"The Holy Mountain" (1973) - Movie Review

Be careful what you wish for is all I could think when I was watching Alejandro Jodorowsky’s “The Holy Mountain”, a film suggested by a fellow film enthusiast in a weekly film group I have been having for the past month. This was picked under the category “Offbeat/Experimental” that I came up for the group and if I thought “Rubber” perfectly fit there, “The Holy Mountain” which was made almost forty years back redefines it with a spank on my ass. A film that is filled with psychedelic imagery comprising colours, structures, sets, blood, flesh, violence, nudity (a lot of it) and sex. An experiment that has odd elements and weird chemistries and absolute spellbinding reaction, this is a pure experience in every bit of its entirety.

Made in the early seventies oozing with peace and love, backed by the Beatles members, Alejandro Jodorowsky begins his film with a ceremony ending with two beautiful naked women tonsured and sitting symmetrically with a mystical man in the middle. If that does not set the tone of the film, I cannot think of what else would. From that backdrop we goto a deserted land where an almost naked man (Horacio Salinas) is lying there with flies covering his face and when I say covering his face, I mean in every inch of his face the creature creeps and fills in the gap. Then comes the group of naked kids and lifts him, puts him through the cross and throws stones at him. This is where I was not hoping this film would not go and it came in the first five minutes. Whenever a person sacrifices the innocence of a kid for the purpose of art, he/she loses respect from this reviewer. I am though speaking too soon as they are out there with an innocence the director wants to portray. Having survived an early scare, I was not foolish to think this was it as there were several other near misses that I wish Jodorowsky would have used his expressive creative ability in better form and presentation. Regardless, “The Holy Mountain” continued to baffle, astound, surprise, shock, humour, scare and outright take me for a ride I have never ridden before. This is a piece of work and I mean it.

The film is filled with symbolism, cynicism and revolutionary images. Watching after nearly forty years from its creation, it still has the power to shock any viewer. As this man begins to wander around the streets of the city and goes through the surrealistic and symbolistic world of Jodorowsky, we are exposed to the religion that gets sold, marketed, entertained and ridiculed. It is hailed and imbibed with phoniness. If you have not figured it by now the plot is nowhere. Dialogues are absolutely absent for the first thirty minutes and successive imageries of carnage and sex are casually thrown around to instigate and challenge the viewer to continue watching this film. As the film hurls through those and finally lands up where the wandering christ like man ends up in a tower that lowers down a hook with a bag of gold, we meet the person the film began with. He wears a black robe with a hat covering his face entirely.

He is revealed as he begins to speak to this hobo. This is where the film takes a turn for the best. Given as a god like figure, the man or alchemist as we come to know played by the director himself, begins to provide synopsis of the most powerful people in the current world the man needs to know. This is the part we are humoured and entertained. There is the industrialist mainly a cosmetics manufacturer, a toy manufacturer, president’s financial advisor, an architect, a weapons manufacturer, an art dealer and a police chief. Each of their background reflects the time the film was made and the perspectives most of the seventies contemporary folks had in mind. While the story continued through each of them, my thoughts ran the judgments of this director who was taking the much despised self righteous route most of over the edge hippie culture took. That kind of overenthusiastic hypocrisy is annoying but when Jodorowsky shows the art dealer’s art work and the “Pantheon Bar” where a man deludes himself of LSD and other crazy drug before the group ascends the Holy Mountain, I was impressed by the balance this mad director had in his film.

“The Holy Mountain” has the most stunning imageries. It has symbolism, surrealism, absurdity, contemporary art that would bring shame to the current art forms and the daring nature of experimental film making. Its creator had the most naked form of artistic integrity that he simply denies to accept to satisfy any kind of audience. Even the most fantastic and admired directors of all time are molded by the environment and limited by the ambience they grew and live upon. Alejandro Jodorowksy’s world is not that at all. He tears the screen and splashes it with imagination, weird disturbing ones and then tender beautiful ones. Then he paints poetry and laughs with his mockery.

Having praised, disappointed and offended in parts and pieces, this reviewer would not sit through this experience again. As much as there are spellbinding photography, location and oddity in this film, the taste of this reviewer comes into place. Fortunately or unfortunately I have a certain liking to a certain common feed of films that beckons multiple viewings. Few of those might be called as offbeat but nowhere near as that of “The Holy Mountain”. While I wish Jodorowksy chose other pictures, paintings and presentations for some of the depictions, he carried those with a certain sense of moral responsibility which I can acknowledge but not agree. “The Holy Mountain” can be said as a film that would shock and awe anyone forty years from now and that is a compliment and a caution at the same time.

"D.O.A." (1950) - Movie Classics

How can you not be excited and fascinated by the tagline “D.O.A.” poses? “A picture as excitingly different as its title!” Mark the exclamation and you know what I am talking about. There are few films I get really pumped and this one got me for two reasons. One is the aforementioned catchy line and the second one is the plot that reminded me of a terrible film “Crank”. With that I sat along with my friends of the film group I arranged to be immersed into the cheesy, oozing 50ish classic film noir filled with lovable bad acting, some cool shots of San Francisco and a sarcasm that cuts through like a samurai sword.

Frank Bigelow (Edmond O’Brien) walks into a police station to report about his own murder. Confusing, isn’t it? Now in the realms of trailer and wikipedia filled world one would know about this kind of hype and plot but in the 50s when advertisements were through cheesy tag lines and pure selling factor of a poster, this opening sequence would have brought everybody to be alert right away. The film immediately goes back to flashback as Frank is preparing for his vacation to San Francisco from his town of Banning, California. His secretary/girlfriend is Paula (Pamela Britton) as it has been time and again taught by several “Mad Men” episodes, secretaries = obvious affairs. She is annoying the crap out of him with affection and as my friend was saying in a bipolar fashion. The reason being his immediate vacation to San Francisco. He departs as a man from those times would irreverent towards a woman’s perspective and opinion.

As he checks in to the hotel there are random beautiful women walk by him and the back ground cue for it is next to silliness while also marks a sense of how the film makers want to be sure of the nature in which Frank was ogling these women. It is ridiculous to hear those crazy sounds of obvious comedy but also symbolize the period in which this was made. Frank begins his charade of finding debauchery through his fellow members of the hotel where they invite him to a club, a jazz club. The festivities and the scene of jazz is shot with brilliant nature. The artists involved are animated and are enjoying their performance while the crowd frenzies around the packed room with noise, cheer and disturbing dances. As Frank settles in a bar stool he shifts his perspective towards a lonely lady on the other side of the bar. He goes to her and leaves his drink. Bad idea. A simple switch a route of his drink by a strange person lands him to finish his night earlier as he wakes up feeling weird about himself. You know what happened to him. The film begins with a new thump on this mystery of who poisoned him. He has little time to leave as he confirms with couple of doctors.

The plot that follows would have to be too complex but the idea is for this web to provide varied location and shady characters. As Frank is wondering how to spend his final day(s), he wants to unravel the reasoning for his sure destiny. He is a man with nothing to lose and he goes gung-ho to get his answers. He picks up short clues, long roads and quick hideaways to find the person who did this to him.

Director Rudolph Mate draws a perfect noir with a right tinge of overblown drama from the writings of Russell Rouse and Clarence Greene. There is immediacy in the acting from Edmond O’brien and Pamela Britton in their romance which truly is made to be an annoyance rather than an expression for true love. And then there is wit and sarcasm dripping through the screen from O’brien’s Bigelow who goes through random places and run through the streets of San Francisco to get some answers and die in peace and regret.

Almost every character is filled with dark shades and Bigelow failing to listen to their entire story before hurrying up to the partially built up clue he made of is entertaining. To understand the original nature of dark wit in terrible time is when he goes to extract information from a photo studio. There as the owner of the studio is getting bribed for information, the man explains the nature in which he conducts business and see the response Bigelow is making which is nothing short of cynicism and dark humour. These are the scenes which makes “D.O.A.” come out of its known cheesiness.

“D.O.A.” has genuine funniness and the obvious silliness of the time in which the movie was made. Yet it carries the pure formulation of a classic noir threaded, knitted and decorated with care and perfection in its own way by not alone the director but from every bit of the actors in good and bad acting and dark shadows of cinematography by Ernest Laszlo through the crazy lines of its screen writers. And from this the film truly has evolved from the eyes of the viewers more than the makers themselves.

"The Taking of Pelham One Two Three" (1974) - Movie Classics

“The Taking of Pelham One Two Three” is that classic genre of thrilling films 70s and 80s were good at producing out. The characters in it are restless, casual and a charm that exhibits a characteristic of being both put up and natural. They had that going for him until the CGI took over the industry and brought this genre to its knees. That is the reason maybe when I watched “Payback” with my brother, it seemed nostalgic or more so original. Seeing this film draws me back to those films despite the minimal quantity of movies I have seen from this time.

Having seen the remade version of this with Tony Scott’s fast editing going through Denzel Washington and John Travolta having fun in playing these characters in the modern world of mediocrity, the original seemed fresher. This indeed is a methodical and cold nature in which a group of men led by a menacing Englishman Mr. Blue (Robert Shaw) takes over the subway train Pelham One Two Three. This addressing of Mr. Blue later became Tarantino’s homage in his earlier film “Reservoir Dogs”. On a regular busy day in New York train network arrives these men and board at different points and take over the train. They corner themselves up and as much as we know that there is a plan of getaway from this trap, we are curious as to how.

Walter Matthau is Lt. Zachary Gerber giving tour to Tokyo Metro directors on the station they are successfully running. Gerber is everyday man, dreading the presence of foreigners at the same time courteous to show them around with cynicism and sarcasm. His colleagues are panicking on the situation they got into when Gerber gets into the mix with quick response. There are no dramatic back ground to accentuate the situation nor does there are crazy run around in the nerve center in head quarters. People panic but naturally and Gerber responds in a hurried calm fashion. He seem to have got the rhythm of Mr. Blue and vice versa that they both acclimatize quickly and begin the negotiation. Mr. Blue is on the upper hand. He has hostages and he needs money and he needs it immediately. He promises to kill one passenger per minute delay in the arrival of the money and he is damn serious about it.

The movie works with a pace creeping into the screen with conspicuously. Gerber communicates back and forth with the fellow Lieutenant Garber (Jerry Stiller) on the happenings outside and then to Mr. Blue. Directed by Joseph Sargent, the film takes the story outside of the train and command center onto the politics and the NYPD involved in the mix. The Mayor (Lee Wallace) who is being manipulated, bullied and nearly man handled by a strong and powerful Deputy Mayor (Tony Roberts) though he seem to be the man of making decisions. The desperate attempt of the policeman riding with the ransom money going through the busy streets of the city shown with a serious urgency and sudden vanishing of emotion in that whole scene. These are few of side plots that gets the film a tone and voice that is missing so much in the thriller genre involving action, pace and intelligence in current days.

“The Taking of Pelham One Two Three” is precise in its presentation and utterly serious about the stakes involved. Do not be fooled by the lack of back ground score or obvious dramatization because Mr. Blue is capable of anything and we see him when he executes with chilling clinical nature. Then again he is annoyed when a killing is done unnecessarily. For him there needs to be a purpose for an action and it should facilitate getting a point or to a means to the end, that includes killing. This surgical nature makes him a terror to the hostages around which brings to the hostages who behave, act and react to the situation calm followed by panic, confusion and eventually to submission.

The smartness of Gerber comes at the juncture when it matters. There is no way out when Mr. Blue places his demands and has the situation completely under his control. Gerber waits for the opportunity though he does not make it know. It is his nature and the instinct which kicks when he tackles the situation of money coming late to the station. He acts and saves lives with a flick of a switch. Dealt with a sincere film making, “The Taking of Pelham One Two Three” is the classic the genre deserves. Films like this “Marathon Man” and “Three Days of Condor” reminds me how thriller was once upon a time.

"Rubber" (2011) - Movie Review

Calling “Rubber” bizarre, weird or absurd might be putting it mildly. Quentin Dupieux’s film is the most ridiculous, experimental and unexplainably engaging film I have seen in a very long time. Told with an unforgiving nature of experimentation, this is a film which might even question and test the nerves of a very serious movie goer. Yet it has an odd element attached to it that keeps it funny for most part and evokes an underlying statement from the observer than the presenter.

It has a killer opening. A man in a remote open land stands holding a bunch of binoculars. A cop car comes and makes it a point to hit each and every chair which has no place of being there. A man in uniform, comes out of a trunk, knocks the driver door, gets a glass of water and gives out the ridiculousness of cinema and its absence of reason to its property and presentation to us the audience. He then dumps the glass of water stating the obvious that we will be witnessing one such. While we are thinking he has been addressing to us, he actually has been addressing to a group of people to whom the ridiculous man provides the binocular as they try to see the live film in front of them happening at a distance though not so far away from them. This is “Rubber”.

Amongst the rusty hot sands lays a sturdy tire. Dead, unmoving as any rubber tire would be, it suddenly begins to move. It gets itself up and begins wobbling around falling, picking itself up and moving on with no purpose. It encounters inanimate objects and shatters them with its power of vibration or the spectators name it as psychokinetic powers. What it goes with its journey and the people it meets and explode are irrelevant then why bother watching this film? Well, you have a very solid question out there but the madness to this method is inviting. Dupieux has both a point to make and to lash it out into threads of thin air. When you expect that the spectators of this freak show are going to draw some sense, he stuns you by making them behave in the nature of the film’s chaos.

“Rubber” has one concrete thing going on which is the cinematography and Quentin Dupieux takes that job along with editing. It angles through the tire’s perspective which spoofs crazy psycho thrillers and low budget horror films. The strangeness in “Rubber” soon throws you off even with the complete awareness of the conscious frenzy Quentin puts through. Soon enough you are both drawn away and towards it simultaneously.

The idea of having no point to the presentation might annoy or might even offend certain moviegoers as there are effective ways to do that in a much more entertaining and meaningful fashion. Instead Quentin goes for the extreme and he is right about it. Any other manner in which he would have made it the way audience would have wished might make it another flick that pokes fun of this genre. He wants to stand alone from the crowd and if it means to be standing alone literally shunning his viewers, then so be it.

The actors in this film vary from very good acting to terrible performances. Stephen Spinella does a stellar job of believing in this narrator, presenter and participator while Daniel Quinn steals the worst performance as the motel owner. Even in that I am not sure whether Quinn’s performance is intentional or not. Nothing can be concrete about a film like this.

There is no way I would be able to watch “Rubber” again but I might definitely recommend it to any one. They might hate me or adore me or plain and simple stamp me as a crazy goose with further odd movie taste. Regardless they would have gone through an experiment that can only called an odd journey of a presentation of nonsense, comedy, non-existing statements, existing agendas and simple madness with crystal clear imagery.

"Crazy, Stupid, Love." (2011) - Movie Review

“Crazy, Stupid, Love.” is a big tease. Not that it promises through the good cast and fails it rather has well developed, well acted and well executed scenes put as a pit stop throughout the film giving hope and after hope and succumbing to dramatization. It is an independent rom-com for dummies and that is insulting to the audience in a way. The complex phenomenon of love is the center of this family drama that soars high and hits the bottom with sufficient ease is that there forms a rhythm that might be mistaken for consistency.

Cal Weaver (Steve Carell) is the middle aged man formulated by the cookie cutter for suburban well to do person who forgot to be interesting. His wife Emily (Julianne Moore) asks for divorce in the middle of a dinner date and this unexpected outcome of a perfected boring marriage astonishes him. His reaction is to compress, suppress and tighten the hate, frustration and anger inside him only to come out through his eyes. The ugliness of this break up skips fast either through time or the film makes it appears so that Cal moves out and pantomimes in a club to himself on the man David Lindhagen (Kevin Bacon) broke up his marriage. His sadness is taking control of him as he is desperately looking for a soul for empathy.

In comes Jacon (Ryan Gosling), a charming womanizer annoyed and little saddened by this adult hitting rock bottom with loudness that he offers to help, to relive the manhood he has lost long back. The make over begins and the film utilizes the comedy of this transformation. Gosling as usual is in control of his character who oozes and drips confidence as he walks by to take total control over the beautiful girls begging to be dominated. Carell as Call and as regular chump is of course startled and amazed of seeing the legend every one talks in films and books. You know where this is heading and it is exactly where it is going. Soon the roles reverse, the love finds, the meanings blossom, happiness and sadness looms and merry around as it is pleased by the screenplay of Dan Fogelman.

“Crazy, Stupid, Love.” is a good film and discusses the complexity of this emotion ever evolving and never getting old as the age progresses. In fact it is more important to rejuvenate the romance in a relationship especially life seems ordinary. Cal’s thirteen year old son Robbie (Jonah Bobo) is in love too with the seventeen year old high school girl Jessica Riley (Analeigh Tipton) who then is infatuated towards Cal. Robbie profusely expresses his love to her and of course Jessica squirms in uncomfortableness. Time and again the idea of “not giving up” for soul mate is brought up though it borders to stalking and creepiness.

Oh there is Emma Stone too as Hannah, the girl who likes the idea of a sweet man in her boyfriend to build a family than actually loving him. All these people are woven by the obviousness of the emotion and fighting to deal with it. While this sounds inviting and juicy enough for the people to be inherently dysfunctional when it comes to expressing their feelings, it dives in the unnecessary overblown drama. Directors Glenn Ficarra and John Requa have a good cast and a good story that gets the magic it needs but it seem to be obligated in satisfying the petty expectation of an audience looking for easy settlement through awkward speeches in a crowded place and series of punches and group fighting.

You know the film has more potential than it actually projects whenever Steve Carell and Julianne Moore talk about their son and when Ryan Gosling and Steve Carell have a reasonable adult moment in dealing with the tough situation concerning each of their characters. It seems to be the nature of the beast in the stupidity of romantic comedy for a scene staged for a huge group of people present to witness the drama happening in a family. Why is it such an important theme to have an audience during a personal moment? Out here Cal interrupts his son’s depressing speech in the graduation and makes it into a lecture in love. He could have done it in person instead the screenplay makes his son and himself to be unnecessarily emotional. “Crazy, Stupid, Love.” has few moments which make up for the entire film but it is a talent wasted in vain. That is a shame.

"Cowboys & Aliens" (2011) - Movie Review

“Cowboys & Aliens” is the second film wherein the ridiculousness and the popularity of the title outweighs the film itself. The first one is the obvious “Snakes on a Plane” unseen by me. Directed by “Iron Man” fame Jon Favreau, the film is exactly what it says and in that unabashed marketing ploy works in its favour, at least for the most part. Having Daniel Craig, Harrison Ford and Sam Rockwell does not hurt either though their talent can be well employed and spent on other reasonable and productive ventures.

My exposure to Western films happened lately and have been thoroughly enjoying them ever since. Even when Coen brothers “True Grit” went mumbled and unheard into the mouths of Jeff Bridges, the mere atmosphere of unforgiving sun, the unshaven men and the dirt that sticks inbetween those stubble creates a strange poetic attraction in to the darkness and resolute nature of these men’s unlawful and lawful missions of that time. Surely “Cowboys & Aliens” benefit from those with a thumping opening scene of Daniel Craig as the nameless man dismantling some resistance with power and blood.

Most of the Western begins with a nameless stranger entering a town and this one follows the suit. There is the mysticism to this usualness, the irony of that predictability is one such that has this genre running forever. I think I will never get bored of seeing it and so Jon Favreau already had me in the start. As we get to know the townspeople starting with the mysterious gal Olivia Wilde as Ella and Sam Rockwell as the do good and naive Doc, the plot gets to the eventuality intersecting Harrison Ford’s Colonel Woodrow and Daniel Craig’s nameless man getting the wanted man’s name of Jake.

When they are in the midst on the cusp of a gun fight breaking, in comes the flying machines from nowhere and strings people into their machine. Startled, confused and wondering what the heck is happening around them Jake’s metal bracelet becomes the defeating weapon they would come to depend on. As they begin to venture on to rescue the people that were captured by these aliens, the film goes through the regular fodder of a Western and brings in the aliens when there is a need for action and common enemies for these people.

With the previews and marketing campaigns in the current days, a film can generate a buzz purely by those techniques. Handled as a business venture, it has evolved into the nature of launching a product and selling it. Here the sell is half done with the obviousness of the name on what exactly to expect out of it. And with the previews, it reiterates the further obviousness and the audience bite into it. With so much given away the least expected is to fulfill those giveaways. The mind game of this slow revelation works in the favour of the film.

While we know that Daniel Craig can make one hell of a beat up and tough James Bond, here he toughens further and becomes the iron hand of a man in Jake. A man chiseled in his physique and determination through his eyes stands tall and different carrying the film’s stature. Harrison Ford comes in and joins it for the fun of it and shouts here and there to add some old school lessons in adventure and action. Throw in good natured Sam Rockwell and Olivia Wilde as the love interest for Jake, you have the recipe for a moderately successful entertainment.
The aliens are as usual mindless, disgusting, gooey and portrayed as nothing but beasts. How come they are so great at creating cutting edge technology far beyond the time and minds of the humans and shun away the nature to have a sense of negotiation? That is least of the concerns even in a serious science fiction film and in a film like “Cowboys & Aliens”, it does not really matter. All the audience are in need of a thrill and the motivation to plough through these creatures with no mercy and no guilt.

There are several films obvious enough in their title and previews and few of them go beyond the judgments and come out with clever entertainment. One such is “Zombieland” and you can see how the actors were having fun shooting it. Here as much as the campaign works, there seems to be not much fun going on nor does any kind of effort in terms of creativity to put an unexpected spin. It is not all fun but it is honest in what it plans to provide. It is like seeing a good salesperson work and sometimes despite the product is unnecessary and not useful personally, you buy for the hard work of the skills in the person. “Cowboys & Aliens” is that product.

"Captain America: The First Avenger" (2011) - Movie Review

“Captain America: The First Avenger” has some thought process going into it. I can give it that but that is where it stops. Unlike the thoughtless comic hero films that are spitted out these days, Joe Johnston’s film has a character with a feel and punch to him. As a desperate man trying to prove himself that he can do more for the country than help load scrap metals in testing times of the World War II, Chris Evans is reduced my computer graphics into ultra skinny Steve Rogers. He never gives up and ultimately finds a scientist to give him a chance. He takes it and later becomes Captain America.

The title and the character name cannot be cheesier enough. It reeks and drips of patriotism on steroids but when the times are tough and there needs a symbol to get money in bonds, Uncle Sam can use some boost to get some funds and kill Nazis. Stanley Tucci comes as the good scientist who committed a mistake of injecting a super boosting serum to Johann Schmidt (Hugo Weaving) creating super monster of an already developed monster under Hitler’s command. Hearing the accent of Hugo Weaving I was wondering whether Werner Herzog voiced for him to overcome the difficulty of overcoming an Australian accent. Alas, it is indeed Weaving imitating Herzog to the syllable. That it adds a certain madness and weight to his villainous Schmidt does not hurt the film.

Johnston as said earlier gets certain things right and adds sense to this otherwise mundane script. Growing off as being tamed and beaten by the bullies, Rogers gets a chance of a life time in becoming a warrior. A super soldier gaining stronger muscles in couple of minutes without hitting the gym and jump higher, run faster and act quickly. His astonishment should be nothing short of exuberant except he has to get in action right after he gains this power. Chris Evans is the perfect choice for Captain America but not sure whether he pulled of the puny little kid from Brooklyn. Despite the graphics shrinking him, Evans face gives off his original form in stature and acting. Evans is a cool cat in doing easy roles and pulling it off without trouble and he does suit in rightly so in the suit but cannot be Steve Rogers.

Marvel Studios is building and aligning these characters to provide the biggest bonanza of upcoming “The Avengers”. With numerous characters flooding that film, I cannot imagine Captain America getting much light over Iron Man and team. Yet I would be curious to watch that mainly because Joss Whedon is directing it and you never know Chris Evans can do as he surprised me a little bit pleasantly in the much neglected “Push”.

Now a day it is more about how much you can show in the expense report to publicize and market it. Joe Johnston’s film though has that report to brag about, all the action scenes are nothing short of mediocre. The film that builds up early characters in Stark Industries owner Howard Stark (Dominic Cooper) and bringing the story to the present time and world, fails to connect those characters to the audience. The need and angst for Steve Rogers to keep doing what he wants to do goes unnoticed. Not that any of this super hero films go for the details or layers of character but the work the writers Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely appeared to be interested in those and rather does not translate well on to the screen.

For the grandeur, hype and spending, “Captain America: The First Avenger” is indeed a sliver of cut above the rest of steady state exercise in the comic film industry. Whenever I see a good actor spewing cheesy lines with an expression of not enjoying that moment comes forth in a blockbuster, my soul dies little inside. And we have that in Tommy Lee Jones out here as Colonel Chester Phillips. Though he is not as pathetic and terrible as Dennis Quiad in “G. I. Joe”.

"Army of Shadows" (Language - French) (1969) - Movie Review

“Army of Shadows” while seems like an aspiring film about the sleeper group against the Nazi regime misses its mark quite a bit and having made three years after the riveting and scarily realistic “The Battle of Algiers”, Jean-Pierre Melville’s supposed master piece loses us right from the start. It comes back to some spellbinding chilling moments in the end to scoop us off but the flaw of the overall film looms well enough to leave me unperturbed. Despite that, it does have an eerie mood in presenting these players behind the curtain depending solely on the secrecy and executing their plans.

The film begins with its primary character Philippe Gerbier (Lino Ventura) being brought in the camp by French police marking the beginning of Nazi occupied France. Well mannered, stunningly elegant and suave is Philippe who instantly identifies the capable and the incapable in the camp. Before he could plan an escape with a fellow inmate, he is transferred where he improvises the situation to play in favour. We see the life outside he begins to pursue with his clan of soldiers hiding in the dark and living under constant threat of being betrayed and fall into the hands of German to be tortured and ultimately die a slow miserable death.

Melville’s film goes through the hardship with cold hands when they have to execute a traitor with no mercy whatsoever. So when the Nazi regime occupied it is like any other occupation and the need for resistance is self explanatory but the hardship and the detrimental sacrifice and violence these characters carryout goes with silence. What were they thinking when they are brought to the ditch of violence to fight for their freedom? Was their philosophy disturbed by this dreadful work and living in shadows? There are voice overs explaining the plans and the skill of their fellow soldiers but there seems to be a page torn from those monotonic recitations of the daily labour of fighting for freedom.

They recruit a young man Jean-Francois Jardie (Jean-Pierre Cassel) curious, talented and ultimately in for the thrills from the get go. He is specifically ensured that his family ties are limited. He has an elder brother living a meager life of surviving in this cruel regime. The film reveals a surprise of how much each member takes their secrecy to their heart which is when “Army of Shadows” got me upright. There we see a commitment unlike any other where tight lipped means what it means.

Slowly but surely we get to know each of the key parties involved in this resistance. There is Felix (Paul Crauchet) a trusted and effective right hand man for Gerdier. There is Mathilde (Simone Signoret) an iron lady with the smartness and bravery to carry on the onus of taking harsh decisions and desperate measures to see the feasibility and effectivity of a mission on the job. Her rescue mission to fetch Felix is one such where there is nothing but practicality. There are no heroic ventures but pure reality of executing a plan.

“Army of Shadows” could have skimmed off a major portion of the film and get right to the resistance’s actions. Not because it has lot happening but the precursor to arrive there does not add any value or point. I love a film when it drains the time and then rewards you with the need for doing so. There is a poem in a silence and the slowness in the way a mood is set and carried on. And I am sure that is the objective Melville went for. Unfortunately it evaporates the interest out of the viewer and by the time we get to the meat of the film, it has detached its view so far.

Every moment of this film reminded how great “The Battle of Algiers” was. It took its sweet time to establish its territory too but the raw nature in which the film slaps you is nothing short of brilliant. It provides the sense of human decay in the midst of struggle for higher purpose for the future of a country. What is wrong and right gets a shade in its true form and we are struggling to take the sides and justify the end, means and what not. “Army of Shadows” is the perfect title and it stands by it but it does not shed the light into the minds of its soldiers.

"Conan O'Brien Can't Stop" (Documentary) (2011) - Movie Review

My first visual of Conan O’Brien was sometime during the grad school days when his late night show was going on in the background in a friend’s television and his comedic entry to the stage. His buffoonery entrance did not impress me rather annoyed a little bit. Then when I visited the NBC studio 3-4 years back, I saw his studio and for some reason triggered to follow his show. From there on I have been a straight up Conan fan. While I like Jay Leno’s act, Conan O’Brien has always been very grounded in his comedy. There is a simplicity to his jokes. And his attitude to acknowledge his falls makes it even more funnier which made me appreciate his comedy a lot more. He is phenomenal especially in his interaction with other people which fascinates me. He is the man he appears on the show. “Conan O’Brien” Can’t Stop” is the behind the scenes documentary of his “The Legally Prohibited from Being Funny on Television Tour” wherein we see him at his highs, lows and everything in between.

Being exited from the Tonight show seven months after he took over it caused him hurt, pain and anger. The exit money was tremendously huge but it is not about the money. What exactly went down rode along for days in the media and laughing war between the hosts. Now with nothing in prospect and the future of his career in question he begins the tour. The film begins with few interviews of the man but the real movie begins when the tickets for the tour sells off rapidly. The ultimate fun begins when the crew hits the air and road.

He is bitter and his props for fun, tease and taunt becomes the people around him. His personal assistant puts up with those mainly because she knows her boss is going through tough times and he is a good man outside of this. He is hilarious and an entertainer throughout his daily life. I was watching an entertainer in a show during my visit to Wisconsin Dells. An old guy with the talent for simple juggling and odd tricks, most of his act involved him talking giving a partial standup. I deduced this about the man that he is the entertainer not on the stage alone but in real life. That is him and this is not an act. So is Conan O’Brien. A man determined to make all his conversation a comedy, a one liner and to induce laughter in the person conversing with him and around him.

He mentions that right on the day of the last episode of the Tonight show, he began planning this tour. 44 shows around the country and he begins to breathe the show. We see him formulate an idea and conceptualize through the writers and perform with his full capability. He is nervous, tense and focussed right before the first dress rehearsal and exhausted after it. He lays on the couch drinking water after every show and we are drenched in his sweat. Then after five minutes he goes to meet the fans outside. Sign the sheet, take pictures while the camera falters due to the inability of the operator of the device. He holds the smile forever and heads back to the dressing room. He is frustrated and has a love/hate relationship with the tour and meeting the fans. He does not want to disappoint a fan and at the same time it dries him out and wonders why he has to do this.

“Conan O’Brien Can’t Stop” is not so of a statement or propaganda on the man’s case and his disappointment with Leno and NBC. It contains the emotion towards it but it is more about the man living through the applause and thrill of standing in front of a crowd. This is his job and he has to do it. This is his drug and this is his cure. He does not care how good he is but feeds off the enjoyment of the audience. His audience is available 24 hours in and around him. That drives him to push through the day and wake up for a kick ass morning. That the title makes sure to deliver and movie backs it up with the evidence.

While this tour was happening, he was also in the process of selling his show to other station. The concept of uncertainty is troubling and I can tell it from experience. Not that world is going to fall apart but the bother remains. It is an itch that cannot scratched and it drives you to insanity. People deal with it in different ways while Conan did it with burying himself in work. His workaholism becomes his way of surviving the ordeal and he succeeded admirably. Directed by Rodman Flender, it is entertaining to see the man behind the stage, in the dressing room and his interaction with his crew. It is moving at times to see him aggravate himself and swallow through the anger. It is funny to see him picking up his colleagues and co-workers. One thing I would remember is I would never ask him to have a picture with me when I do meet him some point in my life.

"Horrible Bosses" (2011) - Movie Review

There cannot be a review which cannot mention Kevin Spacey reincarnating Buddy from “Swimming with Sharks”. I remember that film vividly like yesterday and I remember the scathing review I gave for it despite its terrific film making by George Huang. Here is Spacey again in similar role as though Buddy has grown older, meaner and violent in Dave Harken though this time around the comedy of it overcomes it.

“Horrible Bosses” is the one of the funniest films I have seen in a very long time. That does include “The Hangover” and why is three good beings deciding to kill their bosses for their evil nature tops that post debauchery clean up? It has more to do with the plethora of cast put forth by Seth Gordon. It has Jason Bateman as Nick Hendricks who can do the lovable normal comedic guy still chilling enough to provide a dark edge to it. There is Jason Sudekis as Kurt Buckman having the gift to charm ladies and simply pull of subtle references as he walks by carrying his SNL talents. And finally is Charlie Day from “Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia” playing the nicest guy Dale Arbus of three and the audience along with his buddies do think that he does not have a horrible boss in the voluptuous and seductress Jennifer Anniston as Dr. Julia Harris. With Colin Farrell transforming himself as both disgusting and ugly as Kurt’s new boss, this film comes up with surprising performances after “Tropic Thunder”.

So these three buddies have the horrific and evil managers making their life miserable and cornering them as much as they can to pop them out. The film is a perfect set up and there is not much of predictability rather than unexpected acts and random cats jumping around. The scenes with Bateman, Sudeikis and Day are nothing short of fun. It is not the regular combo wherein there is an always “stupid” character running around making mistakes while the others fall into that trap and complain and wonder about how horrid they can get in messing things up. Here everyone takes equal share of blunders in the most hilarious fashion and this is the best part, sticking to their characters.

Contrary to the Bateman fans who witnessed his performance through “Arrested Development”, I saw his capability in one of the worst films “Smokin’ Aces” as the sky high lawyer coming in for hardly five minutes and mesmerizing the screen with his performance. I would like to see more of that than the less of his normal avatars. In “Horrible Bosses”, while he does not pull a rabbit out, he is seamless with his co-stars working the magic along. Clearly the chemistry between Sudeikis and Bateman stands out but then again Charlie Day and Sudeikis rope each other sufficiently well. Thus providing a balance force between these two without even making the audience see through it. It works tremendously.

“Tropic Thunder” is the last film wherein I could not stop myself from laughing hard in a theater. There Robert Downey Jr. provided one of the best performances greater and tougher than a dramatic role that should have earned an Academy Award but sadly as it goes for comedy films, it was snubbed. While “Horrible Bosses” does not have great performances it has these numerous casts providing their best in the very short time. Take Jamie Foxx with the oddest and coolest invention of a name for a gangster in a film playing against and for stereotype. Jennifer Anniston going mean, ruthless and a sexual monster towards Charlie Day’s Dale is another treat. All of them mix and match in a way that appears like a lucky coincidences.

The writing by Michael Markowitz, John Francis Daley and Jonathan Goldstein provides that platform that holds the film upright and endure it with the flavour of delicious comedy it was written with. I have always admired the idea of a comedian acknowledging their joke that did not work right in the act. Somehow there is a redeeming quality to it but more than that it paves way for the non-working joke segueing for a better joke. Thereby it also creates a bond between the person and the audience in enjoying it together. This technique I have only seen and observed in Conan O’Brien and rarely do I transfer that to films. “Horrible Bosses” has those acknowledging factor that gets the audience into the screen and have fun with the guys doing funny mistakes and working their way out in much dumber means.

“Horrible Bosses” might be termed as the run of the mill crude comedy and lined up with those in the past yet it has immense quality to it. It knows its jokes and the cast knows it better and put a spin on it where it clicks at all the right places. Despite the roundabout predictable nice ending, the film directed by Seth Gordon is absolute fun film and a wonderful collection for your film library.

"Midnight in Paris" (2011) - Movie Review

My best friend wishes he lived during the beat culture and when peace, love and free sex were the mantra. He should watch “Midnight in Paris” and can empathize with the main character of the film. Gil Pender (Owen Wilson) is a successful screenwriter trying to redeem his soul selling to Hollywood by writing a novel. He is in Paris with his fiance Inez (Rachel McAdams). Gil absolutely adores Paris as it is close to his heart when great writers spent peaceful time in this creative catalyst of a town, Paris. Now here he is and he cannot stop praising the beauty of the streets and the cafe’s, the presence of these artists and literary geniuses in a different time. He is going to get more than he asked for.

Woody Allen churns out films every year and it seems that he has an eternal fountain of creative process working in his head. Including this film I have seen three of his works, all recent and the diversity and presentation is so far apart and yet so effective. In “Vicki Cristina Barcelona” he provided three women, one man and a kind of twisted romance in the most amicable fashion. Then he gets Larry David being pretty much his manifestation in “Seinfeld” and “Curb Your Enthusiasm” into a comedy and a statement of the culture and society. Here he comes with a pleasant journey into the heart of this beautiful city known to have nurtured the greatest of writers in the bosom’s of its cobble stoned streets and rainy bridges.

Gil cannot believe that he is in Paris and desperately seeks an empathizing soul to share his enthusiasm in landing out here. Inez is more to be interested in the showy and classily snobby pseudo literate geek Paul Bates (Michael Sheen) who reeks of shady condescension starting from the way he maintains his beard. Gil goes through this relationship in a denial being dominated and questioned by his future in-laws. In a much enjoyable wine drinking session he opts out of dance to walk through the streets drunk. He lands lost in a step way when the bell tolls to midnight. An antique car finds its way and there are cheery people get him inside the vehicle to continue on an adventure I was not ready and expect to happen.

What happens in that midnight of Paris and the upcoming nights will not be revealed out here in this review but all I can say is that it is a writer’s wet dream. Woody Allen obviously has a greater understanding of the feeling like any passionate artist would. While any of the creator’s work is semi-autobiographical leaving some form of themselves inside one or several characters and in this film Allen channels all his fantasy through Gil.

While I am not well informed or curious enough to explore those great writers of the times when they loitered the late nights of this city to expand and explain their creative significance to themselves, “Midnight in Paris” has Owen Wilson exuberant with the cheerfulness of a young kid fluttering around in the aim of immersing into this extraordinary adventure as a writer. And knowing the nature of these writers clearly would elevate the enjoyment level of this film to a different level, it never does hinder an ordinary film enthusiast to miss out on lot of things.

“Midnight in Paris” is the kind of film which puts the audience at ease and lets them relate with concept on the joy someone would have in a fantasy in a personal sense but casually. Owen Wilson gets joined in this festival with Kathy Bates, Adrien Brody, Alison Pill, Corey Stoll and Marion Cotillard. It becomes a homage, ode and a dream that of a writer in the perfect city for that to happen.

I have refrained myself considerably in this review to reveal next to nothing plot as I would like for the viewers to be surprised as I was and go with the flow as the film does. In the current movie going experience the idea of finding a film surprising has phenomenally reduced and for a film like this, it is more than required to conceal the plot revelation as there lies the complete joy of experiencing a film. It is not ground breaking but you will understand the importance of knowing it first hand when you see it.

"Super 8" (2011) - Movie Review

I remember the hazy memories of watching “Goonies” and the bits and pieces of “E.T” and it is not strange that those are brought back in me watching J.J. Abrams’ “Super 8”. Not alone he places the story in that era the films mentioned came out but also provides a sci-fi that has great kids adventuring through the little town of Lillian. With Kyle Chandler coming off from “Friday Night Lights” to give a composed performance not replicating Coach Taylor, “Super 8” becomes a nostalgic experience and an entertaining one.

There are perfect emotional setups as the films begins with Joe Lamb (Joel Courtney) losing his mother to an accident and his father Deputy Jackson Lamb (Kyle Chandler) is the generation dad that had no contact with his son as his wife is the house manager. He is now a single dad lamenting his loss and being tough on the front. The relationship between Joe and Jack needs resolution. Then there is Joe’s best buddy and a passionate director at such a young age is Charles (Riley Griffiths). Joe is good for make up taking his artistic skills from his mother and Elle Fanning as Alice comes to the childhood crush to work on the summer film Charles is making.

The production unit begins their important scene on the railway station and it was enthusiastic to see Charles work his people up as a demanding good director. I wish I could be like him and make use of everything and anything around to add production value. But then again when a train derails, an unknown creature escapes and US Air Force swarms over this little town, Charles gets any director would dream of. A series of perfectly made unfortunate events for movie making!

This reviewer has long forgotten of a kid’s adventure story (yes, I have not yet seen the Harry Potter films) and to see it being shot with a shrewdness of Abrams makes up for that lost opportunities. So far Abrams has directed the box office hits “Mission Impossible III” and “Star Trek”, both of which were evident that these subject matter however cheesy and preposterous have been gets a life supporting system to wake it up. He surely seems to have mastered the art of adding human emotions into blockbuster mindlessness. There is just enough seriousness and gravity in his past films that it takes this fodder of Hollywood haphazard exercise into something meaningful. “Super 8” gets more of it than his previous two ventures.

Like M. Night Shyamalan’s “Signs” which I was not a big fan of, the film keeps this creature that gets loose of the air force train hidden and out of focus. Suddenly the dogs disappear and engines from all the cars vanish. Added to that the Sheriff of the town absconds leaving Jack in the middle of people’s complains in waves and the Air Force shutting him down of any information. In between he has to deal with his wife’s loss and with the man whose shift his wife took to succumb to the accident.

Noah Emmerich comes as the secretive and egomaniacal Colonel Nelec. Again it is so predictable of his character but Abrams somehow breathes life into these known people seen in previous films. The main strategy he employs is getting these gang of kids to be those kids looking for adventure and trying to make things bigger than them in the small little town. Then there is Elle Fanning coming with similar talent as that of her sister in a much mature and cute performance.

Yet it is Joel Courtney, Riley Griffiths, the goofy little fire mongering Zach Mills as Preston and the protagonist in Charles’ film Martin played by Gabriel Basso along with Ryan Lee’s Carey that take away this film from the hands of adults. They are at the genesis of teenage year exploring the limits and spurring rebelliousness. Their dorky character lands up in teaming within themselves and be in the midst amongst the greatest moments in the human history.

“Super 8” pays off emotionally that does not require Sam Mendes or Paul Thomas Anderson to be involved but is not vacant as that of Michael Bay. This balance it has with the precise amount of drama, loss, love, adventure and science fiction provides the smoothest ride for a very familiar road. Its stand against 3D definitely works in its favour and the IMAX helps out the larger than universe in a small town environment. And the kids make it all entertaining and “Super 8” will be played not far from future to be the perfect Sunday evening film.

"X-Men: First Class" (2011) - Movie Review

For all the above average mediocre fun the X-Men series have presented, Matthew Vaughn makes it up in “X- Men: First Class”. A thoroughly entertaining prequel in this series it takes a step above those in presenting James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender as Professor X and Magneto respectively in their young glory days and why they are the way they are.

As much as I would generally dislike the obligatory introduction scenes from the main characters’ child hood, Matthew Vaughn sets up that tone from these two main characters that become their core nature of their personality and grow with them unperturbed. Charles Xavier is a kid who graciously accepts a young girl Raven (Jennifer Lawrence) in his home as he realizes that he is not alone in being different. There is an ingrained sense of compassion in this person and he grows to be James McAvoy. Not so much for Erik, the young Magneto who is under the cruel torture of a Nazi doctor to move a coin by his power or Erik’s mom will be shot in front of him. Soon we realize the revenge transforming him to the man he will be. Despite the outcome in these two characters the film treats them as young men in the same predicament approaching it in different ways. Both become great friends learning wisdom and differences in them. Their bond makes this film a better one than the rest of the films in the series.

The film intelligently takes the historic incident to its plot and deviates it just enough. In the edge of cold war becoming a real war, the diabolic Dr. Schmidt who shaped Erik for who he is, is now Sebastian Shaw (Kevin Bacon) and is in the process of launching his plan for world domination by invoking a nuclear war between USA and Russia. His beliefs in him being mutant and the idea of human’s predictable reaction of fear and hatred motivates this grand scheme of known plan. Erik is in the pursuit of knocking down the Nazis in hiding waiting for the opportunity to get even with Sebastian. Meanwhile Charles is at Oxford expanding his knowledge and living with his foster sister who is going through the angst of not being herself and unable to find a balance in her life.

After Charles and Erik meet up in confronting their common enemy, the strength of Charles is laid out and given how he models these mutants into using their power effectively and more importantly wisely. Charles is the ultimate good but also naive in the way the world is going to turn out on them. Erik knows the truth as he has witnessed the worst in the humans through the holocaust and cannot wipe out his cynicism towards these predictable personalities. Yet both of them join hands in working with the CIA to get Sebastian’s evil plans foil.

They begin to assemble a team of their own to battle the evil. The recruiting process not only provides fun to the audience but you can see how these two people are enthusiastic in finding these mutants hiding in plain sight. And there is a superb cameo who delivers the one “f” word allowed for a PG-13 efficiently. They find young kids on the cusp of being decimated into permanent identity crisis and rescue them. There is a CIA scientist with a large foot identified immediately by Charles and that is Hank (Nicholas Hoult) who empathizes with Raven. But Erik sees the struggle in Raven and always in the lookout for opportunities to remind her to accept herself for who she is. Easy for him to say being Michael Fassbender.

There is beyond a doubt some splendid work from James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender in providing these comic characters the very much needed characterization. While Fassbender is my personal favourite as he provided performance of a life time in “Hunger” and easily incorporates the young Magneto in this film, James McAvoy somehow excels him. McAvoy has always been the stereotypical nice guy including the bloody “Wanted” but here he exemplifies this noble character and balances him in between idealism and reality. The friendship between him and Erik is truly believable and when the time comes on choosing their path it is little heartbreaking to see these two depart. Knowing the eventual rivalry in the future, it reminds us how friendship can spring from different places and depart at the same.

Matthew Vaughn resurrects this lukewarm series into much more than it would have ever anticipated. While this is not the best comic book film, it is a much better film in providing actors believing in their role and the belief their characters hold. They do not become a caricature in a formulaic comic book film and enhances into something more. Matthew Vaughn’s screenplay alongside Ashley Edward Miller, Zack Stentz and Jane Goldman have their moments of wisdom especially the Zen like advice Charles provides Erik in using his power to maximum and to perfection. While “X-Men: First Class” is no “Batman Begins” or “The Dark Knight”, it is definitely better than the overrated “Iron Man”.

"Bridesmaids" (2011) - Movie Review

The world behind the curtain of the opposite sex may be is too scary for a man like me. I remember the shock of seeing the complaining session in “It’s Complicated” for five minutes and I get to see the full session in “Bridesmaids”. The whole film is a witness to a wreck methodically performed by Kristen Wiig as Annie. It is a funny film but somewhere in the middle I felt a little guilty for laughing at a character who clearly needs therapy. Despite the horror of seeing the craziness existing in the realm of women, “Bridesmaids” has the talented Wiig who co-wrote this film along with Annie Mumolo.

Annie (Kristen Wiig) is in her late thirties and is going through a rough patch in her life. She lost her bakery to the recession, became a sex buddy for an excessively confident and arrogant Jon Hamm and now has to sink herself into the misery of being the maid of honour for her best friend Lilian’s (Maya Rudolph) wedding. Lonely, broke and neurotic, she is trying to be happy for her friend and gets a rival who subtly and brilliantly orchestrates to snap the best friend job from Annie. That will be Helen (Rose Byrne).

The marketing campaign in making the title look like a women’s version of “The Hangover” is silly as it is mainly about Annie and her insecurities. The film is raunchy stretching its limits to shock people which is surprisingly funny and left me unscathed. What bothered me as the movie progressed was the temper tantrum and drama Annie begins to pull at every step of the way. While the feelings of her being down and dealing it are true and I am sure it depicts the part of women that I am not aware of, it was little disturbing to laugh at the emotional expense of a seriously messed up person. It goes from laughing to awe in crazy disappointment towards Annie.

Regardless “Bridesmaids” leaves you with some great laughs and some amazingly interesting male characters. Jon Hamm is hilarious as the jerk who simply wants a sexual relationship with Annie and nothing else. He is direct, blunt and a super ass about it too. And then there is Officer Nathan Rhodes (Chris O’Dowd) an Irishman being the nicest guy to Annie. Their scenes have more than chemistry if that makes sense. He is super macho person with such a humility. He firmly believes Annie’s skill as baker needs to be revamped and needs to be continued as a passion. He is gentle, sensible and not the obligatory man figure the standard rom-coms spits out.

Maya Rudolph and Kristen Wiig in few of the SNL sketches I have seen provided ample evidence that these women who would stretch beyond the realms and boundaries of what is expected out of women and men. Their physical comedies are a hoot and they go 300% on the job at hand. Here both of them respect that it is a different media and then ice their talents from SNL into perfect situations that require that talents. Kristen Wiig especially leaps from supporting comedic role to center stage giving some serious emotional performance on the way.

There are other bridesmaids beyond Annie and Helen. One that is equivalenced to Zach Galifianakis in “The Hangover” is Melissa McCarthy as Megan, Lilian’s sister-in-law. Megan while is used as the object for fat jokes and total inappropriateness (beyond the regular stunts), her character gets redeemed when she punches a reality check into Annie on to her spiraling life of self pity and pathetic cry for sympathy. Ellie Kemper from “The Office” as Becca has little to nothing to do or punch lines to pull to keep us remembering her along with Wendi McLendon-Covey’s Rita as the mother ready to let loose.

Director Paul Feig embraces this side of women going all in and standing toe to toe with the men’s raunchiness is another door to further films that might or might not be better than this. The resolve for the happy ending is uncomplicated and the redemption for Annie is not overblown either. What the journey provides is some series of set ups for Annie to loose her screws steadily and in the meantime learn some life lessons on avoiding dramas.

"Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides" (2011) - Movie Review

Johnny Depp is desperate to breathe life into this franchise and it is gasping for breath. When the extended and elongated two sequels that followed the first installment came, the graphics and the adventurous sea fights were the highlights for this reviewer. By this fourth time around there is not much to expect than series of Captain Jack Sparrow’s tilted walks, permanently inebriated speech patterns and lot of ocean to look forward to. Yet there is an obligation by this reviewer and thus I did so for this fourth installment.

The main star of the franchise is back for some more adventures, searches and confusions. They are in the hunt for the “Fountain of Youth” and why? Because to introduce two new characters with big names, Ian McShane and Penelope Cruz as Edward “Blackbeard” Teach and his supposed daughter Angelica who is also an ex-lover of our beloved Jack. Blackbeard has complete control over his ship and is a bad ass when it comes to sea in looting and plundering ships and wealth on his ways as would any pirate would aspire. As with magical powers comes predictions and prophecy. One such states that Blackbeard will be killed by a one legged man and hence the hunt to keep his heart beating.

Apart from my laziness in writing reviews lately, when I began writing this piece, all I could think of is what are the things that I can talk about to even say it is not good? That being said and the thrive to earn bazillion more dollars from this franchise, director Rob Marshall takes up the job from Gore Verbinski and does not go for the complexity his predecessor went for in these ventures. He understands this business concept and with cooperation from Johnny Depp as the major asset would fulfill any moviegoer that are looking for antics of Sparrow and some special effects fireworks.

Incidentally the first “Pirates of the Caribbean” was the very first film I watched in a theatre after I came to US. I was rudely introduced to the concept of not having intervals which I grew up with. This caused additional dislike towards the film but when I later watched on a relaxed weekend, it did its job. It had its tactical Johnny Depp working his character and making him repulsive, comic and unusually likable. After two more films, Captain Jack Sparrow is no longer those and has wore down considerably. Sometimes it does surprise me why would he even take up a venture like this as he has been quite intelligent though whimsical in his role selections.

There is a side romance plot between a mermaid and a missionary which does not have any kind of depth or even the glossy shallowness sometimes a better movie good do over. Ian McShane is purely here to have fun and I am sure he had lot of it but the movie became from an entertainment into an ordeal for me. I skipped “Fast Five” coming so close to watching it. It was a personal conscience playing and discouraging by not paying one more ticket for this intolerable festivals of sequels of chasing cars. Strangely it got so many good reviews. I now keep kicking myself why did not I watch that and skip this. I ended the previous film with the note “And every soul beckons this one be the end of this chain of Pirates of the Caribbean” and I seriously wish they do.

"Thor" (2011) - Movie Review

Seeing IMAX 3D for the first time in Peoria, “Thor” is something to watch for in that technology. What a treat! I along like several others have been against 3D and I still do believe that it eats away the core nature of a film a little bit but watching “Thor” in 3D and mainly through the beautiful technology of IMAX I think there are films that beckons to be viewed in this format. Yet the truth remains which is whatever the magnanimity the brilliance of science and technology might bring the art of telling a story has to be the crux of any movie going experience including a blockbuster like “Thor”.

Opening the gateway for ridiculous blockbuster films that serenaded the preview for this film, “Thor” is sometime better and most of the times mediocre road the superhero films tend to take. Thor is played by Chris Hemworth who has imbibed the gym within himself and shaped into a rock giant. He lives in this magical world of Asgard, far far far and far away from Earth and other “realms”. Here magic happens because, well it happens. No reason or explanation other than the fact that of it being the source for plethora of larger than universe action sequences and backdrops.

Thor is arrogant, cocky and immature as any superhero with crazy powers would be. His father is Anthony Hopkins as a one eyed Odin, King of Asgard. As Thor proudly walks to accept the Kingdom from his father the blue skinned monsters Frost Giants (sounds like a delicious delight from Diary Queen!) sneak into steal the WMD of their world called the Casket of Ancient Winters (sounds like a classic dessert in a fine dine restaurant). As the ferocious young warmongering mind of Thor takes his allies to teach the Frost Giants a lesson, he gets a lesson of his own from Odin to be banished to the Earth for breaking the peace and prosperity that exists between Asgard and Jotunheim.

That gets you to the origins of Thor coming to Earth. The film maker are not so curious about the world of Asgard which is filled with sparkling bridges, golden structures and powers that makes nuclear weapons a water gun. Of course they are worried more about the rambunctious and irresponsible giant kid. That is indeed the reason we as the audience are out there but little do they care on providing some form of idea on this magnificent world of Asgard. For instance what is the day to day life of an Asgardian? Or for that fact the Frost Giants whom at the end Thor realizes are another race with innocent lives? The ridicule from the readers on this reviewer is well aware but for a superhero film to be greater than the genre itself, you got to go above and beyond. Even the “Iron Man” which proves merely a thriller and funny than a great superhero films has some grip on its ambience and characters. “Thor” does have those but aims low on several occasions.

What redeems the film out of the mediocrity is the last act wherein our beloved hero begins to understand the nature of leadership, wisdom and sacrifice. The plot with his brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) provides a good revelation and his aspiration to please Odin makes complete sense in putting together this piece in nice order. The romance between Thor and the gorgeous young scientist Jane Foster played by Natalie Portman is there just enough to not become a distraction and exists for some sort of obligation which I am happy to fall for.

The build up of these Marvel comic characters to formulate the 2012 “The Avengers” paves way to bring S.H.I.E.L.D agent Phil Coulson (Clark Gregg) and does so rightly. The real wonders of this film is the glorious backdrop of Asgard given by Cinematographer Haris Zambarloukos and the great team of graphics. It is grandiose and flawed but it is more about witnessing these structures that is both poetic, glossy, boisterous and magnetic. Take the Bifrost Bridge leading to the gateway of traveling to other realms and the road to it glitters like spongy diamonds.

Directed by Kenneth Branagh, “Thor” is considered and written by many critics as the right entry to the blockbuster and many claiming it to be a far better superhero film. True that it provides good entertainment and is an inch above the fiascos of this genre films. Apparently the standards of this genre has gone down considerably wherein people like Chris Nolan are the only ones taking it to phenomenal heights of realism, thrill and profundity. Ranking for what it is “Thor” is a fun film with some soul in its titular character but as a general scale for good films, it is average at its best.

"Leaves of Grass" (2010) - Movie Review

Odd needs a definition after seeing “Leaves of Grass”. A film that never comes under any convention and takes a ride that goes with total unpredictability at every step of its way and comes out with a mystique of its own. What did Edward Norton see when he read the script written by director Tim Blake Nelson? Is it the in depth philosophical references and the esoteric nature of Bill Kincaid or is it the simplicity in the pot headed Brady Kincaid who is as much as brilliant as his brother succumbing to the land he grew up? How could you approach a subject like this and produce a performance out of it? I believe that is where Edward Norton distinguishes himself in taking odd films in odd characters and rolls on with it. You might not possibly fall in love with it but you know you have never seen anything like this before.

Bill Kincaid and Brady Kincaid are identical twins living separate lives. Bill is a professor in philosophy and has a promising career awaiting in Harvard law school to frame his own course and content. What a pleasurable post it would be for a professor? Brady is living in Little Dixie, Oklahoma and has built the most sophisticated and pure form of modern agriculture through hydroponics for growing weed. He built up a hefty amount of debt from a drug lord (Richard Dreyfuss) in the process and he is given an option to either pay back or expand the business, neither of which he does not want to do. This brings to the turn of events to use his brother as a ridiculous alibi for his crazy plan.

There is a plot and there is no plot. There is significance and there is insignificance to its details. There is a poetry and garbage. There is confused mix of everything and you have no idea what you are getting into. The treatment of the material is organic. It has a simple set up and ordinary people behaving in their defined ordinary manner. Only here it is a pot headed grower is in his out of mind attempt to get out of this fix as he is expecting a baby. Seeing Billy and Brady you can say how each of them opted out to be who they wanted. Billy knew too much in the early high school years to get out of this place and be consumed by its eccentricity. Brady embraced it with full heart and is left with debt and troubles. Their mother (Susan Sarandon) brought them up influenced by the culture of 60s. Talk about dysfunctional family and you get a true to the bone enactment out here.

Billy is the sophisticated and feared professor. He is lured back to Oklahoma only to find out he is the coin in his brother’s plan. He meets a beautiful and smart woman Janet (Keri Russell) from his child hood and is charmed by her erudite in literature and philosophy. His life before this film would have been solid teaching with student crushing over his handsomeness and not able to afford any time for himself. Here he is forced to smoke pot and let loose to not dwell on those conventional drug trip but to let Janet to him. Despite the fear of his home town taking his life away, he is liberated and free in the tricky situation he was tricked in.

Brady is the other side of the coin and he is every bit of Billy in mind and soul but is completely messed up in making decisions. He loves his brother and his family. He takes life at its face value and takes it as it was given to him. His buddy Bolger (Tim Blake Nelson) is loyal and this duo work in a weird sense of rhythm and understanding. They are what they are and nothing else. They are regular humans and every one is in their sanity but the choices and decisions define the uniqueness of failure and success. You would know which part Brady is.

I have so many questions for Tim Blake Nelson on what made him to write and direct this film. Resembling much of Coen brothers storytelling it still goes way away from them. Coen brothers in their films have a distant agenda of something. Either the mood or the way of life or simply the characters dissection in a surgical manner becomes their backbone. In “Leaves of Grass” it wanders with no purpose and here and there it lays the seeds of thoughts and profound realizations. It talks religion, god, existentialism, narcism, greed, desperation, betrayal, violence, hatred, comedy, tragedy, romance and everything in between.

The experience of watching “Leaves of Grass” is nothing short of weird and unique. It invites the viewer in the assumption of simple plot of mix up and then becomes into this monster of a chaos. People begin to do things unexpectedly expected and violence erupts from unknown corner. Tragedy cruises through with ease and all of a sudden you have no idea what you are watching. It might either irritate and confuse its audience or beckon for another viewing like this reviewer. The undertone of this film is subtle in unexplainable ways and I cannot possibly explain what made me like this film and what will make you not like this film. I think that is the beauty of this picture that stands there as a philosophical statement leaving its readers in a little confused state. It might be a germination that grows up into an epiphany or simply rot in the ground. Regardless, you will be infected.

"Handsome Harry" (2009) - Movie Review

Before we go any further into the review of “Handsome Harry”, can I say how majestically handsome Jamey Sheridan is? No wonder they picked the man for the titular role of this smooth and classy film directed by Bette Gordon. It has a rare nature as the several scotches and wines the characters sip in the film. You know how it is going to taste but it is the joy of sipping it for real makes it something unique in this common occurrence.

Harry Sweeney is living in a small town and gets a call from an old navy buddy after thirty years he comfortably forgot. Tommy Kelly (Steve Buscemi) is dying and he needs to speak with Harry about the horrible night where the two along with their friends in the navy did to a guy named David Kagan. Harry begins his journey to meet his navy buddies who were there during that night nearly killing a man. This will be his search for forgiveness and you know where it all leads to. Nothing surprising out here yet there are actors and the mood Bette Gordon sets that goes like a smooth drink.

Harry played by Jamey Sheridan is unquestionably magnetic. Looking like a stallion he commands an upper hand even before he speaks but he is a regular man with regular moves and regular regrets. He begins meeting his friends and in that drunken night of hate and rage he questions who threw the armature on David’s arm and crush it. The night they want to forget gets a visitation for real and outside of their mind. This blast from the past is not a happy reunion.

Soon we learn the obvious nature of the act they bestowed upon the poor man. David made a pass on Harry and evil birthed upon him through this mob. I can still remember a dark incident from my past that involved similar situation and bunch of kids having no idea other than getting an opportunity to show their bravado beat a confused kid. I will be honest and say that I was disgusted about the kid to make a move on a guy but somewhere in that time I knew that the kid did not deserve that and now this film brings up those crazy past. Everyone has grown out of it and I cannot honestly say what they think about it but I can only be thankful that the kid did not get hurt as bad as David in the film. Rage and hate are such a violent thing that the damage of it can never be undone. Whatever the life everyone would lead that incident would be there and nothing can be done about it. Life still though goes on. Harry’s life and other’s did go on. Harry is a divorced man with a son he cannot talk openly to. Life does go on.

Harry visits Peter Rheems (John Savage) who instantly remembers Harry and is so excited and cannot wait to boast his success to him. He invites Harry to his new home with his wife Judy (Mariann Mayberry). There they share a drink and a memory. Peter tells the time they went to Acropolis and how several years back he went there again. He says how he began to think “Me now and Me then” and that part is one hell of a scene performed by John Savage with a nostalgia and decades of regret, pain and forgotten dreams in small sentences written by Nicholas T. Proferes.

Harry then visits William Porter (Aidan Quinn) a professor who has erased that past he served in the navy and denies any claims of that life he lived. Harry begs for twenty minutes and at the end of it William asks whether he wants to come for dinner and Harry replies that it appears twenty minutes is the life span of these reunions. He then sets off to meet Gebhardt (Titus Welliver) who is a born again Christian trying to forgive. He is too wise to know that the talk Harry is expecting and takes him to a golf course than a drink in his house. Their conversation reveals little bit more into the state of Harry. “Handsome Harry” has these one off sudden lines and mystic that brings past like a delicious rum. I keep referring this film to the sweet bitter taste of alcohol and you will understand once you see it.

Despite some wonderful acting, writing and the mood, the film does not go for the skyline. But this is the kind of film that would have been drowned into chaos with such an attempt and I can see the path Bette Gordon took. Seeing this I remember one of my favourite films “Broken Flowers” by Jim Jarmusch with Bill Murray trying to find the woman who mailed him a letter informing that he has a son and how his journey goes to the serious relationships he had in his womanizing life. There it was more about the enigmatic, funny and profound settings of the director and the end that made a strange emotion to its viewer. In “Handsome Harry” there is the open suspense of how Harry sees his life and the lies he decided to live upon. The end is polishing and suave. And I had nothing much more expected from this film yet there is a yearning. May be I was subconsciously expecting more from a film that knows its characters and the ambience. Either way check out the shining men reliving their dreaded past through handsome Harry.

"Easy A" (2010) - Movie Review

Seeing Emma Stone in “Superbad” for first time, all I could think of is how this is one another teenage actor that will be stereotyped in several upcoming films. She kicked off all those notions in “Zombieland” with a knack for working her beauty into timed comedy. Here in “Easy A” she takes the lead and goes through it like a veteran actor. A tale which would have been otherwise tamed into a teenage soap opera turns into a heartwarming comedy.

Emma Stone plays Olive (what an interesting name for a movie character) a high school girl looking for an identity. Despite her notable beauty she has somehow missed the train on popularity. Her best friend is Rhiannon (Alyson Michalka) and Rhiannon appears to with Olive predominantly to look shiny amongst unpolished shoes. The film begins in what is a webcast by Olive confessing to her side of the story. She begins how a simple lie in escaping a camp trip with Rhiannon brought to the place she is. In a faint attempt to continue her reason for not going to the camp, Olive lies saying she went out with a guy and had a one night stand. This of course happens within closed doors of women’s room but an open one for gossips. Enter Marianne (Amanda Bynes) overhearing this conversation. How can I say her type with political correctness? I cannot. She is a Jesus freak.

Within hours the rumour mill churns this and spits out to several mile radius around the campus. Olive despite the lie begins to like this new formed attention. People know her name and the idea of being watched and noticed is a drug like no other. Ask the reality show participants. But the reputation is not something to thrive for and the gang of Marianne gets in a tiff with Olive that gets her in detention. There she meets up with her closeted friend Brandon (Dan Byrd) and that leads to amplifying the reputation to next level. Before she knows the formed lies spread phenomenally while the unformed truth circulates amongst other students who wants to be associated with Olive’s reputation. She becomes a prostitute for fake reputations.

Through these serious steps of life director Will Gluck cruises through like Disneyland. Emma Stone is his girl who can bode those guilt and declining self esteem into lovely humour. Of course there are some snippets of astounding supporting roles from Stanley Tucci and Patricia Clarkson as Olive’s liberal, free, hippie and yuppie parents and Thomas Haden Church as Olive’s favourite English teacher Mr. Griffith. Along with Lisa Kudrow spraying some of her talented charm of goofy wicked humour to provide the greatly needed cast for this film.

Olive parallels this course of events taking inspiration from her reading exercise “The Scarlet Letter” and do not worry as they give a crash course towards this fast paced impatient FB generation that includes me. She stitches “A” in her new scintillating edgy costumes to symbolize her pursuit of standing tall in a high school society of ostracizing and judging their fellow students. That adds a good touch and may be even make some of the people to reach out for the literary work.

“Easy A” has all the flavouring of a boring romantic comedy but takes inspiration from the classics of John Hughes 80s teen comedies. It refers to it and fantasizes on those romantic actions of the boys in it. What more than a classic romance than John Cusack holding the boom box? John Hughes indeed has set the standards very high for the teen boys and there are not many to follow those. There is one like that though in “Easy A” and he is Todd (Penn Badgley) who is a gentleman passionately dressing up as ridiculous school mascots and has nothing but non-judgmental crush on Olive. Even beyond my cynical brain he comes out well.

Emma Stone is now consecutively proving that she can take sensible scripts where she is not alone used for a stereotype but a brain and humour that comes along with it. She can be cute, attractively obnoxious, silly, sexy and a dork with no trouble. That is saying something for someone portraying teenage beauties in several films. Will Gluck provides a better film in romantic comedies with a cautionary tale as Tina Fey did in “Mean Girls” of course with a kick and fun to it.