"Monster's Ball" (2001) - Movie Review

The phase of a person molding up depends on the surroundings and mainly the actions of their parents. It is human instinct to make the loved ones happy, even sometimes hating some one. Packing all the emotions of good ness inside him is been Hank’s (Billy Bob Thornton) life. Act of showing some kind ness to the people is considered the sign of weak to the family of Grotowski and that is how Buck (Peter Boyle) has brought up his son, Hank. Sonny (Heath Ledger) is different kind or rather one who is not afraid of his emotions not as of Hank. The introduction of Sonny is good enough on what he is missing of in his life. Sex and Love. Hank on the other hand demonstrates his state of doing the right thing through his job. A job which would drain out the last bit of hatred from any one; orchestrating the execution in the department of corrections. Ironically, in a way Hank gets clean whenever he is inside the death house. He does not let out the animal of ferociousness inside this place. He understands the strong and fragile moments in an occasion like this. As soon as his job gets done, his internal engine of hatred and anger fuelled by his upbringing triggers him. This leads in confronting brutally his son for a mistake Sonny commits during the execution procedure of an inmate Lawrence (Sean ‘P.Diddy’ Combs).

Lawrence is spending his last few moments with his son, Tyrell (Coronji Colhoun) and his wife, Leticia (Halle Berry). Tyrell as Lawrence says is the best of him. Lawrence spends his Monster’s Ball (The fare well feast given to the prisoner before their execution) with Hank and Sonny. With financial squeezing in, Leticia with her son who as his father relaxes by drawing realizes they need to get on with their life.

I guess if I understood it right, the night of Monster’s Ball connects these two different frames of character and hence comes the title. Unknowingly these linked in people meet by fate and find something soulful to make their life a little better for the while they are together. The film polishes with the style of sleek camera work by Roberto Schaefer. It is nice to see films such moody and independent as this gets a stylish look. It seems it would seem awkward when it is written out here but it really strikes the combination at right notes.

The film is about how the upbringing and constant control of a person with an attitude of racism bring in. At some point of time in their life, every one hits the threshold of doing the wrong thing and fall down. Whether to lie there helplessly and die or to get up with being hit upon and start a new life is the question. Hank picks himself up and does the right thing. For once he listens to his inner cries which got numbed by his father’s improper preaching’s and also the job which put the added pressure on the battle inside him. His regret is unexplainable and that’s the reason he cannot articulate his emotions properly while confiding with Leticia. The action of his son shakes him up but he puts up a stern face to the public. The public which is his father. When he does the right thing of lending a helping hand to Leticia he gets struck by the kick of having a clean soul. This drives him further and tries to continue it.

When the resultant of these heavy feeling in Hank is expected, Leticia is not able to understand her state. She is a nice mother who wants her son to be happy. Her tiredness got bigger as the time went by waiting on what is to happen to her husband’s end. A sour unimaginable expectation of the hopeless eleven years and as expected, to see her husband’s execution. She does not have time to think about this because there is another life ahead. An innocent child getting to know the world and she needs to prepare him. Already in the deep hole of misery, she loses the final member in her life. She does not know how to react after the sad ness gets over by the loss of her son. The losses dries her inside and out and when Hank questions her on what she expects him to do, the confused emotions over come her.

The characters in the film are made to walk on a line and also twist and turn when the line takes its way erratically. Handling those sketchy and tightened up beings is brought up in strong sequences. Hank and Sonny, Hank and Buck, Hank and Leticia, Leticia and Tyrell, all of these have their strongest moments. In those moments, there is an unexpected result. The strongest moment of course forms in between Hank and Leticia and there by becomes the final frame of the film. The strongest becomes the most peaceful moment in the whole film. And the only peace which emerges out of it is from the butchered and tainted past forgotten for good.

There is a consistent mood of balanced dull emotions set in this film which is disturbing and restless, that the audience feels the moment of burst getting bigger and realize that the result is going to be extremely devastating. Elongating this tension throughout the course of this movie and making the audience numb to the deaths constitutes further more pressure. Adding to all this is the melancholic and somber element of music score which makes it even more chilling and gloomy. With all the character of an intense drama, bringing in the expected as unexpected is a skill and director Marc Forster plays it to perfection. And in “Monster’s Ball” he brings in the unusual peace in to these sad characters.

"Seven Samurai" (Language - Japanese) (1954) - Movie Classic

When a film is made at particular time period and the future generations get to watch it, there is lot of details and scenarios which goes away with the time passed by. If a movie not only retains it originality and novelty, but also transforms itself unintentionally along with the time passed, then there is a classic. Akira Kurosawa’s “Seven Samurai” not only invents and show cases the techniques which are getting followed till date, but also stands tall with its concept and film making unique ness.

The villagers are going to get attacked by the bandits after the harvesting and they hire seven samurai to defend them. One line. That’s it. That’s all I took to summarize the story. It is extremely tough and I would go ahead and say almost impossible to generate an interesting and unique three and half hour movie out of it today. The film starts right off from the first frame with the bandits setting themselves the time to strike the village. One farmer overhears and then the village people get advice from the patriarch to hire Samurais to defend them. Four villagers set out to hire their defenders for their village.

The movie builds up so much on its foundation, detailing the process of defending a war is an ordeal and it brings the real feeling into the audience. Akira excels in the introduction of each character with finesse and precision. This is the strong point of Akira; making the character friendly and earn respect from the audience as the other elements in the film does. He did it in “Red Beard” with another totally different surroundings and situation. Here it is with respect to bravery and clever ness. The introduction of the central character, the one who will be recruiting the rest of the six, Kambei Shimada (Takashi Shimura) is the trend setter for an unusual out of the way situation. He asks to shave his head and pose as a priest to save a child who is been held as a hostage by a thief. That sequence is enough to draw out the personality of the character. He is bold, caring, clever and ready to give up his life for a stranger. In the very same manner, with the introduction of each character, there is this employment of showing the in depth characteristics of them and also using the same situation to the advancement in the screenplay as well.

While the movie goes along smoothly with all the six of them very composed and diligent, Akira introduces the funniest yet wild character of Kikuchiyo (Toshirô Mifune). He is animated and at times mad too. Even then he shows interest in assisting the most meager paid and dangerous assignment. An assignment where in death is almost certain and still he goes for it. At the right time, the character shows his agony and anger. A peek in to the madness of this unusual personality. Akira’s movies are by far technically advanced in those periods and still it is. The slow motion, contrast balance with most of the movie shot in natural light and the editing are top notch.

Apart from ahead of time technical improvisation in the film, there is tons of information embedded and explicitly available. For any film, the time taken to describe and emphasize the antagonists is enormous. Sometimes it becomes the revolving factor for many of the successful movies. In this film, the whole concentration is on the villagers and the Seven Samurais. The head of the bandits get two dialogues in this three and half hour movie. Still there is no gap felt. In fact this is another unique technique of story telling. With so much focus on this handful of characters, Akira gives romance, humour, action, thrill, philosophy and brilliant locations.

The film is a classic and there needs to be no more detailed explanation. The usage of natural elements has always been a trademark work in Akira’s and here Asakazu Nakai proves how it can be presented in black and white. The movie carries rain, wind, sun light, amazing water falls, dense forest and the hill side view of the village with clarity and amazement.

There is a particular sequence wherein one of the Samurai, Kikuchiyo tries to ride a mad horse. He some how gets on it and goes victoriously. All the villagers cheer him and he rides with pride. He goes through a series of huts and the audience does not see him as the villagers. After the hut passes by, the horse alone comes running while Kikuchiyo breaks his hip and walks humorously chasing the horse. This sequence is by far the most predictable part in the movie but this is where it was born. When I think about it, I cannot stop laughing and admiring the same time.

“Seven Samurai” as I said in my first paragraph show cases and transforms itself with respect to different generations. When the first viewers would have watched it, they would have been the optimist. They wanted all the Samurais to survive. They would have been hit by tragic and would have empathized with the rest of the characters. Now in this generation, every one is pragmatic and they know that there is going to be loss. And this time, the suspense of who is going to survive drives the viewers to get into watching the movie. But I guess both the generation came out with a slight smile mixed with tragic emotions, yet with some pride in watching the master film maker’s brilliant movie presentation.

"The Sacrifice" (Language - Swedish/French/English) (1986) - Movie Review

A film which may not answer all of your questions might still be intriguing and also may be some of the sequences, life changing philosophies coming out of it. Yet some times the very same will be extremely abstract which might not supposedly deliver what it is out there, if there is something in it. “The Sacrifice” is the last film directed by Andrei Tarkovsky and the first film I am seeing directed by him. In that sense, this might be a big leap off the blues, but still there are some perplexing and riddled puzzles unsolved at the end of this movie. But on the other hand, there might not be anything to be solved at all and it is all in the perception of each viewer. While it is something which can be said for any movie, in this film it is intentional and draws the lines fair and straight from the audience.

It takes extreme patience for any viewer to sit through the whole movie. But it is the curiosity which drives the factor of insanity with the abstraction embedded into it. One of the extremely technical applications in the film is the use of the camera and its operations in the most slow and definitive way. The initial sequence of the movie goes continuous for more than 6-7 minutes and it is hard to notice it explicitly but it is felt. I guess this is the reason; the movie is been praised and applauded by most of the critics and fans of Tarkovsky.

The film supposedly mentions about the end of the world by a war which most of them assume as “World War – III” while I would term it as any war. It happens on the Birthday of the protagonist, Alexander, a journalist and philosopher. The happenings of it are depicted by loud thundering shrieking sound of an airplane or a bomb which shakes the whole building. Phones go out and electricity goes out too. These are the indications of a war which is supposedly going to destroy the humanity. To arrive this point in the movie, it takes an hour or so. Even those are in a pace set with Alexander voicing his opinion on this life and his actions till this birthday to his son referred as “Little Man” who is recovering from a surgery which temporarily does not allow him to speak. What can be derived about the character of Alexander? Before answering this question, I have not thought about it and the following is the flow of my thinking about the movie. Alexander is a man who has seen and studied it all. He tries everything once and does not hesitate to give it up, if it does not make sense. He is a man of lot of words and suffers to make a point solid enough to penetrate the other party which is the reason why his relationship with his wife is not so tight. At the same time, he is a man of intense affections towards his son. His appeal of appreciation towards art is high. He is good in making friends within a short period of time as that of his Postman Otto. Having said all this, is it the feeling that the film has delivered what it had? But sadly no or at least for me it did not suffice enough.

But I can see where other directors like David Lynch and Michael Haneke get their inspirations from. The style of making is something stands out for me. This is a movie which is totally dependent on individual perception. I did not expect any kind of surprise ending or even an explanation of unknown actions by characters. What I was expecting the least is a small amount of experience of getting something very mystical yet riveting as per the content per se. Unfortunately I did not read it close enough. Maybe someday when I watch it after several years, maybe, just maybe I would be able to appreciate it for what everyone is saying. But right now, I am waiting for the next Tarkovsky movie to see and hope I can read it properly and understand the greatness of this legend.

"The Weather Man" (2005) - Movie Review

Life is not easy and it is the nature of it to be hard. Other wise there would no taste of having happiness. Defining individualistic personality may be easy but accepting the fact that some one really messed up due to it, is unacceptable, at least to them. Dave Spritz (Nicolas Cage) is the weather man for local television channel in Chicago. He works two hours per day and gets paid an unimaginable huge amount per year. He does not live with his wife and people throw things at him. This is his life and it is not easy.

There is a pity in his lifestyle, but in reality, he is rich and as one person who identifies him says, “You are in TV, bro”. What else one could ask for? A person can be famous and rich, yet a screw up, a clichéd truth. There is a single line of difference between things going wrong and things you mess up due to own actions. Dave jumps on both the sides. His actions are sometimes irreparable and still he has the hopes. He thinks things can be worked out. He believes everything would fall in place and more money is the answer he arrives on. When he gets interest in Archery and becomes good at it, along with Dave, the viewers does hope that this is where he lacked his concentration. This is the focal point of his failure and it is the time to get it all back. It does not happen that way. Life is not easy. He knows he is wrong.

What is so interesting and mesmerizing about this film is that the presentation of a man who spends his time thinking about solving it while not exactly taking the right actions for it, in a manner everyone would do in their life. It is the beauty of the slick Chicago with his complacent ignorance of reality. Is it the combination of the place to the right people? It might seem I am kidding but the movie matches up so perfectly to believe so.

In the middle of all this hell breaking lose or as he thinks himself, Dave’s father Robert (Michael Caine) is the man of right words. His deliverance of sentences is meticulous. Of course he is a Pulitzer Prize Won Writer. But he is so definitive and clear, even when he curses. It is like he knows why he is saying this and what is the impact of each syllable will be on the other party. It is Michael Caine at his touch of versatility. He is a dying father who knows life better than his son. While Dave is continuously fighting for his recognition, he spits with truth on his face. Dave respects his father and so does Robert about Dave. The concern for each other is mountainous that they take so much time and energy to tell it in a subtle manner. Robert even though is clear about the happenings, stores it for his final hit. The film plays around with it all balanced. The audience expects it and they give it and they do not even realize it. After the credit rolls and do the thinking like what Dave or Robert says, they realize the facts. The film excels in this of the sudden enjoyment consecutively and the viewers get immersed into it. It takes time for them to wonder the actual events which happened in front of their eyes.

The film concentrates on the unusual bonds and the circling of the same knowledge passed on different generations. It is the mirage of life gets going without any effort, but in actuality it is all effort. It reflects the attitude of a person who is in a comfortable position financially, feels everything might just work. The style of the film takes the viewers in and for a while be a part in the everyday life of Dave. They are placed as the third person with respect to their convenience. Sometimes they do want to throw stuff at him and the film provides the opportunity. Sometimes they do want him to get his autograph and get snubbed by him. It also facilitates that. Strange and comfy feeling of being in a movie without their knowledge is the improvisation; a viewer might get from this film.

Gore Verbinski makes an impressive film in the arena of independent comedy drama genre very strongly. As the movie itself centers on a man of predicting weathers, the film happening in the middle of a cold winter is right utilization of the theme. This reminded me of “American Beauty”, not because of the character serialization of the primary element in the film losing the sense of touch with his family, but how different both movies depict something so similar in a totally different and brilliant way.

The film seems to have weighed and estimated the capability of viewers and feeds them with the right emotions at the right time. I am sure it is not intentional to do that but as moviegoer, there comes a tendency or putting it on a positive note as “knowledge” to predict subconsciously on what the story might provide. This might prove fatal to the experience and fortunately it has made me to identify the good and bad movies correctly. This film made me forget that fact during lot of moments. I guess with respect to that, “The Weather Man” did predict the right results. Do you think there is a variance? Let me know after watching the film.

"Talk to Her" (Language - Spanish) (2002) - Movie Review

Marco Zuluaga (Darío Grandinetti) cries for an emotionally stunning dance performance but shies away when he was asked to express his feelings to his comatose girl friend Lydia (Rosario Flores) by Benigno (Javier Cámara). Benigno thinks they can hear and very well react to them even though scientifically they are in a state of sedation. In fact he has been doing that with his patient/love Alicia (Leonor Watling). “Talk to Her” is the film of how different people handle their loneliness, love, rejection and also their obsessive affection over other person.

With the above gist of a small situation, the film is good enough to be left unsaid. There are cob webs of inter related broken hearts in the story. The characterization is done with care and detail. Marco is finding it hard to get out of the relation he had been bearing for a long time. Something about Lydia strikes him during a television interview of her. He is puzzled by her that he takes up the assignment of interviewing her who is a bull fighter. He is a man of soft skills. He does not force or even show signs of aggression unnecessarily.

The movie shows different angles of loneliness. Each angle is through the viewing of the three main characters. Marco, Benigno and Alicia. Lydia is the only one constantly in touch with a partner but finds it tough to accommodate the softness of Marco and having her mind boggled in previous relation. Marco is the guy who gets absorbed by every one but lives inside his pain of losing the loved one to some one else. He does not share it with any one and that forms the strained relationship with Lydia which is not been shown but observed by me.

Benigno is the cheerful lonely man. He knows deep inside that he does not have a dialogue with any one and in a way does not want to. As the psychiatrist says, his “special” adolescence gets missed. He misses it because he took the responsibility of taking care of his mother at a very young age. His mother dies and his ogling love becomes his object of untold obsession. Alicia learns dancing opposite to his house and she gets into coma by an accident. It is the field of Benigno, to be honest. He enjoys the four years day in and day out taking care of her. It is the purity of love he shares with her and painting it in the screen is amazingly done. He is tormented by the unreciprocated soul of her but gets consoled himself. His character is full of energy and does not shy away as Marco to express himself.

Alicia partly in her bubbling dances and a two line scene impresses not only Benigno but the audiences too. Those two sentences are the life of Benigno. He lives the life for her. He finds enjoyment in it. The film does not shed unnecessary sympathy for Benigno rather depicts hope and joy through him. It is not mentioned whether he is the one who raped Alicia or not, and leaves it to the viewers. Either way it becomes obsolete since the character is so pure for the love towards Alicia. The feeling is not making the action right but it is neglected as it gets comfortably super imposed by the emotions of him. Marco does not question him of this and this is where the movie takes its time to beautifully lay out the love in between these two men. The final meeting in between these two is the best sequence of friend ship filled with love and sympathy.

The film’s impressive ness lies in the performance and artistic transformation of it. Performance in between Darío Grandinetti and Javier Cámara forms the crux of this movie. The way they carry their character’s emotion and empathy makes the piece a subtle love story of two men who are not gay. It is kind of getting mandatory in movies to explain a relation ship between two men if they are not sexually intimate. While it is sad, if the movie demands it, it becomes necessary. This movie has delivered it with such terse ness and intensity that nobody cares about it. There is no reason to explain the emotions of two human beings as that of shared by Benigno and Marco. Pedro Almodóvar has given the new definition of depicting those through this film.

As for the artistic transformation of the movie, it is the way the pace of the movie gets it agility and beauty. The screenplay and editing needs to be high credited, since it picks up as an independent movie and races as a thriller at the end. But the writer/editor did not get held up in negating the emotions and subtleties. They glorify it with this speeding story at the end and thereby accomplishing the impossible, an independent/fast paced thriller.

The film can be viewed with multiple tones of pain. A person insanely in love with another person loses his hope when it was the most crucial time he should have had it. Benigno losing himself for the love over Alicia. It is this pain which may affect a viewer. A person who is insanely in love with a person does an action of love which is so touching and tragic. Another angle of Benigno showing his affection over Alicia. This is another reason for the pain which may affect a viewer. A person who forms an unusual bond with another person who is his complete opposite in every aspect and he continuously loses his loved ones now and then. Marco losing his last contact of being loved, that is Benigno. This is another deliverance of pain by the film. But of all, it is also the hope which exists in between Marco and Alicia, whom after so many ordeal and torment have some thing in common and “Talk to Her” opens it up to the viewers.

"Omkara" (Language - Hindi) (2006) - Movie Review

Tragedy strikes the point of ripened interest for any movie maker. When the audiences leave the theatre, if they leave with a heavy heart, then there is some kind of satisfaction achieved by the director, as any one feels. The truth is, grief is deeper than happiness. Vishal Bharadwaj having already adapted two other plays from literature in his previous films “Chatri Chor” (from Ruskin Bond’s “The Blue Umbrella”) and “Maqbool” (from Shakespeare’s Macbeth), both of which I need to see yet, comes with his third adaption from Shakespeare’s “Othello”, as “Omkara”.

The film’s story is aware to most of the audiences even who are not an avid literature reader. The story which is open to majority of the viewers and to overcome the non-elemental surprise to his movie would have been the challenge Vishal would have faced. There are hiccups for sure but coming out of it successfully is a craft learned by experience. The story essentially boils down in between two characters. Lago in Othello being done as Langda Tyaagi (Saif Ali Khan) and the protagonist Othello as Omkara (Ajay Devgan). The trust and the betrayal are handled in between these two characters.

The film is not about justifying or questioning their action they do for their living, but it is the internal ruined relationships. The beauty of this story is that it can be adapted to any situation and applying it in the place of gang in a remote village of Uttar Pradesh state in India suits even better. Taking off the concept of complete stage set play and adding the nativity and authenticity for the location, the film is a perfect example of how a literature need to be placed rightly and precisely for a modern day world.

Omkara is a man of power. He is been guarded and worshipped by his two trustful men, Langda Tyaagi and Kesu Phirangi (Vivek Oberoi). And at the start of the movie, they do not have any problems except a marble game being won by Langda. Omkara steals the love of Dolly (Kareena Kapoor) and hence gets the wicked words from her father, of a woman who can betray her father can very well betray any one. Those brutal words do lay some bad seed in him. Still he gets it wiped off as soon as he sees the beautiful Dolly. His perplexing mind of whether to believe Langda or his innocent love is killing him. This confusion could have been better enacted by Ajay Devgan but he decided to take the “Company” Mallik face whenever he is in bad mood. When there is a doubt in his acting skills, he comes with a bang in threatening Langda to bring proof and the final sequence of being beaten by his mistakes of suspicion. He redeems his mistakes in the end as Omkara himself.

Langda is man of foul mouth. The power of control does take control of him and makes him do things in the most evil way possible. His machinations are so cleverly crafted and executed that little does naïve Kesu or the blind faith of Omkara will shudder those. He knows his actions are wrong and is beautifully given when he calls himself “serpent” and “chameleon” when his wife Indu (Konkana Sen Sharma) says there is an animal inside him. Saif Ali Khan proves that he can be the anchor of a film. He does not shy away from this down to the bone evil soul of Langda. Langda is confused too and not able to understand the actions of his leader. His immediate anger goes to the new “General”, Kesu whom Omkara elected. He attains consolation out of his machinations. In the end, he too is not sure of the truth and lies. It may be seen as an excuse but it suits well to the downtrodden uneducated Langda who believed everything is Omkara and felt insulted and neglected by him. His obsession is the result of his evil conception to burn down Kesu. It is the role any one would love to do and Saif has played with the same passion to fulfill the character in place.

Kesu is the calm player in this whole game of snake and ladder, unaware of it. He is a flirter, rage filled yet calm college kid who is in a different confusion. He does not understand the anger of Omkara towards him nor does he identifies the pit Langda is continuously ditching him in. This character is the most underplayed and yet projects lot of character. It is too bad that Vivek Oberoi gets minimal time for his Kesu in this movie. Unfortunately there is no evidence of his loyalty or passion towards Omkara. It is plainly said and believed so. It is even stranger that Langda gets enough time to project his disguised trust and loyalty towards Omkara. It is either a depiction of improper balance of characters or a notable art work.

Dolly is the innocence in this whole drama. She is blindly in love with Omkara and waits for the marriage to happen. She gets solace from Indu when she gets dark yet silent tortures from her love. It is not through merely confiding with Indu she gets ease but the happy face of Indu is what keeps her going. Kareena does justice to the role and brings on the required pathos and glamour to the film. While Konkana Sen Sharma brings in the subtle comedies and support to the role of Langda’s wife.

The film is the portrayal of tragedy. A tragedy of how power, misunderstanding, lust and betrayal can occur so powerful. The film top notches with the underlying point of executed and lost souls. The movie while moves at a very slow and cinematic pace at the start do justify those in the final hours. It does build up the momentum slow and steady to be hoisted high up in the air. Still there could have been easy elimination of couple of unnecessary songs. Vishal who also composed the score and songs of the film show cased couple of bad and brilliant pieces. The score during the first encounter of Omkara with his enemies is the worst theme music being used which on other hand could have been a true moment of musical execution. Disappointing in it, he came out with blazing guns and at the same time tears from the strings in the final sequence. Couple of short and smart re runs could have trimmed those bad patches.

Nevertheless, this is a movie stuck so loyal to the play structure and still adding the necessary flavour of art and authenticity of film work to it. “Omkara” is a work of art with solid message of tragedy. While the movie did adapt the best tragedy the literature has produced. It is sheer excruciation of losing innocent beings and that produces the best tragedy. Of course, nothing is more tragic than a loss of an innocent soul.

"Reign Over Me" (2007) - Movie Review

It is really surprising to see only director Mike Binder identifying Adam Sandler’s talent from “Punch Drunk Love”. Maybe there are lots of financial and personal constraints attached to opting a more serious role by Sandler, but he nails down the character of Charlie Fineman in “Reign Over Me”. Grief does not come in installments most of the times and hits any one very hard that it is no more possible for them to get up from the pain.

Charlie Fineman lost his whole family in the disaster of 9/11 and his depression is immeasurable that when his college roommate Alan Johnson (Don Cheadle) spots him after several years, he is not able to or does not want to remember him. One can only imagine the pain Charlie goes through. His in laws does not understand his outbursts. They want the only member of the family left by their daughter. Charlie finds it hard to come out of the tormented past and seeing their in laws reminds him more of it. He needs some one new and some one who does not judge him for how he appears or behaves on certain instances. Alan is the right candidate who is still finding it hard to open up with his wife even after two kids.

The film is predictable experienced drama plot. I had an idea on where it all leads to. Even then, it is portrayed interesting enough to keep the viewers occupied and entertained. Alan is trying to find he free of being tied upon completely by the marital responsibilities. Charlie is without any attachment and apart from helping him; Alan has a new friend to be single again, if only for a while. The film is a classic school book example of a part indie part commercial drama to be handled. Unfortunately when everything is going completely engulfing the viewers, it dips into unnecessary court room melodrama in the final twenty minutes. The movie if had been reduced by those twenty would have been the impressive story about two individuals who influence each other, but instead they want the viewers to have more and more sympathy for Charlie. This definitely proved to be fatal for the movie.

Apart from that total mishandling of the story during the final instances, the movie belongs to Sandler. The sequence where he finally confides with Alan is a piece of attention to all the performers in the industry of what he is capable of. It is so sad to see him play the comedy roles most of the times, but he has the potential of an amazing character artist. If only Hollywood uses him further more in a proper way to bring the best out of him.

“Reign Over Me” is an extremely emotional movie and they had the beautiful vase painted and carefully crafted. They took it to the highest building showcasing it all the way and then dropped it straight from the top floor.

The movie also misses the relationship tension in between Alan and his wife Janeane. I guess it was not show cased intensely mainly to not over shadow the main plot. The film definitely picturizes the internal pressure of Charlie and if may be for those couple of hours, the viewers get a small portion of those. It also puts out the question of what can be done for him. While his in laws are trying to help him, what can be the consolation to a soul who got terribly beaten by life? The film may not provide all those been answered but it is a trade off in between two friends to share those and get a life out of it.

Adam Sandler is out there and he needs to be utilized properly. And when I think about it, I remember the trailer I saw for his next movie, “I now pronounce you Chuck and Larry” and the plot line from IMDB is “Two straight, single Brooklyn firefighters (Sandler, James) pretend to be a gay couple in order to receive domestic partner benefits.” While the movie may be extremely funny, wake up Hollywood, Sandler has more than that.

"The Namesake" (2006) - Movie Review

In a film, most of the occasions, the pace defines the flavour of it. Breaking it at any point of the film may definitely fall in different places thus ending up either a non-entertaining or extremely gripping piece. In those aspects, “The Namesake” rides on a tight thread high enough on the ground, to walk over it, but not damaging it. There has been lot of movies exploring the cultural differences and also the influences on the people. Those movies mostly ended blaming one culture and finally emerging the rich traditional one the winner. Mira Nair’s film does not go on that path but tend to at some point of the film. It explains those with unraveling of maturity and some steps taken by varied generation to end the movie and mark the beginning of a new cultural birth.

Irffan Khan has always impressed as an actor in Indian serials. It is too bad that I was not able to watch his “Maqbool” till date. His enactment of Ashoke is so subtle and underplayed. He brings in that calm ness along with the open mind. He has concerns over his son Gogul (Kal Penn), but he knows time will answer those. He does not worry himself and nor does he make his wife Ashima (Tabu) worry due to that. He is subdued even in showing his slightest hint of anger and within seconds sheds off to make up for it. His portrayal of being a responsible father and an understanding husband makes the film dance upon smoothly. To compliment his character is his better half Ashima. Confused and concerned in a strange land, she is taken back when Ashoke gears up to prepare tea for her. She is taken back because it is the responsibility of a wife to take care of her husband, as the cultural/traditional Indian system says. It takes some time for her to understand the nuances of the extremely independent cultured America. Yet she is ready to go that extra mile to get it.

For these beautiful couple, arrives the expected westernized son Gogul, who beats himself for agreeing for the name at the age of four. He is pulled up in between the traditional values his parents thought and what he wants. He is curious and does not get fussy. Instead he enjoys the moment and tries to live in it, internally questioning his ultimate aim in life. He realizes his responsibility but does not kill himself over it. He decides to make up for it rather than weep about it.

This is the underlying game of this movie. It dwells upon each character but never lets any one get any more inside than they ever show on the screen. There is no assumption involved in enacting the characters. The viewers do not expect any predictable and also unpredictable reaction from these three characters. “The Namesake” teaches how living in a different place with a culture at the opposite end of the spectrum is not a big deal. It may take time for any one and especially it takes more time for some one culturally brought up from child hood. The fact is there are goods everywhere and end of day it is one another person with different back ground to know about.

As I was in the mid of the movie, it took a wild same road many have taken and it made me worry. Why do they want to do the same which is not true? But I was proven wrong at the latter part of the movie. The tone of the movie appears in a lonely environment. It gives the viewers the feeling of being a house wife in a strange land. It is not easy and yet some how, most of them manages it and find their destiny in it. Times have changed and so are the people. This is what the film tries to give out.

The soundtrack is been employed for majority of the film and it does not hinder rather it elevates the flavour of it. The film has lot of directorial significance. Especially using the tree to give a time period or the rituals to mark the occasions are some instances to mention. It is a nice application of technique.

I liked “The Namesake”. It appeared to be a typical “American Indian” movie and it totally came out of it right from the initial frame. The film specifies that, regardless of where some person lives, their character and emotions are universal. While the cultural back ground may aid in instantly identifying some one but to get the emotion of understanding, care and trust, it takes a lot more than that. It also says that time does make a difference and the generation who were left behind by the insinuation of the bad parts of some traditional thoughts might very well understand the good ness in a foreign environment. Similarly, it is the same value of time, the current generation should give them to come up and understand each other. “The Namesake” is an enigmatic feeling of living in different parts of the world.

"Grind House" (2007) - Movie Review

“Grind House (n); A theater playing back-to-back films exploiting sex, violence, and other extreme subject matter.”

The movie opens with the above lines. It clearly says that the following two features by Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino are going contain some extreme gore, sex and violence. Most of the audiences including me are aware of it, but I was expecting the good out of the dust. I was expecting the elements of those glorious days in those movie theatres which I missed, along with the creative talents of these two talented directors. While I do not believe much in expecting something, the trailers and advertisements sub consciously set those. I walked in with the idea of getting an amazing cheesy spoof with the right mix of that “tarantinized” version of those exploited movies. Tarantino drives on the line while Rodriguez painted the most unimaginable gross I have ever witnessed. I have not watched the “real” Grind House movies but I have the idea of how it is. But being gruesomely loyal to those gory details is the fact I did not expect. It is indeed my bad.

“Planet Terror” had its moments as the first feature in the movie. I have never understood why there are gruesome and stomach churning graphical movies. Some how my mind does not able to pull away as “everybody has their own taste”. I have a strong feeling that no one will enjoy watching someone’s private parts being cut off and being collected as bunch. I do accept the fact the Zombie movies need some special effect to promote the intensity in it, but is it a competition on how much one can make the audience flinch or even throw up seeing something like that? Since the movie boasts those as their remembrance to the director’s days of Grind House, I guess Rodriguez wanted to stick to the loyalty of it. I am trying hard to think of some good lines or cheesy scenes or maybe even story telling, but it is an “exploitation” movie and hence it is the way it is. I did not enjoy all the parts of the parts flying around or blood drooling, which concludes I did not like “Planet Terror”.

As I was anxiously waiting for the flesh feast to end and give my senses back and also expecting some real stuff from Tarantino who disappointed big time with his private parts melting in “Planet Terror”, the fake trailers gave some relief. They were the most I enjoyed. The trailer “Don’t” will remain the winner of all those. It is not surprising when I learned that the trailer was made by the director of the movie “Shaun of the Dead”, Edgar Wright. The rest of the trailers gave the effect the “Grind House” demanded. A special mention to Rodriguez for using some of the real mishaps which would have happened in those Grind Houses and they bring the authenticity to the feature.

Having been burned up by the first feature and brought back to the screen by those trailers, Tarantino’s “Death Proof” opened up. It can be only Tarantino, who can think of a serial killer using his car as weapon. Kurt Russell as Stunt Man Mike is sleek, stylish and viciously real. He rules the frames when he comes in. The film goes through the girls partying and also having some Tarantino’s classic conversations. When I say classic, it says it is a trademark Quentin touch. Is it interesting? For a while, yes, but it dies with the time. But Quentin shows how it can be done. He put back the faith of having some real solid invention out of the dirty old garbage. Taking the elements of those comedies of errors, he sprinkles his formula. While Rodriguez’s piece stays as “typical” Grind House movies by the definition, Tarantino flairs with his style of presentation. Definitely a watchable feature and can be enjoyed for its moments of Kurt. While thinking about it, the question is, whether he nails down the feature and pays the real nostalgic with their creative tribute to those films? Maybe not. The feature’s first segment had a promising start. Kurt impressing all way had his ammunitions ready to blow it apart. But the mileage driven was not till the end.

One of the best stunts I have ever seen is the car sequences of this feature. Heavily interesting and nail biting chases providing the essential ingredient for a thriller. It is the indication of how a horror is not alone in bringing tons of blood, but some nice inventive thinking to make the audience come to the edge of their seats. Quentin excels in those and proves that he can make a “bad” good movie.

Of all, given a chance, I would not want to watch “Grind House”. It is due to the fact that I don’t like flesh and blood all over the place and also that the real nostalgic frame in those can be watched in a streaming “you tube”, which are the trailers.

"Boys Don't Cry" (1999) - Movie Review

Life is most of the times pre-programmed. In many countries and societies, it is destined to do the certain booked up things to come up in life and if some one show any sign of own interest, it gets dismissed instantaneously if it is not prosperous enough. While a normal career decision will be scrutinized, it is extremely critical and fragile when it comes to sexuality. The sad part is that, it is the taboo everyone ignores but smashed upon ground inside four walls. If some one takes a movie of a girl’s soul stuck in a man’s body, it becomes comedy. While the true story of Teena Brandon a transgender takes on the screen it is no comedy and it is full of emotions crucified on every instance of the frame.

Teena Brandon (Hilary Swank) is a born woman, who as he says is in “sexual identity crisis”. Disguises as a boy, things start to fall in place for Teena by living a life in Falls City away from his hometown Lincoln. Befriending the guys over there he falls in love for the young Lana (Chloe Sevigny). How life can be torn apart due to living a life away from his/her appearance is what “Boys Don’t Cry” is about. There seems to be a casual approach of Brandon not understanding the consequences of his actions. As Brandon’s cousin constantly getting fooled by consistent instinctive actions of Brandon, it is tough for some one to cope up with his behaviour. Probably the feelings are far from understanding the reality for Brandon. Considering being at the age of twenty, for any usual kid, it is the age of reality popping up. But for Brandon, it is the age of confused reality. It is under his skin that things may not go as he intends but still not afraid of the consequences. He accepts the risk hoping to get the happiness of the present.

As the movie progresses, it invites the viewers into the world of a complex emotions but a simple mind. Strange enough, he is bold and outspoken in expressing himself. He goes around bars and woos girls. He does everything to be accepted into the “guys’ world”. The unfortunate thing is that he enters into the world of bad guys’ world. John Lotter (Peter Sarsgard) and Tom Nissen (Brendon Sexton III) appear as a junkie but there lies a deep hatred in them which never comes out initially. The final thirty minutes shows their blind hatred and the person they really are. How a person is driven by hatred where he forgets how close he got in with some one and how it totally brings out the dark ness in him when there is a concept not grasped by them.

The viewers are consistently placed in a dull environment. It may seem how some one can get an enjoyment out of a place so screwed up and shoddy. The reality for Brandon was there in Falls City and where he found what he wanted. The tight romantic tension in between Brandon and Lana is the high light. They both fall in love out of instinct. When Lana first kisses Brandon, the suspicion is shown in her eyes. In fact her suspicion is almost confirmed while they make love but she denies it. Brandon falls for the right person to be loved. The viewers definitely know that there is going to be an eruption of anger in all of the people around Brandon, when the truth comes out. The most would be out of Lana but she embraces Brandon for who he is and continues her affection limit less. They truly love each other.

The film appears sullen and cranky during the first one hour. It happens to grip the throat of the foolish hatred ness during the final thirty minutes. The actions are so atrocious and shown with naked brutality, it takes some moment to come out of the frames. Swank won the 1999 Academy Award for Best Actress in a Lead Role. Her enactment of Brandon formed its beauty by the supporting cast of Chloe as lady love Lana. Their chemistry worked the magic for this tragic story. Sarsgard and Sexton form the same chemistry for their enactment of those confused evil souls.

The film does not flag around any message but reminds that there exists hatred for being true to one self. It is granted that Brandon should not have lied and should not have built up piles of further more, but those are the results of a soul, fearing rejection. It is sad that Lana was not powerful enough to save the misery being caused upon Brandon. It is equally sad that the men powerful enough were not ready to save him either.

The film brings out the question on what can be defined as normal. Is there anything wrong with what Brandon felt for Lana? Apart from conning his way through, is brandon’s actions are so bad to be brutalized? After these series of questions, there is nothing called normal as it is termed. Kimberley Pierce directed “Boys Don’t Cry” is the clear depiction on how “out of normal” gets its treatment and how one stands for it till the end.

"The Station Agent" (2003) - Movie Review

“Loneliness is much better when you have got someone to share it with”. This is the tag line for the movie “The Station Agent”, directed by Thomas McCarthy. I have never seen a movie whose story or movie making goes well with the tag line they derived or so to say it has not impressed me, as much as “The Station Agent” does. The movie stars Peter Dinklage, Patricia Clarkson and Bobby Cannavale.

Independent movies most of the times go with the suburbs rather than the city. So does this movie. It is my opinion that it brings out lot of introspection to oneself or it seems that one would have lot of time to think things over. Independent movies bring out those times to think. Watching movies like this creates an environment around the audience, which has those moments of happiness, still with some underlying sadness. There will be instances of silences with the images staying still or with some uninteresting actions as it may look like. But after time pass by, those still images of uninteresting actions brings peace and meanings, so much more than dozens of dialogues. Take the character of Fin (Peter Dinklage), a man of very few words. There is definitely the anger and pain in his eyes of appearing different, but still keeps it entirely within him. He has given up with people and he does not want any more opportunity to get hurt. He keeps everything straight and never tries to strike a conversation. Still, he is a good listener. In those silent nodding and the looks, he invites the other person to flow everything and they do not expect an answer from him. They want him to listen and that’s exactly what he does. To explain that character by dialogues is absurd and those images and actions aid in understanding Fin.

When Fin is occupied in his whole world of trains, there is Olivia (Patricia Clarkson), who has her own grievance, maybe an unknown guilt of losing her son couple of years ago. The pain of looked upon and pitied is not been tolerated by her which drives her to the suburbs of no one. She meets Fin and able to identify the pain with him. Fin who is a good listener of course gets those and connects in the most silent way possible. There is a sequence wherein Olivia trying to break away the awkward silence tells that they can eat without talking. And Fin says yes to it. This is the strangest agreement in between two people dining together. That moment defines their connection. Those are the moments, any one can who is watching this film can expect.

When there is this two characters of this kind, there needs another one to counter those. Enters Joe (Bobby Cannavale), a talkative and strangely interesting guy, who has a mobile hot dog vending van. He is full of life. He extracts the essence of happiness with almost everyone. He looks forward in knowing everyone and especially a reserved person like Fin. He is the person whom will not like him for being very talkative, but given a chance of letting him in their zone, will create those joyous moments for them. Joe believes in forming the bridge of party in between these two. His action of taking something granted is vividly cute and funny.

These three find something common in between them. They do not much know about it, but they do enjoy each other’s company. They do not openly convey it but they do it in their actions. While Fin and Olivia have their own form of entertaining themselves, Joe gets joy in participating in those with them.

The movie tangos with the emotions, but performs it as a silent recital. It is refreshing to see the greeneries and the deserted train depot. It brings in the warmth in the air which some time gets missed in these three characters. The train forming the theme and backdrop for this unique movie is another interesting factor. Watching trains go by is interesting and even though I knew it, this movie brought out and made me think of my days in those tracks, when I was a high school kid. Walking in it and playing around when the train comes are some sick fun, I used to have. It is quite thoughtful and magnificent that the movie focuses to bring in that novelty in to it.

“The Station Agent”, is a view on solitude. In the middle of these three characters, they do share their loneliness. It is unbelievable to bring in the element of solitude in a movie with three characters, who become friends. The movie ends with the note of their blossoming of friendship to one more level. “The Station Agent” is where all the members of the audience, take time away from their friends and families to enjoy the solitude with the company of Fin, Olivia and Joe.

"Find Me Guilty" (2006) - Movie Review

Coming as an extreme stunt junkie and also a quick witted guy in “XXX”, Vin Diesel brings in a stellar performance as Jackie DeNorscio in “Find Me Guilty”, directed by Sidney Lumet. The film is about the real life trial which indicted all the organized crime members is the longest trial in the US History.

Jackie DeNorscio (Vin Diesel) already been convicted for other charges, is doing his 30 years time in prison. In the process of nailing down the family of organized crimes, the US government brings all the members in it through RICO Act. Having been almost rejected by the boss of the family, Jackie wants to show his “love” as he says. He fires his lawyer and takes the responsibility on his own for defending him. There are rests of other lawyers who are defending other members and the main anchor of all, Ben Klandis (Peter Dinklage), who believes the unusual style of Jackie, may very well bring some good to their case. The film mainly projects on the court scene happenings.

The film is sensitive in bringing in an unusual sympathy for the defendants. While it may appear clear that everyone is guilty of what they did with “lot of Scorcese movies” as witness, the benefit of doubt clouds surfaces over the air. In the midst of thinking about it, it can be realized that director is not trying to take sides out here, but to give the character state of Jackie. His life is his family and friends. Jackie considers this trial as for him to reconnect with the missing element lying for so many years with the other members in his family. As he says, “I love you all guys”, he tries to bridge in with them. The story is about how regardless of all the elements of breaking the law, Jackie still respects the family and his will to not give them up. The film portrays on his character on defining loyalty beyond any reason of doubt. Even though he gets insulted and demeaned by his boss, he does not take it as a chance to play it against the case.

Sidney Lumet is good in bringing the best out of any actor. His intention of letting the actor take the center stage with scenes revolving around him to work the character as well as the story has once again not let him down. The narration style is straight forward and right to the point. Since the movie focuses essentially on the trial, there gets little time to know the “real” Jackie or the one who has been accused of breaking the law on many levels. In fact, they do not show it for the reason for not taking away the empathy of the audience. They place the camera in various unconventional positions to encompass the whole court room and make the audience to be present in the place. The utilization of Jazz music for the film adds up the mood of comic and old times.

Vin Diesel is the surprise package for sure. People who have witnessed him in all action films may have also noticed his touch of delivering the comic sarcasm with amazing timing. Jackie is filled with that and he moulds in the character with nice clarity and execution style. Before I sat for the movie, I had hard time believing Vin Diesel doing a performance of slightly older guy with no “action” sequences. He delivers one of his best performances and I am hoping to see him give a lot like this in future. There are two other performances which support Vin Diesel. Peter Dinklage as Ben Klandis and Linus Roache as Sean Kirney, the public prosecutor. Linus nails the sequence of enacting his frustration and agony in which, when his assistant informs that one juror thinks Jackie is cute, proves his presence in the movie. Peter as Ben continuously supporting Jackie in a under toned way and also toning him down when it is needed, also brings in the performance very much needed for the film.

The film may definitely bring in sympathy for Jackie. The question to be asked of course is this, is the movie anywhere trying to prove that he is not guilty? And the answer is No. The film never mentions about it and the verdict stands for itself. This film as said earlier is not about whether Jackie and rest of the others are guilty or not. Rather this movie is about Jackie’s last chance to show his fellow men and family that he deserves to be loved by them. This movie rides on the concept of “love”, as he says in the most unusual way at the unusual circumstances. It brings the subtle truth of humans, that who ever it maybe, they need to be loved. Rejection is not an easy thing to digest and the desperation of Jackie is what the movie is about. It is surprising that how come such a character of will and loyalty able to break the law. Humans are complicated as Jackie and his wits and “gagster” techniques definitely came handy for this trial.

“Find Me Guilty” as a movie is an interesting display of trial and gangster flicks. It gives the affection of man who lost almost everything, but not ready to lose his loyalty and the fact of being still accepted in a group he has spent his entire lives with. “Find Me Guilty” title meant as if Jackie is challenging the government of finding him guilty when I was about to watch the movie and came out with a totally different meaning at the end of it. Watch it to know it.

"Serpico" (1973) - Movie Classics

A Gun shop owner asks Serpico, “That gun takes a 14 shot clip. You expecting an army?”, and Serpico replies, “No. Just a division.” In reality, he was truly expecting an army. An army of corrupt police officers who were ready to eliminate him for being a “cop”. I did not mention “an honest cop” for the reason that being a cop that gets attached automatically. “Serpico” directed by Sidney Lumet, stars Al Pacino as Frank Serpico who as a single man was against the corrupt system of police in the city of New York.

A police car carrying a shot Serpico and the policemen informs the necessary people over intercom that they are heading to the hospital. A police officer in a precinct receives a phone and says to other fellow men that Serpico got shot. The other officer asks whether the cops shot him and the reply is that he knows seven to eight of them who wanted to. This is the message which resonates in rest of the movie. Frank Serpico gets out of academy in sole intention of serving the city. He gets in the middle of politics of who is getting the “collar” and the jurisdiction. He gets out of the initial posting to finger print division where he is getting accused of performing sexual activities with another colleague wherein reality they were just gazing out the window. He gets frustrated and gets transfer to another division. First day, he gets a cover with money inside. From there on, he fights till the end to pass it on to the superiors and make it clean. Everyone makes big promises at the start and shows up with invisible words in a few days.

In the meanwhile, he gets anxious and tension mounts in him. He is wandering among the individuals whom he is informing about. One day or other, they are going to realize it, and then, he knows that things are going to turn ugly. He is frustrated inside out and gets beyond control. He is not able to have a solid personal life due to these incidents of dishonesty. He finds solace among animals who does not know the meaning of all these. The film is the time compression bringing the slice of a cop’s life who got aimed by hundreds of guns from his fellow men, got rooted out of his personal life and living with the frustration of helpless ness. This is Serpico.

It was a time when “Godfather” got out with guns blaring and Al Pacino wanted to come out as an individual character from the shadows of those. He wanted a character. Frank Serpico would have felt proud about Pacino’s performance. Every movie Pacino comes along, he makes sure to nail down one particular scene. Be it the final speech in “Scent of a Woman” or the confronting his colleague and breaking the windshield of a car in “….And Justice For All”. All of those were just the followers of the sequence of locking up the character of Corsaro and the viewers realize that it all started in “Serpcio”. This is Pacino, young and vibrant. He comes with the strange costumes and it is sheer presence of magnetism. I cannot imagine anyone ever even trying to play Serpico again in this life. That character belongs to Pacino and it would rest with him forever.

Sidney Lumet in his intereview says that they were running on a deadline of December and they started shooting around July. Hence, they needed to do most of the post production simultaneously which was the only way to meet the deadline. While it would have been one hell of five months, it brought out the best in all of them. It is a period of five years and bringing it in a matter of two hours becomes critical. It is critical due to the amount of substance it lights on. There needs to be so many events which need to be encompassed in this battle of honesty. Bringing in the mean streets of New York with punching dialogues is what this film offers.

This film is the presence of honesty in this world. This movie shows the ordeal went through by a cop who was never letting his character get in the dirt. When his girl friend breaks up with him in a café, she says that he will be fine “unattached” so that he can fight his cause. Al Pacino as Serpico gives a reaction saying, “My Cause” and that means a lot. The whole movie gets concentrated in those two words. It is not a cause of him but this is how the system should work. It is not a cause of going brave and getting shields. It is about doing a job with righteousness and conscience. These two does not get defined by one’s cause but it gets defined in the actions of the people in a job involving responsibility of guarding the people in its city. I am not sure how much “takes” that particular sequence of two words took, but it is where the focal point of movie lies and it is brilliant.

“Serpico” got its recognition of being real and true to its facts. Sidney Lumet definitely does justice to the character which I guess the real “Serpico” would have acknowledged too. The film maybe looked upon on two angles. Firstly is, being honest is all suffering and the second is, being honest is how to live. Both are right, but what can be defined as “suffering”. The following conversation brought to attention by my friend Nagesh from the book, “To Kill a Mocking Bird” would help in explaining it. Here it goes,

Scout: Well, most folks seem to think they're right and you're wrong.... Atticus: They're certainly entitled to think that, and they're entitled to full respect for their opinions but before I can live with other folks I've got to live with myself. The one thing that doesn't abide by majority rule is a person's conscience.

Live with yourself is what “Serpico” is. At the end of the film, maybe “Serpico” got shot and left with a future outside of his country where he lived in for most of his life, but he is a man who lives with himself without any problems. He has no one to fear. That is the freedom one cannot imagine, unless they decide to live, with themselves.

"Merry Christmas" (Language - French/German/English/Latin) (2005) - Movie Review

There have been tons of war movies with messages. It is also evident that violence is taken as the prime medium to even boost up the preaching of anti-war. There is definitely nothing wrong in it, but bringing out a message stronger than the movies with gore in it by unconventional yet truthful harmony of humanity is an unusual welcome for the movie industry. Here comes, “Merry Christmas” directed by Christian Carion which accomplishes it without any problems. Before I even get into the details of the movie, I would like to say that this is one of the best (anti) war movies I have ever seen in my entire life till date (I believe that I may get lost in praising the movie and forget to tell this).

The film is set during the World War – I. There is focus on four to five characters even though the film is on broader range than those few. The Scottish, the Germans and the French are lined up to fire upon each other. It is December and it is Christmas. All the soldiers get reminded of their life before the war. Then there is the famous singer who comes all the way to the front line to visit her singing husband. This is where all the magical things start to happen. I would not want to spoil the unimaginable joyful thing happening in the movie and I leave it to the viewers to watch it. Having said that, I will focus on the performances and a few of the various important contents conveyed by the movie.

Diane Kruger plays as Anna Sorensen who comes all the way to get that one night with her husband who is a singer as like her in the front line. She is convincing as the opera singer passionate for her art and love. Benno Fürmann as Sprink, husband of Anna is inspiring and bold. He is there against his conviction and does not shy to show it to the authorities. He forms the genesis of the magical moment in that “Silent Night”. Guillaume Canet as Lieutenant Audebert, Gary Lewis as Palmer, Daniel Brühl as Horstmayer and the actor playing the Scottish Captain honour their roles.

The technical department of the film underplays on purpose for the importance of the content. They do not try anything fancy but at the same time support the situations and sequences in a mellowed fashion. In a trend of complex screenplays, non-linear editing and breath taking visuals, these technicians appreciate the content of the movie and decide to tone it down to brighten the concepts.

There lies this beauty to this art which makes most of the people to forget their origins, beliefs and cause in a particular place. It is no surprise that this film embraced this technique. The surprising news is that it all happens in the most unusual place, the war zone. It can be argued that there will not be a better place to forget all the pains and fears through art in any situation, but is it possible for it to eradicate the hatred ness and of all the bullet fires all together for a few moments? The film gives the answer and it is based on the true events which happened all around the war zone during those times. Films like these not only give hope on the movie industry but also the factor of having those creators in this world. “Merry Christmas” is a movie which is profound and touching. It reminds us of our emotions. “Letters from Iwo Jima” gave a different perspective on war with respect to the oppositions and the feeling of humanity in everyone. “Merry Christmas” came in 2005 and it does the same but in the most heart warming fashion any one could imagine. In a world wherein there is not a day goes by without the news channel informing about the brutal calamity caused by the hatred of war and this film could not have come at any better time than ever. This film reminds all that regardless of time and advanced technology, the situation and the butchering of humanity still remains the same. Regardless of that, there is an emotion being attached among us which needs to be tapped to show our feelings for fellow men and women. “Merry Christmas” is a movie which cannot be engulfed in any reviews or awards. This movie while more than deserves its appreciation should be a mandatory watch for all the people in this world. “Merry Christmas” is the time for the celebration to embark on a journey filled with love and art to remind us our reason to live, which is “to live”.

"Breach" (2007) - Movie Review

He goes to church almost daily. He does not drink. He is terse and aware of his surroundings more than anyone in a place. This is the Robert Hanssen, Chris Cooper is portraying for the movie “Breach” directed by Billy Ray, which is based on the true events of the secretive operation of Eric O’ Neill of FBI to nail him down for his compromise of classified materials and human lives against US Government.

Billy Ray is very good at bringing out the official environments of peculiar places. He was able to bring out the press ambience in “Shattered Glass”. He does it here with a different touch of thriller with psychological chess game in between two equally skilled agents. The viewers see the then US Attorney General, John Ashcroft addressing the press revealing the security breach which had been going on. He also announces that the person in the FBI, Robert Hanssen has been arrested for the same. The movie then goes back two months and shows ambitious Eric O’ Neill (Ryan Phillipe) getting briefed by Agent Burroughs to collect details and evidence against Robert Hanssen for being a “sexual deviant” which would cause embarrassment for the bureau. Of course Eric questions back after a while, on what exactly they are investigating Robert for. The remaining movie deals with how Robert and Eric play this unknown game of suspicion, betrayal and courage.

The film races on with consistent fall of events. Chris Cooper nails the character and brings in the untold doubting radar in Robert. He has eyes in back of his head. He is under constant wariness and alert. He never gives out any piece of slightest doubt to Eric. He behaves as a regular retiring FBI agent who complains that he never got the appreciation he deserves. He is phenomenally religious and unbelievably creepy. He likes Eric due to his technical skills and also that he is “Catholic”. Eric on the other hand is the young aspirant who is waiting for his promotion as an Agent in the bureau. He agrees the assignment with some concerns but hopes that obeying the superiors would bring some good to his career. Once he gets to know what he is really into, he plays all his cards. He profiled Robert better and deceives him in his own style. At any point of time, he does now let loose of his anxiety or pressure inside him to show up. The film never slows down at all. There is always this air of thousand eyes in the screen which makes the viewer to be on watch always. As the movie involves the game of deception, they made sure it is played with right mix of entertainment reality.

Chris Cooper is brilliant as usual. He is able to fit in the suit of agency employee with convenience. At the initial sequence, the viewers may get the tone of him being a tight guy with no liking for anyone. Immediately after some couple of sequences, he amazingly gives the character this outline of unknowingly trusting the character of Eric. Chris Cooper comes out with great emphatic colours to fill in the screen with the unusual liking for this demoniac secretive character. After the movie, the viewers realize that they did not like the character but the man who gave the best performance of his acting skills. Ryan Phillipe comes with an impressive role play of Eric O’ Neill who is mounting the pressure both in his professional and personal life. Somewhere in the middle of the movie, his eyes tone down. That represents the internal war of the character to hide the most crucial factor which hangs his marriage on the edge. Laura Linney as Agent Burroughs adds the authority trust to character of Eric similar to what Martin Sheen does in “The Departed”. Support cast did well with Dennis Haybert, Caroline Dhavernas and Kathleen Quinlan.

There is lot of strong sequences in the movie which captures the dialogues exhibiting the stand of characters. The film says that nothing is as it seems. Along with Eric, the viewers initially doubt on whether the FBI is trying to remove Robert. Knowing that he is the “bad guy”, the viewers know and Eric is given the idea of, the movie seeds those doubts even with the truth out of the bag. The film conveniently hides some nice value related concepts here and there. Close watch would bring the concept of purpose of life, the art of quitting and the action-consequences of one person. The “Why”, most of the times do not make sense in a situation especially like this. The movie is not a search of “Why” but “How”. It is “how” Robert fell for his own actions. It is the truth that everyone needs to pay their dues for their actions of betrayal. The “Why” may bring in the answers for picking oneself up from the ditches of sins but there is always limits.

“Breach” is not only entertaining but gives the horrific truth about on how one can easily exchange lives for a silent war fare. It warns that it is not always what it looks like on the common actions of a person.

"The Astronaut Farmer" (2007) - Movie Review

When someone says that they want to launch a rocket in their backyard and the person seems to be around the age of 40, there goes all alarms. It is a nice fantasy filled dare of Charlie Farmer in the movie, “The Astronaut Farmer” that he wants to launch a rocket in his barn. Billy Bob Thornton plays Charlie Farmer, Virginia Madsen as his wife Audie and there are all the regular people who play the “head” of any government agency.

Charlie Farmer (Billy Bob Thornton) who had all the trainings to be an astronaut is not in military. He is looking after his ranch and leading a happy family life. He nurtures the family with his dream of traveling in space and quite literally builds the dream in his property. The movie starts off when Charlie is trying to purchase a sufficient amount of fuel. This rings up bells for the US government. Then they come to discourage and everyone discourages but his family supports, he gives up and gets encouragement and….That’s it. The viewers are smart enough to get all the details which are not spread out here.

Some call it “October Sky – Part – II” but it does not even come near to the movie starring Jake Gyllenhall as the young kid who fights his life of flying rockets in the middle of a nowhere coal mines. Granted that this movie surges itself to promote aspirations, dreams and hope. Everyone knows it and aware of it, and also seen tons of other movie projecting those brilliantly. The film fails not due to the fact of improper movie making but it is an ordinary film making. It is extremely ordinary. In fact, with sufficient movie watching experience, some regular movie goers could easily guess the next line coming out of some character. Predictability is enjoyed when it is welcomed for some relief in a tight intense circle of events. The movie fails to create that at various instances. In the middle of it, there was a very nice surprise but it lasted for ten minutes and faded off.

Billy Bob Thornton as Charlie Farmer is very good as the loving and inspiring father but not able to bring out the Astronaut in him. For some reason, the viewers always gets the feeling that this guy does not know what he is doing, but the whole movie gives proof that he has sufficient knowledge in all of it. It is quite a strange sensation to have that even after so much substantiation. Virginia Madsen fits the character picture perfect. Right combination of beautiful and charming wife, who is also a loving mother, provides nice opportunity for her to perform. She does well. I did not know that Hollywood too has some “surprise actor” formula attached to its movie now a day. Bruce Willis is the winner for the guest star and there is no proper reason for him to be in this movie.

Editing – Ordinary, Music – Ordinary, Screenplay – Predictably Ordinary.

“The Astronaut Farmer” could have been an inspiring and goose pump invoking film as that of “October Sky”. Even with all the ordinary features, it could have sailed on to reach far beyond the skies if the director of the movie Michael Polish would have employed some novel methods. The movie is not bad but it is bland. Bland to the core.

"300" (2006) - Movie Review

It is strange how blood shown at different circumstances brings out entirely different meaning to a presentation. I was constantly pestered with the spillage of meaningless blood in “Sin City”, from Frank Miller’s graphic novel and now the same shedding of blood from the very same creator in his other creation “300” taking the screens, brings in “glory” as it says. “300” directed by Zack Snyder is a close match presentation of the graphic novel by Frank Miller and his visuals on Battle of Thermopylae. It stars Gerard Butler, Lena Headey, Vincent Regan and various other casts.

The film is how 300 Spartans led by their King Leonidas blocked the entry of the Persians into the Greek city states. It appears simply enough to explain the film in one sentence, but it is not. The film is how it has been presented. The adaptation of the comic which I can imagine would have given the exact idea of what needs to be put on the screen. The film kicks in with the narration of how Leonidas and rest of the other Spartan are brought up. They fight. Period. They are how the history has defined them as “Warriors”. The film is in the B.C and hence there is all chaos to acquire the world. It is time for acquiring land and wealth. It is the time when men were measured mostly by their sharpness of the sword along with their stable mind to execute it at the right moment. Leonidas is sent a messenger who appears more than a threaten by the Xerxes who informs Leonidas to surrender to him. Leonidas with calculated thought dismisses him, in a fashion anyone will dare to imagine that would happen to a messenger. With open invitation for war, he has some hesitations and his queen clarifies his definition of responsibility through freedom. Despite “bad omen”, he gathers 300 of his finest soldiers to block the entry of the Persians which leads to his city. The film then details and picturizes the battle of those 300 soldiers through out of the world graphics and visuals, the film world has experienced in recent days.

There needs to be no more appreciation than the trailers setting the standard on what to expect and the way they deliver it. “Sin City” exactly brought the comic book effect on to the screen but bringing something like that for this creation would have been more of erasing the significance of the content. It needs to be a nice blend of reality with some imaginative details and also within its limit. Since the viewers enter the movie hall expecting gore, they have stretched it a little bit more. It is agreeable since it is what it was. The difference between “Sin City” and “300” is that the situation plays a significant role in bringing out the red ness on screen. Moreover, there seem to be amazing justice done in showing those graphic details to pump the adrenaline in viewers when it is down. It assists them in imagining how it would have been for those brave soldiers to be in the midst of that shower of arrows. The entire technical department gets their attention in this film and I bow for their creative diligence to make this movie an experience.

As for the content, it is blood and rampage. The main point of freedom which has been presented in zillions of war movies takes its place out here too. It is another depiction of how “Freedom” inspires and values the human. This art work while may not preach the honour and values, the viewers will experience the meaning of sacrifice and courage. While it is pinching to learn that our ancestors were fighting for land and the war is still going on, the film peeks into the hearts of those men with spears.

Gerard Butler as Leonidas has knocked out the role. He brings in the frame and stature of a King. His smile and sharp eyes speaks louder than words. He is calm when he needs to and punches the screen when he needs to. He is a definite actor to watch for. The rest of the cast support him in all levels. There are some memorable performances for sure but Gerard takes the center stage and has cling to the character strongly.

The first one hour is gripping and chilling. The sequence of their first stand of 300 towards their enemies is brilliant and pumps the viewers’ blood. The film brought all the ingredients well for an entertainment in a total creative and new style in that one hour. After that, the viewers are over fed. Somewhere down the line the viewers gets used to the novel factor. Once the film reaches that point, there seems to be some uneasiness in the members of the audience. They want the movie to end and it is visible that the director wanted it too and got mildly out of the way. It is not the argument of having a different ending, since it is history and facts. It is the handling of it. The opening created so much display of treat; the film misses to capture the same momentum by a nano second. The urgency of the viewers is quite evident when I witnessed most of them got out of seat pretty fast. There was a difference in their reaction as I have seen for other movies.

Apart from that small glitch during the end, “300” is a must see. It is not recommended for its so-called preaching of courage or zest for war. It is suggested for its different movie making with respect to visual style and presentation. It is strongly recommended as it is an experience rather than a story.

"Black Snake Moan" (2006) - Movie Review

Bringing up two entirely different people of different age and back ground to gel to form a bond has been in the field of movie for many years. The directors are able to bring the flavour and profound ness in it now and then with success. There was “Good Will Hunting” with a psychologist who connects with a tough and brilliant kid. There was “Finding Forrester” in which another young brilliant boy helps and gets help to and from an old famous writer. It is strange that Gus Van Sant was able to produce those films very successfully. While in both the movies all the characters wanted to help each other there always had this internal self achievement to themselves and “Black Snake Moan” is different in that. The characters in the movie do not act on what they need in life, rather they believe the life is like this and it should happen in a certain right manner. Some of them give up and others try to keep the “given ups” running. Starring Samuel L. Jackson, Christina Ricci and Justin Timberlake, “Black Snake Moan” is directed by Craig Bewer.

Lazarus (Samuel L. Jackson) feels he has hit dead end when his wife leaves him for his brother. Rae (Christina Ricci) is hit back with her child hood sexual abuse when her boyfriend Ronnie (Justin Timberlake) goes to army and she is alone. Both of them are a mess. Rae could not control her urges to suffice her unknown sexual tendencies while Lazarus is trying to get back to the peace which has been swept off. These extreme far end characters in a different plane get to meet and rest is the movie.

Laz is a god fearing blues guitarist who feels pressure and confusion due to some continuous preaching from Reveren R.L (John Cothran Jr.). When Laz meets the injured and disturbed Rae, he wants to change her. There is good will in doing it, but it is mainly to bring his life to normal too. Laz thinks that changing her will in turn bring some good things in his life. He feels he can find some answers to the questions which are not there at all. He just reacts to the situation and hence helps her. Rae on the other hand is confused and got so deep in to the ditch that there is no remorse. She got so injured with the guilt surrounding her further that she could not even see herself in the mirror. Both of them have nothing in common. The viewers constantly expect the worst to happen for some reason. Maybe the Hollywood movies have tuned movies like this so hard in viewers’ mind that all they need is a bad to worse situation. The movie needs to be appreciated for not letting it into further miserable situations. On the other hand it does not give the contention of everything is fine scenario too.

The film starts off with a slow note and rides on it very fine. There are no intense moments or startling twists. It is plain and simple hot atmosphere in which the viewers wait for these two characters to meet. The movie progresses at a pace wherein nothing is comfortable yet sub consciously likeable. The film is bland for definite but there is a reason for it. The character back ground and their knowledge makes them low toned and submissive. The movie circles in between the reality and the cinematic boosted sentiments in very close range. This makes it a little bit touchy and rest less during the sequences of start and then somewhere in the middle of it.

There are two things in movie which bring out the best. First is Samuel L. Jackson as a man in a confused state of mind after his wife leaves him and he showcases his talent for acting. He demonstrates that he can ride on both worlds of illogical high entertainment and high caliber character movies. Second is the usage of Blues as the theme for the movie. I have not listened to Blues but the movie made sure that I will be exploring the unusual tone of it, after watching it. Dead on soundtrack and do watch out when Samuel L. Jackson loosens himself on the stage in the club. Christina Ricci as Rae is wickedly cute. She is able to bring in the disturbed kid into this messed up young girl Rae. She brings the broken bridge, Rae is walking on. Playing Rae as a kid who knows what she is doing with the guilt eating her inside is not an easy walk and Christina is able to handle it nicely. The weakest link and a man out of place in this movie is Justin Timberlake as Ronnie. There is a prejudiced opinion that he is not able to act but the problems for him go beyond that. There are some evidences of improvement in him but he needs to work hard and it means “real” hard. The character of Ronnie may not have the essential substance but it definitely compliments the character of Rae. Justin was not able to compliment that well.

The viewers neither love the film nor hate it. The film’s atmosphere is hot and humid while the content is humid all the way. The director did not want to concentrate on the child hood tortures of Rae but points out that a couple of days of listening ears would do a lot of good for her. As a movie, “Black Snake Moan” rides on the shoulders of Samuel L. Jackson and he took the responsibility well. But the film falls short as one which would not give the feeling of lingering in the viewers mind after they come out of the movie hall. There is couple of sequences which balances those factors, but those couple does not elevate the movie as it would have been. The film is a good attempt but not a great one.