Cinetim

A epic so powerful it may be easy to dismiss, **** Punch is nonetheless a masterpiece for those who observe it closely. In the 1950s, a young lady nicknamed "Baby Doll" (Emily Browning) is sent to an abusive psychiatric institution after the violent death of her child sister in a fight with her rapist step-father (Gerard Plunkett). Befriending four other patients (Abbie Cornish, Jena Malone, Vanessa Hudgens, and Jamie Chung) and a music therapist (Carla Gugino), Baby Doll embarks on a dangerous quest to escape the hospital before her lobotomy, which is scheduled five days from her admission. In an attempt to cope with her terrifying situation, Baby Doll views her surroundings in two surreal landscapes in addition to the existing one: The first being a brothel she is being forced to "dance" in; the second being a fantasy war zone complete with fire-breathing dragons, cyborg zombies, and demon samurai. I find it odd that even though i rejected critic hits such as Black Swan and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo I am the one defending a film that has been widely criticized for being far too sexual. Zack Snyder (300, Watchmen, Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga'Hoole, Dawn of the Dead), who produces, directs, and is one of two writers (the other being Steve Shiyuba) for the film, states he is attempting to create create a feminist feature. Of course, it is a fine line between viewers gasping in horror at the clothing and actions the villains subject the young girls to and staring in delight. The difficulty of making the "bad parts" entertaining has been a problem throughout cinematic history (how many anti-war movies count as action flicks?), and there are a few elements (such as the provocative costumes) that go too far. Snyder stated in an interview that he felt some of the sacrifices he was forced to make for the studio undermined his messages by making the girl's life in the brothel sometimes appear "great," and I do believe his vision for the movie would have been much more respectful. Even so, there is very little parts in this picture that are actually sensual--we never see any nudity, there are no shots that ogle the girl's bodies, and there are no sex scenes. Sure, there is a tone that might be a bit suggestive, but really people are going to be far more titillated by images than mostly-accidental implications. No one cared at the graphic sex scenes in Snyder's 300, and really the costumes are far less suggestive and revealing than anything you will see in Step Up. Anyway, most people astute enough to find a sexual tone are going to be paying close enough attention to realize that the story is stating that such ideas are misogynistic (or are stimulated by most PG-13s). Though the film's critics might not know it, the biggest problem is the unconventional ending and atmosphere of the picture (don't worry there are no spoilers). Not everything is solved by Baby Doll killing her abusers. It is not sexist to make show Baby Doll as physically powerless to her oppressors: The film has a far more realistic defense mechanism. This is a story about women (and guys too, for that matter) dealing with an atmosphere of despair. One part of the message is dealing with sexism, but Synder is obviously talking about broader issues as well. Baby Doll's fantasy worlds are not a weapon, they are a literal escape. She can imagine something so great the world around her doesn't matter. In order to accept the film, you have to believe that is possible. I think the picture that best compares to **** Punch is Precious. They both feature female characters in abusive and powerless situations, who's imaginations is what helps them survive. The difference here is that Precious imagines dancing in a big ballroom and Baby Doll imagines killing orcs. Understandably, while Precious is the more realistic and down-to-earth of the two, **** Punch is vastly more entertaining. Snyder has always been a stylistic director, and in the surreal landscape of **** Punch he is unencumbered by continuity points such as why '50s asylum patients have unlimited access to mascara. Sure, easily 90% of the movie is in slow-mo, but along with the visual effects team and Cinematographer Larry Fong (300, Watchmen) this is an entrancing picture with visuals that add too the power of the scenes. An additional plus is Oscar Isaac (The Nativity Story) as the villainous orderly in the hospital. Isaac manages to come up with a unique brand of evil as a mild-mannered yet talkative pervert. The character is creepy, but the performance greatly adds to the role and actually enhances the meaning of the story. **** Punch is a masterpiece. It might be hard to tell, but it is.

A+ With morals and plot devices that have been sadly lacking in cinema for the past ten years, The Eagle is a true epic. The movie takes place about ten years after the (real) event titled the "Lost Legion," where an entire legion of Roman troops in the post-Christianity era (117 AD) "vanished" after marching into unfriendly terrain in Northern England. Marcus Alquilas (now we are talking fiction) is the son of the Roman general who commanded the legion at the time of their demise(?); and he is distraught over the loss of his father, respect for his family, and the honor of Rome. Brave and intelligent (if nearly-mad with his obsession), Alquilas rises through the military ranks and is offered a variety of posts throughout the empire--not surprisingly, he chooses the northernmost fort to Hadrian's Wall, a barrier built to block off the upper half of England after the events of his father's command. After an injury, Alquilas needs an aid for recovering. His kindly uncle then gives him Esca, a slave Alquilas rescued from a lopsided gladiatorial combat. Recovering, Alquilas decides he will depart to the uncharted area on the other side of the wall. With Esca as his guide, Alquilas steadfastly pursues his goal of finding the Eagle of the Ninth, a treasured golden standard of the Lost Legion shaped like a chicken. No, actually it looks like an eagle. While I understand Focus Features' reasoning, it is sad that a movie with this merit and talent behind it got released with little fanfare in a time of year not associated with great films. No one who watched the trailer would know this is from Jeremy Brock and Kevin Macdonald, the writer-director team behind Oscar-nominee The Last King of Scotland. The book it is based on (Rosemary Suttcliff's The Eagle of the Ninth) is considered critically acclaimed classic. Channing Tatum (G.I. Joe, Dear John), a very underrated actor, plays Marcus, while BAFTA nominee Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot, Hallam Foe) plays Esca. Also worth noting is that The Eagle''s cinematographer is Anthony Dod Mantle, who did the Oscar-winning work on Slumdog Millionaire. All the talent comes to good use. The movie is surprisingly old-fashioned--promoting honor and nationalism over liberty and personal-gain. It also deals with many dark issues without becoming unnecessarily grim. This is probably much due to the fact that the book is from the 50s; it is still impressive, though, that a 2011 film about ancient Rome managed not to be anarchistic. Even better, the movie has powerful morals which (while probably not discussable in a spoiler-free review) definitely make this better than most Academy Award-nominees. The movie's action scenes are slightly disjointed, probably due to the fact that the movie seems to really not want its PG-13 rating. Still, there are so many fight sequences (the movie keeps away from any tacked-on romantic subplots) I am sure that the action crowd will be pleased if they attend. Best of all, though, is the fact that this is not mere popcorn-fare: The Eagle is a moving epic in the vein of Ben Hur. Powerful morals, an exciting plot, and a well-crafted story make this cinematic experience exceptional.