassist in his band with his high school ex Kim (Alison Pill) as the drummer. So as you think how many ex Pilgrim has, in comes Ramona, who has a funky hair style and a careless outlook to give one sign and one sign only, trouble, baggage and past that is going to haunt her and in this case try to kill Scott.

The film plays like a game played by Edgar Wright. It has action sequences which after a long time is refreshing and fast with bloodless joy. Then it has the right usage of interlacing the sequences. A door in the midst of nowhere and I know it has been done some many time but in here it almost feels home. Like it belongs and participates in this game Wright plays out though not always. Those are high peaks you see and we are longing for some association to the characters than to see them as game characters.
The film which takes hints of the game world in to movies soon forgets the fact that the audience are watching this play. It begins to autoplay the levels. Even for someone who does not understand this world of arcade games and early greatness of simple target driven PC games, the usage of the props from that world becomes tedious. We neither like or dislike Scott Pilgrim and we certainly are not flattered by Ramona’s evil ex-es. They formulate great stunt sequences but there is no character to them to remember for who they are.

The music rocks at times and moves slowly to the pace the movie diminishes. The creative energy in the film is unquestionable. It blends in nicely and legibly to certain sequences and becomes an exercise in others. It is a victim of its own imagination. The medium it appreciates and infiltrates has to be background in this case unlike the director’s previous ventures. Gaming is a strange beast and it involves our participation than mere observation. In “Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World” it does not ask participation but the nature of it drives it to be. We are like a friend to Edgar Wright playing this new game and for half an hour we watch him play and then we want to play it but you cannot.

"The Memory of a Killer" (Language - Dutch) (2003) - Movie Review

“The Memory of a Killer” is the thriller you have seen but not with Jan Decleir in it. He does not do an extraordinary work or he makes it so easy on our eyes. A dying killer is not a good sign for any one because he has one more reason to go on his spree with his nothing to lose attitude. Jan Decleir’s Angelo Ledda is succumbing to Alzheimer’s disease and his change of mind in this case should have been more than a contract to kill a kid but it is never explained. We do not worry or carry that burden as Ledda carries it for us in his tiring eyes and dissipating brain.

While Alzheimer becomes the primary action for his change in life, it never really takes it full effect. Director Erik Van Looy worked on a tag line than a plot line. Nevertheless “The Memory of a Killer” moves as it has always in the cat and mouse thriller game and with a strange empathy towards the killer with no past. Retirement is not an option and age has only made him sensitive than the other way around his job demands.

The trick in the film is to escape those logics of his final redemption. He goes for a job in Antwerp and gets handed two assignments. One he successfully completes with some fragments of incompletion within his mind while the other he comes close to realize that he has to kill a child. To people who are not aware of the code the movie contract killers have is that they have a soft spot for kids. Our Angelo is no different and he takes it personally when someone else does the job he refused. He begins the vengeance.

There has to be a police as crime is still punishable by law. Vincke (Koen De Bouw) is the young man with empty house and slaughtered innocence from his job. The young girl Angelo missed and later completed by his employer is the one Vincke rescued from the claws of a sick father using her for prostitution. Vincke needs assurance and sanity for continuing his job though Koen De Bouw is super fresh and does not carry the ghosts with him. A single look at Jan Decleir and we do not want to know his past as it is written with burned bones in his grey hairs and sweaty face.

The attire Angelo chooses has something to say. He is aging but with style. He is sloppy in his works but he is a gamer lost interest in the game. A joking but perfect analogy is me driving the wrong way in a racing game because I am tired of it. Angelo does not go mad like that but approaches it methodically. His definition of crooks are really low level sick people and that is final deed to the dreadful life he has led. He is consumed by it and begins the hunt.

“The Memory of a Killer” offers little suspense and you do not complain. In Decleir’s performance there is not alone a presence but the simplicity of the killer he wants to be. All his jobs have been without background and he gets to go on a rampage of his choice in his magnum opus. He is a sociopath of a different kind. The goodness in his deepest heart are good for the audience but clinical for Vincke. Vincke has a smart and sharpshooter right hand man Verstuyft (Werner De Smedt). He is focussed with a blind dedication to the job as if a younger version of Decleir. But the film analyzes the similarities in Vincke and Angelo.

When there are two leads in a film, there needs a balance or more than that is a match. Vincke as a character and Koen De Bouw as an actor are no equal to Angelo the character and Jan Decleir the actor. They are not the same and they are not the difference we wish to analyze. They are simply two characters with one very strongly influencing its audience.

Still there is classic text book storytelling in this film. It is simple and does not boast of having a great one. It calmly dictates it and leaves the rest to its casts. Rest is bullets, blood and bodies. The culprits meet their fate and so does Angelo. There is a victory for the good as it should and we leave with a content heart. What it associates the memory of a killer is not the striking blow rather the killer being made into a slightly sympathetic character with no explanation other than his zest for killing the well defined bad guys makes us to be him for the period of film. That memory sticks.

"Winter's Bone" (2010) - Movie Review

A place sculpts its people. Crossing boundaries and crossing frontiers will erase their sharp sword but the sheath remains as traces of that remains deeper than the bones and the subtly mixes itself in the blood. “Winter’s Bone” is a story of a place and how it shapes the people in it. They are not stereotypes but characters. They are not mocked but constitute a sense of scary stillness to the place they live. In this land which often follows a violent act with an act of kindness is Ree Dolly (Jennifer Lawrence), a seventeen year old sister of two being made to an adult.

Debra Granik’s film is the kind of meditation you find in films which has immaculate details in creating an environment along with its character. Like the poetic films of “The Proposition”, “The Assassination of Jesse James by Coward Robert Ford” and David Gordon Green’s southern films, Granik takes on the inner veins of Missouri. Though I have studied in this dense state, I dare not claim that I have the knowledge of the culture and the mood of that place. But Granik creates those with an authenticity that is true to the story it forms.

Ree has a sick mother unable to comprehend the reality around her. They just tell she is sick but she can listen and react to what she wants. May be Ree’s disappeared father Jessup’s meth labs have caused her to be that way. That brings to the driving sense for this film which is that Jessup has a court date to appear and has left the house and woods as a bond for his arrest. Now he is going to jump the date and thus the only source of comfort of having a place to stay is getting ripped off from Ree.

She has to find her dad. To do that she enquires, snoops and finally goes to places a seventeen year old does not allowed to be seen. Jessup’s brother Teardrop (John Hawkes) is not inviting of his niece. Teardrop is the collection of all the uncles we all feared as kid. With him around he creates trepidation in lazy movement of his. A face with marks, tattoos and scars that cannot be differentiated, he is not the one to mess with. There is a gun and magazine in place where keys are kept in his house. A mere start of sentence with “Listen” by Ree brings forth a sudden wrath that tells about the man he is. Then again his wife Victoria comes back with some wise advise and some cash for Ree to move on.

Wherever Ree goes, everyone knows the situation. There needs no explanation other than the fact that no one is there to provide the answer she wants. In between these on-the-edge situations Ree gets into we wonder was there even an affection that lived across her dad and the family? There is lot of pride in being a Dolly but abandoning a family for meth lab does not score brownie points for affection with your loved ones. Despite that Ree goes and stares and graces the shoes and clothes of her dad. She daunts and carries a determination in finding her dad dead or alive where risk does not even appear to be on the horizon for her.

There will be those who are denied the opportunity to be kids, teens or even the early part of irresponsible adulthood. Even in a family of strict upbringing, there exists an entry to an exit temporarily into the world unseen. There those kids become kids and in those we have seen people like Ree whose moments to those exits are dropping her young sister to the school. Looking at yearning on the opportunities that will be missed and her life stranded into the responsibility she never opted for. Being that kid and becoming that kid is brought in by Jennifer Lawrence. She does not enter a house with nothing but trouble not because of determination but the confidence in the ability to handle it. It does not scare her because she grew up around meth lab. She is smart around the people who are both deceiving and helping at the same time. When you have people like that there is nothing but your family keeping you inside the small sanity in the house of hers. When that is threatened to be taken away, there emerges those instincts she never knew of or shown of.

John Hawkes is the actor you would have seen as faceless sleazy man in films wherein all he has to do is exist with his devious presence. He is the guy who talks a lot and gets kicked with the support of audience for our action hero. He is also the man giving a complicated yet likable person in “Me You and Everyone We Know”. As Teardrop, the uncle of Ree, he has matured to a degree which have been denied to him in all other films. He is all what he has done in the stereotypic role I mentioned but here there is the conviction. He transitions into the unexpected life saver which is more than the hope you could hope for, even if he snorts coke now and then. That is the world Ree survives upon.

“Winter’s Bone” never denies and takes advantage of its environment for the sake of plot. The characters in here cannot be confirmed by me as real but in this film they cannot get more than that. If I stop by in a remote place of Missouri or drop in the outskirts in a town a colleague of mine comes from, I can see myself running into these people. I might get hit by Merab (Dale Dickey) with her cup, helped by strangers like Sonya (Shelley Waggener) and stared by Ree with her friend Gail (Lauren Sweetser). Debra Granik brings forth the territory which are foreign to Americans yet it is so American in simple subtle actions in the midst of imminent dangers. Seek this film is all I can say.

"Raavanan" (Language - Tamil) (2010) - Movie Review

Mani Ratnam’s “Iruvar” is the one of the few films of his which tears up the skin a little on its characters. They carry the suave and sophistication of the director’s style and they obey to their senses and give out the people rather than a glossy outlook for a poster. “Raavanan” is the opposite of that where the nature in the background has more flesh and bones to it than the characters. This is director’s second venture into adapting an Indian ancient epic in to his version and modernizing. The first one was “Thalapathi” taking Mahabharatha as its core which fairly does justice to the cast and audience. “Raavanan” takes hints from Ramayana which in the end draws sympathy from us towards the capable actors.

The film begins with bangs and brutal murders. As police men are drawn into the traps of this ferocious unforgiving man Veeraiyya (Vikram), he collects his final prize Raagini (Aishwarya Rai) in the middle of nowhere who is having a leisurely boating trip. There begins the setups for the director’s illusion of poetic imagination to have cinematography of high technical skills but with inconsideration on the job he took of presenting a film. Raagini’s husband Dev (Prithiviraj) is the soft looking but terrorizing police officer obsessed in catching Veeraiyya than rescuing his wife. That should have been flesh to chew for proper entry into this proclaimed hero as this devious personality who has utter disrespect for the way his job is done. Instead we get into this remote camps he stays and Veeraiyya changing locations as and when he pleases.

After a long time you get to see yesteryear actors Prabhu and Karthik in thankless roles. Especially Karthik who made his entertaining presence in the director’s earlier film “Mounda Ragam” as this comical yet commanding personality. Karthik plays Forest Officer Gnaanaprakasam supposed to be Hanuman, the faithful monkey god in the epic. Mani Ratnam ventures into this abysmal loud reference of it by making Karthik jump from trees to buildings and unfunnily mimicking the police officers. Neither Dev or us are impressed by it but Dev has to as the story needs to be continue with Gnaanaprakasam. The officer is the maze solver in this luscious jungle and his capabilities are never exemplified.

If Karthik is for Dev then there is Prabhu for Veeraiyya as the titular character’s elder brother Singarasu. Prabhu as an actor can make any onscreen characters comfortable by his presence. Even in his ferocious character he can make an offbeat friend to Raagini and he does in a way. Then again Mani Ratnam is too interested in the falls and greenery. Prabhu along with Vikram’s Veeraiyya wanders around in the jungle while providing food and zero characterization.

Films which does not carry much sense in story are made into this masterpiece by poetic images. Such is where I would consider Mani Ratnam is at least capable of providing his works. His characters are too polished and become a mannequin than an unfinished yearning line in a poetry. Veeraiyya in his appearance and mannerisms is a man to be feared of and in this film’s case bored of. He rhymes unpopular rhythms to annoyance than scare Raagini. And let me start talking about Aishwarya Rai as Raagini yelling, screaming and wondering what the heck she is doing in a film like this. Here Raagini becomes this judgment towards this two characters. Thee is a pivotal scene wherein the director shows how feared she is in inside by her screaming in a land with blackness but beauty in it. That should have been a daring moment in this film industry to portray something like that yet it lacks the oomph to it. I could appreciate the effort but the execution is quarter baked.

Vikram got to reevaluate his choices at this point. His success in critically acclaimed films are supposed to encourage for similar roles than as a mass hero. While couple of them I would welcome to please those senses of senselessness, but it appears to be his mantra in the past years. Taking up this film would have been an obvious choice but to be left there as Veeraiya is the worst thing he could have asked for.

Characters come by for no reason and disappear as they wish. They serve no purpose other than to fill the screen of beauty in the unseen and untouched southern India. Prithivraj is the only actor who makes much of the little bone he got offered. He is calm, well groomed and carries a menace which we can believe. He is the perfect cast for the Rama’s character because in the way he appears and presents as the accepted hero. He is spotless in attire and action but there lies a creepy cunningness and doubt that the film should have been made surrounding him.

People hail Mani Ratnam for how he takes these ancient stories and applies it to the modern scenario. I would accept that for “Thalapathi” which made a psedo faithful adaptation. It worked because Mahabharatha has complex characters and situations wherein there is this swinging balance of right and wrong. Every one is a culprit in that story and hence when it got over to the director’s adaptation, it easily fit in. In “Ramayana”, the right and wrong are so clearly set from the way the story has been told. Rama is immaculate even when he is cruel in suspecting Sita. He is good looking, charming and supposed to obey parent’s command regardless of how ill conceived and stupid it would be. He is the example Indian men were asked to be. Raavanan is the embodiment of evil although he became the kind of man most of us are, tempted by the beauty and driven by emotions of his sister being humiliated. The indirect and convoluted point Mani Ratnam ineffectively makes is the analogy between these two and say that it is not as black and white as the epic puts forth. Or to be fair and precise on how the epic has been spread out to people. The director’s adaptation is a step by step grueling slow approach of how to waste time and talent of good actors and the technical expertise of his cinematographers.

"Transsiberian" (2008) - Movie Review

You can make a noir suspense with the elements that are so to be in a noir and finish it as an assignment. That works most of the time. It leaves you with contentment but not a satisfaction. Brad Anderson’s “Transsiberian” gets a new setting, retains those elements of noir and then twists, turns and of all gives some characters who are always on the edge and define a true sense of stubborn and relish for darkness. If desperate times brings true face of a person, “Transsiberian” has some characters that brings those with a strange cunningness.

What more than a closed train and carriage full of strangers traveling in a snow filled country be the setting for a noir drama? Roy (Woody Harelson) and Jessie (Emily Mortimer) are traveling back from China to Moscow in this longest railway system in the world. Their church or more like Roy’s church has send them for some goodwill programs. Their cabin mates are those dubious characters Carlos (Eduardo Noriega) and Abby (Kate Mara). Those young and luscious couples are always a danger. Carlos invites and keeps on seducing in subtleties for an eventual move towards Jessie while Abby reminds Jessie in her wild days. Roy is just Roy, a free flowing cheery individual consistently in love with his wife. Add Ben Kingsley in to the mix as this snaky and calmly threatening cop Grinko, you have more than something going on.

There are some breathtaking shots of this train in the never ending white dirt. In the middle of nowhere is this box where time has to be spent with making friends out of strangers and consume alcohol instead of water. Roy loves trains but the couple is having the usual marital issue of having/not having a baby. The film rolls on and in those train stations when the couple split there are some pasts revealed, present buried and a future that has nothing but trouble written on it. Jessie had her days of decadence and debauchery ending in an accident, literally, in dashing with Roy’s vehicle. Roy comes as the guardian angel and forgives her sins and brightens her out of darkness.

Behind those tired eyes of Jessie, there still is that old sweet young girl running away from everything. With Roy the only soul in her life dissatisfied and a closed train with time making its plans, she thinks of those days of unsettled chaotic sprint. Abby reignites those simply by being there. Jessie does a great job in evading those temptations but the situations in noir film does not let it be. In one station Roy misses the train and the three drops off in the next remote station to stay for the next train where Roy hopefully should get on. They have a day to chew and Carlos sets up everything he can to set out old Jessie for a ride. The two go to a remote church and something happens which sets out the ticking time bomb for Jessie there after.

There are drugs, there is suspicion and lies. Emily Mortimer gives one of those performances through Jessie that we are holding melting candle dripping its hot wax post the church sequence. She is on the edge and the stress level goes on like a torture like no other. Conscience is a dangerous and cruel thing wherein it can wither you from inside. But Mortimer’s Jessie shows several sides of her in the vacillation of the thoughts and consequences. If you have a dude like Ben Kingsley in Detective Grinko, sleep is out of question and all is left is painful thoughts of what could have been avoided. Give a bag of drugs accidentally becoming evidence for a murder in the hands of Jessie, you have one of a kind solid noir.

Setting in “Transsiberian” is crucial to its play. It is not a regular stranger in a strange land. It is bunch of strangers in a strange machine in a really strange lands and towns. They are stuck and there is nowhere to go. It does not over do that novelty and takes it out when needed as if to give a breather to its viewer but then pulls off the rug with an essential sequence to march the story forward. Mortimer and Harrelson are wonderful as the couple in a regular marital issue in the wrong time and wrong place while Ben Kingsley as the Russian detective is provides the missing wrong man in the is equation and is nothing short of brilliant. One character late in the film says to Roy and Jessie what his mother used to say, “Don’t talk to strangers”. Easy to say when you are not in the midst of the only people you can cling on to in the middle of nowhere and caged in a machine for several days.

"Salt" (2010) - Movie Review

“Salt” goes back to the books of making a classic popcorn thriller. The problem is I have outgrown popcorn thriller, at least the one “Salt” reaches out for. I had a similar reaction to “The Bourne Identity” but then I went to seek it again after seeing the franchise getting the fresh and dedicated outlook from Paul Greengrass. It appeared to be the same but the love for the next two films made it something else. “Salt” is supposed to create a female spy franchise which it most probably will and I would like to see this as Bourne grew up on me.

If it can be anyone else, there cannot be much of a solid choice than Angelina Jolie. She has a vigour grown much sharper and wiser. Here she is a CIA agent with a loving husband Mike (August Diehl) who went to great extent for a spy exchange when she got captured in North Korea. When a not so known actor plays Jolie’s husband that should tell you something. He is not going to have a lovely future in this film. But that is secondary information. The primary is that Evelyn Salt is chased crazily for two days from Washington, DC to New York. Reason being a Russian defector Orlov (Daniel Olbrychski) says that a Russian spy trained from childhood has been planted in CIA to complete a mission in New York. That is to kill Russian President and then do some for stirring up nuclear war and henceforth destruction of the United States of America. Yawn.

But no you cannot yawn because you might miss the jab, punch, jump and climbs of Jolie with stunts that were made in Hollywood to create time moved beyond itself. There is no stopping after that. Phillip Noyce is good in making character studies as in “Catch a Fire” and “The Quiet American” and here he has gone a wiser Michael Bay if you catch my drift. He got hired as how Paul Greengrass came in for the Bourne series and it makes sense.

Liev Schreiver and Chiwetel Ejiofor joins the fun as being the trusted friend/colleague Ted Winter and that irritating hunting man of Salt Peabody respectively. Both of them have the face and deception to be on the other side of this game but we do not care as we do not know whose side Salt really is. Salt once being said as this killer Russian spy appears to be startled of this information and goes back to her apartment in search of her husband or maybe to collect her weapons. Then she heads to New York and begins to plan out the mission. But she also denied strongly in Jolie way that she is being setup. This ambiguity takes away the necessity to be right and wrong. On one side she might really be the Russian spy or she might doing something else as a double agent. No clue and we have other things to worry, like how she is going to escape out of a completely locked CIA building or how she would jump off the truck, buses and most of the vehicles in the busy Washington DC traffic to lose the tail.

Noyce goes back to the basics and Jolie goes on full fledged to support the fireworks. I have always said that writing a review for a film I despised or loved is the easy than the ones which are moderate in kindling reactions. “Salt” is one such. It has all the firepower and adrenaline for a packed up action film but lacks the novelty expected in coming days of action thriller.

Angelina Jolie succeeded Tom Cruise for this script and that says something about this film. Cruise with the right mind went off the project while Jolie adds the power it needs. Even behind those lovely lines of smile, Jolie cannot control her dominative power over screen and it is welcomed in a script like this by Kurt Wimmer.

Sure “Salt” sets out straight for it target and achieves it. It has a thorough bee line to its plot and goes for it without hesitation. The predictability is out there but then again we do not know which side this character is going to side and that keeps a wee bit of suspense. Take away that tiny detail along with Jolie and you have a razor thin script with nothing but senseless stunts which would keep our interest for half an hour. Those two adds the necessary ammunition and it keeps on firing.

"My Best Friend" (Language - French) (2006) - Movie Review

Patrice Leconte’s “My Best Friend” would be the last film to expect an ending with “Who wants to be Millionaire?” show but it does and it unfolds with the tense of the game itself with an ending known to everyone. There is an epilogue which completes the film and saving it avoiding my wrath. Leconte’s films focus on two human beings destined to meet each other and acquaint themselves of their differences and emotions. Here there are to “un”sociable fellas, François (Daniel Auteil) and Bruno (Dany Boon).

François is a dealer for antiques and arts. He goes to a client’s funeral. There are barely people and he takes that thought to his group of friends for a dinner conversation. The group of people he thought were friends are mere acquaintances and his business partner Catherine (Julie Gayet) inclusive shoots straight on his face of his inertness and impatience towards the people he meets. And they not alone say that he has no friends but also incapable of one. He is infuriated not because they accuse him for being antisocial but the idea of him not able to do a social task. He calls for a bet with Catherine. There begins his first mistake as later in the film Catherine points out. If he cannot shown them his best friend within 10 days, he would give the ridiculously expensive vase he bought (the obvious irony that it symbolizes friendship) to Catherine and if he does, he keeps it.

François is not detrimental or violent or boorish. He simply disregards people with a classic indifference. He does not react and that poses a question of his true emotions. He has a daughter (Julie Durand) with whom he has managed to have conversations through Catherine. In this midst, he meets taxi driver Bruno. Bruno is full of facts, details and trivia. His life long ambition has been to get into the you-know-it-all contest. He has adorable parents (Jacques Mathou and Marie Pillet) with whom he dines every Sunday and they live on the same street.

While his childhood might have been to win money, now it appears to be something to prove to himself. It might be a channel to let it out as this problem has managed to keep off his existing company of people. Though he is cheerful and has the right conversations with his passengers. His time for keeping interest might be very minimal and before it culminates into a conversation his passengers would not like, the destination is there. François and Bruno are made for each other.

François begins to make a list and that will be the people he would have met twice a year, for business. His top in the list is a competitor in his field and to say that their meeting is a complete debacle will be putting it nicely. François is not villainous or evil rather simply goes through life with no attachments whatsoever. He dislikes people or the pain to like one. His marital status is not surprising. There is a woman in his life whom questions the road they are taking, if it is a road at all. The hunt is secretive and the only person he at least comes close to opening up is Bruno.

Bruno is hired on by François to teach him to be “social”. He asks some of the fundamental questions which everyone looks at him perplexed. How to define a best friend? It comes down to doing and taking the ultimate risk for his compatriot. That is the litmus test says Catherine not able to keep answering this ridiculous question of François. While taking tutorial sessions from Bruno, he realizes that the teacher is the best candidate. He sees it clinically and there lies the blunder of several mistakes. Of course Bruno is not aware of the bet which will be the third act breaker.

“My Best Friend” is a comedy, a very light one but when the hearts are broken it is dealt with the gravity. It is not a band aid act. When Bruno does gets deceived by this whole act and François makes it up to his only friend, they do not patch in a jiffy. It takes a year and some soul searching for François to see who he is and what he has done to the poor man. They do not have to show the one year because Auteil shows in his face and the way he carries himself seeing Bruno.

Daniel Auteil came as the middle aged knife thrower in “Girl on the Bridge” with a certain charm, shadow of grief and loneliness that attracts young women. Here he is a dad, a boss and a man looking for some sensitivity under his skin. He gets it and fails to understand it. He still thinks he is in the game and spoils it. Even in his worst act to win his bet, we do not hate him nor develop sympathy on his inability to understand/respect people. We simply are clueless on how one can be like this and shake our head. Patrice Leconte is the one who can do that and create spiteful characters with charisma and bitter sweet temper. In “My Best Friend” François is the man for that while Dany Boon’s Bruno can be both seen as an adorable man and a boring annoyance. Now that is what I call as a best friend.

"Mumbai Meri Jaan" (Language - Hindi) (2008) - Movie Review

“Mumbai Meri Jaan” is the only good sign I have seen in a very long time wherein great films from Hollywood are taken as an inspiration than a shameless act of plagiarism. For once there are people rather than heroes and there are characters than villains. In real life every one of us play different characters based on instincts, situation and the belief one holds. Directed by Nishikant Kamat, this film has people living their life as it is when terror strikes. It is not the operation but the post operation which is the real test of sustaining hell and the question of existence after it.

Nishikant Kamat though gets a little too long in the end to arrive his proper and deserving destination but has stories which are told with simplicity and a moral pendulum which often gets missed, dismissed and compromised in day to day encounters. Here we have distinct people in this vibrant city. There are peculiarity to their characters in small amounts which gets disturbed in some cases and amplified in others.

Tukaram Patil (Paresh Rawal) is hitting the age to retire from the most hated and despised job the public sheds its eyes on, being the police. Then there is Suresh (Kay Kay Menon), a computer business person having a good solid subtle hatred for Muslims which gets its complete form by the bomb blasts. Irfan Khan plays a nameless Tamilian being harassed by the people of Mumbai in one form or other and gets his say. Nikhil (R. Madhavan) is an idealistic well to do working man and he prefers to be environmentally conscious and be good to his country. He religiously rides the heart beat of the Mumbai, the train and gets shaken when the beat skips to cause a deadly tragedy. Finally is Rupali (Soha Ali Khan), a direct victim of the tragedy losing her fiance Ajay (Sameer Dharmadhikari) and she has been up close in the ugly journalism India has adopted from the fear inducing US media.

Most of them go through the fear and come out infected. People like Tukya see it as a regular part of their life. He has lived through several of these in his thirty-six years of police life while his young protege Kadam (Vijay Maurya) feel emasculated of not being able to catch the perpetrators and live through being mocked by the public. He gives it back with slaps and curses whenever he pleases. He accepts bribes with a cushion consolation from Tukya while looking at what he will eventually become in thirty-six years.

Before the blast every one are in a particular juncture of opinion or phase in their existence. Though Irfan Khan’s character is as many bystanders is a simple poor guy looking for a way to make his family run with meager amount of his mobile tea stall. He stands there as a witness to Suresh’s groundless anger towards Tukya and Kadam and then being punished for being there. He goes to mall and wants to get a whiff of a perfume that would cost his entire year of hard work. He takes his small family and being doing this for a while gets him in trouble. This creates a general anger towards the people, the middle class wealthy ones of Mumbai to be despised by him. He sets off to do a prank which dangerously results in people’s inconvenience. His story is a genuine short story going with a life of its own.

A friend of Nikhil from US conveys how the next generation will be used to terms of bombs, chaos and riots unlike the current one but the fruit has been conceived well and has ripened in this generation. Bomb blasts in India has become the addendum for riots. It is too bad on the way we settle out these things far away and keep ourselves in the four walls. So is life and we do what we can but the impact of such an event mars permanently. It does to Nikhil, Suresh and Rupali directly being there while Tukya, Kadam and the innocent tea stall guy feel the ripple. The ripple is very near to its epicenter in “Mumbai Meri Jaan”.

“Mumbai Meri Jaan” uses the intertwining storytelling of “Amorros Perros” and mainly “Crash”. The great thing about the film is it takes the technique for a complex and existing pathos of the people in Mumbai. Suresh suspects the Muslim regular Yusuf in his hangout to be a terrorist suspect and begins to investigate. From the details of Yusuf’s disappearance and timing, it makes sense of him being the culprit but so will be Suresh. Nikhil cannot ride a train like before as the life threat has intruded in his common space. Rupali gets a cruel rude shock of what she has been doing in the name of journalism and news. She is put in the podium and understands the lengths to which the current media makes an ugly spectacle of misery. Tukya has conveniently lived through being docile and immobile. He has accepted the life of police person in collecting briberies but not the one he took oath for. The nameless tea stall guy just lives through it and learns a bit of wrongdoing can go a long way. All of them learn a lesson but whether they follow through is within its audience. We are who they are.

"An Unfinished Life" (2005) - Movie Review

There is an effortlessness in the smoothness of “An Unfinished Life” and in the acting of Robert Redford and Morgan Freeman that makes it something of a simple predictable story into a simple story. It follows the classic formula of reconciliation with the lost relationships but it does it effective without shudder and emphasis. Lasse Hallstrom has the cast to do that job of easing into the comfortability of the story and then let the surroundings of supposed Wyoming (though everything was shot in Canada) to do the rest.

Jennifer Lopez plays single mother Jean and is running away from an abusive boyfriend Gary (Damien Lewis) with her daughter Griff (Becca Gardner). In the small luscious green town of Wyoming is Einar (Robert Redford) with his long time injured friend Mitch (Morgan Freeman). A year ago Mitch got mauled by a bear and it is back in town. Before Einar could get his say for his friend’s misery, it gets captured and put in a local zoo. Mitch has a strange feeling towards the bear. Einar has the same towards Jean, his dead son’s wife. Jean was the driver when the tragedy happened and has hidden the fact of having a grand daughter and grand father from each of them. With nowhere to go, she lives at the mercy of Einar who has nothing but unforgiving spite for taking away his son forever.

The tradition of broken relationship glued by the generation next is as mentioned traditional. Out here there is a calmness in story telling and does not take the melodrama of it to sweat. Redford’s Einar has some lonely mumbling moments with his dead son and Morgan Freeman has his wise smart words as he always does. How can he speak up such simple life lessons and adds a gravity to it that the only thing left is to listen and follow it? Even if it is going to be someone like the hard nut Einar.

In this town where every one wishes every one and knows them by first name, there buries a deep story within for each of them. In the waitresses like Nina (Camryn Manheim) who not alone knows Einar but knows his emotions and the simple comic nature of the doctor and Einar there exists a soulful town. There are plot pushers like Crane (Josh Lucas) to get Jennifer Lopez’s Jean a pair and there is the regular waitress Nina in the town for support in between these lost characters. Nothing much appears to be there in this place and there is a question of the life Einar has been leading. It is nothing but pure regret, hate and grief. It only reached its height with his dear friend Mitch getting crippled and him being helpless.

Lopez is an odd choice but she fits the bill. Not too much to extract herself out in the emotional frontier. Her Jean has been the good looking gal and has been surviving clinging on to these boyfriends she settles for. She has put up with Gary and now has to put up with Einar. She has not talked or seen him since her husband’s funeral and she prefers him over somewhere else. She comes by and get the Sheriff Crane for multiple purposes. Getting away from loneliness has driven right to Gary but now she has to think sane, at least for the sake Griff.

Griff is getting there to grow up and learn the truth about the adults. There is nothing but deceit and sorrow. And in Einar she sees more of it. Einar gets some wise standard talks from Freeman’s Mitch and begins his road to redemption and meaning. It begins with bonding with his grand daughter. Simple things makes this piece of normalcy into something better than good. Gary as the trend of angry boyfriends goes visits the town and with the new guardian Einar, he gets the treatment to get off the town. Crane comes by and does his part in the way that these kind of films might settle for fist fights. Crane comes inside his vehicle with drenched Einar. Einar asks if it is ok to not talk about this at all and Crane abides. Moments like those makes “An Unfinished Life” a story knowing what it deals with and mainly the people it brings out. These are people who lead simple life with straight minds and has always lie with wounds to lick.

Lasse Halstrom does not provide something new but polishes an old story with some good story telling and cast that delivers what they were recruited for. There are predictable moments of possible tragedies and the escapes of it but it always has a reason and slides in those like a perfect tightening of a new pair of screw and a bolt. “An Unfinished Life” will always lead a smile and care from its audience, even in its slightly overdone melodramatic moments.

"North Face" (Language - German) (2008) - Movie Review

There is a decision of death of a fellow climber or destination to that tempting summit in “North Face”. Every one knows the answer but only one says it aloud. That is Toni Kurz (Benno Furman), one of four climbers of Eiger mountain’s north face. His climbing partner and friend Andreas Hinterstoisser (Florian Lukas) looks at him with a relief and anger for the truth told at that moment. The other two climbers are competition Austrian team Willy Angerer (Simon Schwarz) and Edi Rainer (Georg Friedrich). Willy is haunted and drugged by the vigour to get to the summit that halfway when he is badly hurt and Edi suggests to go down, he threatens to kill him. When another terrible incident hurts Willy worse than the head injury, these two teams has to work together in descending. That is only the beginning of the terror in this film based on a true story, “North Face”.

In 1936 Austria is on the verge of eventual annexation with German Nazi’s while Andi and Toni are more interested in climbing mountains. Andi is the older of the two and wise in the looks and actions. Two climbers already died in the attempt of Eiger and now the newspaper needs a story to detail the conquest by either a Germany team or an Austrian team supporting the Nazi annexation. Either of their win will be a triumph for the senior reporter Henry Arau (Ulrich Tukur). Arau got the office secretary Luise (Johanna Wokalek), the childhood friend of Andi and more than a friend for Toni on the story as a photographer. Luise and Toni have long gone in distance and waiting for that first move from either of those for a rekindling of their relationship. “North Face” is not about that of course.

Even before they set out for the venture of this dangerous feat, they camp at the foothills of the Eiger. Arau has brought Luise so that she can be his protege. Arau is a serious reporter hunting like a fox for a story. He is not cunning but has a blunt mind and unmerciful outlook on this situation. For him this is a story and it is purely a story. The outcome has to be either happy or tragic to provide a story. Not a friendly retreat. Luise likes him because he opens up the career and life she cannot pursue in the time and place of Germany. Add fancy parties, drinks and four star comfort, hard fought climbing ex-boyfriend moves away far long before guilt brings her back. Toni bids adieu submitting his mountain climbing journal to Luise. He and Andi takes an unconventional route only which the Austrian team dedicatedly follows.

“North Face” blasts the snow and the icy cold wind on to its viewer’s face. The snow flows like a waterfall and the climbers are shot with some long distance aerial shot. Their zest is uncompromising and deadly. The movie shows the Eiger on different situations that it changes its face. It is peaceful, serene, brutal, cold and cruel. Every time based on the climbers’ predicament and success we are scared and fascinated by this white giant. Nature is beautiful when you are at your comforts and is the worst villain when it shows its darkness.

Philipp Stozl, the director of this film knows that certain parts of this story has to be told faithfully. If he is going to tilt and swing the angle of emotions out here, it is a disgrace and plainly sinister to manipulate it. The hatable reporter speaks out some untimely truth with an inconsiderate mind. He knows that the media needs a very successful or a sob story. He knows that smelling a story is the greatest success for a reporter and he knows that being human should be selective to be inhumanly objective in the situations that beckons empathy. He is played with a pendulum mode by Ulrich Tukur. He is kind and encouraging to Luise and at the same time spits out the venom.

But the greatest achievement in acting comes from the four actors playing the climbers. As the main man Toni in the true tragic story, Benno Furmann plays him like a hero, wise man and mainly a tired and drained human being. He initially objects of going to Eiger knowing the considerable risks involved in it and says he climbs for himself. Most of the great artists do things for themselves. The best piece of their work comes from pure selfishness. Yet again Toni is an amicable and lovely man who understands his friend’s desire which translates into his own. He abides and sets forth. As the end nears and the audience expects, Luise’s love is intertwined but not as a director looking for solace. Her braveness is not in helping Toni by doing the unthinkable heroics but by dangerously being there. “North Face” is an exhilarating experience for the intimidating mountains and snowscapes and deadly abyss but it is more about the climbers, the people, the politics and the limits and endlessness of humans.