Intentionally or no, this film is an entertaining and farcical trip. Synecdoche is mainly about finding out the truth about oneself by looking at one's relationships to other human beings. It is a romantic film, but in an amazingly absurd one at that. To enjoy this film, one has to be able to just go with everything that happens (all manner of weird and crazy things) and maybe make some sense out of it or not. (And for those that do like a challenge, there is plenty of brain candy strewn throughout the background of the film.) Synecdoche is reminiscent of Woody Allen films (as well as 8 1/2 and Barton Fink), though the energy level is higher: more manic and more depressive. Phillip Seymour Hoffman is a great fit for the lead role with a performance that highly projective, the world is his shadow. The main character is honestly and apologetically imperfect (again, reminiscent of the Woody Allen characters, but also very different) and striving. It is hard to know who to recommend the film to since it is just a bit on the dark side. Those who love arthouse films will probably pick up on a lot that is in it, and enjoy it. But there is also plenty in there, plenty of drama and humor, for the casual viewer. Whether or not you enjoy it, may be highly dependent on whether or not you are in the mood for the experience.
Performance is a great film for those that want to feel verve and are willing to pay the cost of nonconformity. The dialogue has got liveness and the music has soul; the attitude is rock-and-roll ("I am alive and well. You push the buttons.") The pacing is good, and goes back-and-forth with tension and play throughout, right up to a memorable climax. This is an arty kind of film, but is also challenging and edgy, with a fair amount of violence, sex, and drugs (mostly violence) in its look at what man is spiritually. The performances of Mick Jagger and Jamie Fox are very complementary, it has a naturally artificial feeling as they give each other a hard time and secretly love it (the bit where they are in bed together is pretty damn funny). This is the interesting 60s, where the setting is old but the vibe is fresh and unrestrained and un-50s.
The Perfect Sense feels like it should have been a good movie but winds up not more than mediocre. The lead actress is a terrible fit for the role, her acting felt fake in a few key scenes and in others she seemed more a spoiled princess than an epidemiologist working hard on a cure to save the world. Besides that, the film was alright. The premise was interesting, the shooting was fine, and Ewan MacGregor's performance was believable. I must say, though, if you are going to make a movie about the end of the world and you want it to work, the audience has to have a good amount of sympathy for the characters.
Watching Paradise Now, one definitely gets a sense of stuckness and frustration the Palestinians feel without condoning violence; the film engenders compassion but not sympathy. Note that this balance is achieved without portrayal of the Israeli side. While not a great film, Paradise Now is performed well and helps the average viewer understand a bit better why that area of the world wrestles with such difficult problems.
Paprika is a kaleidoscopic and phantasmagoric animated thriller, a bewildering ride through dreams mixed with more dreams mixed with waking life. Now for some films, if you do not get what its makers are trying to say, it is lost on you. This is not so with Paprika. This is the kind of film one can watch and find highly entertaining without having much of a clue what it is about. The "Parade of Everything" is quite a sight for lovers of whimsy and fantasy, symbols and the surreal. While there are various weak points to the film, but there is not much point to mentioning them. Why? Well, when something goes for it on a grand scale, as Paprika does, it is better to watch and appreciate what it does right. Beyond the vibrant images, the direction does something special with the choreography, the movement on-screen. You get this wonderful feeling of animation, everything brought to life by imagination and the mind. So if you enjoy crazy dreams or the carnivale, definitely give Paprika a view.
Pan's Labyrinth has all the elements of a fantasy adventure: costumes, props, effects, sounds, score, sympathetic heroines, detestable villains, mystery, and wonder. However, there is a great deal of cruelty in the film, and it is taken such a high degree that it detracts from the experience.
Oslo, 8/31 is both a character sketch and a social drama (and in that aspect it raises questions rather than delivers a message). The film begins strong and then fades, as other reviewers have noted. I put that mostly down to the script as the acting and directing are solid-to-excellent throughout. (Love how the sound mix captures the buzz of city life.) Would recommend to lovers of film, those able to have any kind of pathos for an arrogant addict, or those interested in looking at things from a psychological/social standpoint. Others are likely to find Oslo, 8/31 emotionally unsatisfying.
To enjoy Once Upon A Time In Anatolia, the viewer must enjoy policework, in a sense: reading people, making observations, drawing inferences. It is not a film for the passive viewer that wants to be stimulated, entertained. The work is masterful and deserves the acclaim.
Once is a film I do not have the heart to downrate because at least the male lead is making an effort. But overall, it comes off as amateur and I am not feeling the vibe of the film. The scenario is like Lost in Translation but there is no chemistry and if there is no chemistry, what does it matter what happens? Still, it is an OK film, short, and not difficult to get through.
It was difficult to tell if the Number 23 was an intentional joke or no. After the first hour I thought it was intentional spoof of the genre and came off as odd, but mildly interesting on account of the oddness. Then the film appears to become more serious as a mystery / thriller before making a strange turn at the end. If it was some intended cleverness, it was too clever for me, and if not then it was not clever enough.
New Rose Hotel, I admit, is not actually a good movie (though it is). It lacks in dramatic tension and in substance, material. Why do some rate it up then? I do so for the style and the acting. I think you have to be a fan of Walken, Defoe, literature, noir, and enjoy looking at Argento red lit to be able to rate this one up.
Never Let Me Go is a surprising film, with a strange blend of sci-fi, mystery, romance, and atrocity that I've never seen before. The film's style, especially in the first act, is quite good and gives the sense it takes place in an alternate, but very real world. The lead actresses play their parts well, as one would expect. The main strike against the film is the lead actor, who is fine, but not on par with his co-stars and it detracts from the tragic strain the film is going for. But overall, Never Let Me Go is a memorable film and is quite good.
My Own Private Idaho is an interesting mix of acting, directing, setting, and subject matter. It is an interesting watch but the elements don't cohere very well or make for a solid movie. The main problem is that little is done to first establish an emotional connection to the main character. Because of that, the rest of the film lacks in dramatic impact. Things happen, the film ends, and the impression is that while the film was decent enough, it could have been better.
Mulholland Dr. does not have to be understood to be an interesting experience. I still do not completely understand it, but get something more out of it each time I watch it, and always enjoy the distinctive style and vibe (reminiscent of 80s music videos, but with a 90s mood). One gets the impression that it is not a cheap, gimmicky mystery but rather it is somehow coherent and that makes it open to rewatchings and discussion. It is like a jigsaw puzzle you cannot finish, because it seems like pieces are missing from it, but you later come back and find there are few more and fit them in. The performance by Naomi Watts contributes to the rewatchability of the film. A film about illusions needs a convincing character to be believed.
Mr. Nobody is a film I want to uprate since the visuals are lush and wonderful and I tend to enjoy cerebral / trippy movies. But I never got into the story. It felt wandering / meandering and did not feel like it was going anyplace. There is an excellent film in there that is waiting for an editor to bring it into existence.
Amusing and charming, Modern Times still entertains decades later. The set and prop design for the first act (the factory) are very good. The plot takes us through the many ups and downs (mostly downs) of the hero and heroine, and the way they handle it all is very endearing. The lead actress has great spirit and natural beauty. Modern Times isn't a must-see, but I would definitely recommend it.
Metropia is a film where the sum of the parts is greater than the whole. The film's animation is fascinating and the voice acting is engaging. The setting and premise should please fans **** dystopian or conspiracy film. The plot does not pan out in a satisfying way, unfortunately. But still, there are enough upsides to Metropia to make it an easy uprate.
Medea is a very sullen, brooding production. While the film is put together well (with excellent use of sound), it is lacking in pathos; Medea and Jason show little emotion and come off more as pathetic rather than tragic characters. What's more, in the finale the film trails off and then ends, unlike the play, followed by end notes read as if from a Bergman film. But overall, I would recommend Medea for lovers of film, late mid-20th century dramas -- a high three.
Martha Marcy May Marlene starts better than it ends. Elizabeth Olson plays a sympathetic lead in an intense role. One expects there to be some kind of character development, some payoff for the emotional investment in the main character that the film builds up. Unfortunately, plotwise, the film devolves into a vehicle for cheap thrills and goes nowhere. One wishes it would have been more, but for what it is, it is still worth a view. Recommended to those interested in social dynamics and what life is like for people caught up in cults.
I rate Margin Call up on account of the acting overall and as a Kevin Spacey fan (otherwise it would be a three). The shooting is fine, with some nicely framed shots. The story is OK but was a bit disappointing in terms of tension. Some scenes could have been left out in favor of flashbacks which reveal what the characters were doing in the weeks and months prior to the meltdown: who knew, what they knew, how they contributed, etc. But despite the story not being what it could have been, Margin Call is still an enjoyable film.
Malice in Wonderland is a stupid but fun B-movie. The film is a more quirky than trippy take on the Alice story. Alice herself is easy on the eyes and Whitey is likable enough. But overall, nothing about the movie is particularly good or unbearably bad. It is fine for what it is.
Ironically, Lost Highway is not as good as I remember it. It has a great opening for a noir/horror thriller. It may have made a good 90 minute or 105 minute film but over two hours is far too long and the 90s soundtrack feels dated. Lost Highway is not a bad film but is definitely a notch below the other Lynch films I have viewed recently (Mulholland Drive, Wild at Heart).
Lincoln is best viewed with modest expectations. The performance of Daniel Day Lewis lives up to the hype. It is a great performance in a great career. Unfortunately, the other elements of the film do not rise to that standard and it shows. I'd compare Lincoln to Raging Bull. In that film we have also have a great performance by the lead but also great supporting cast, script, directing and it makes for great film. If DDL had those elements around him I could see a classic film being made, but instead it is a good movie, a high three.
John Dies at the End is one of those delightfully weird movies. Yes, it lacks here and there in various aspects (e.g. plot) but none of that detracts from the fun. While I found it to be a notch below classics such as Repo Man, still it is undeniably a good time.
Jiro Dreams of Sushi is, of course, about more than Jiro and sushi. It is about work, dedication, mastery, family, and (changing) Japan. There is much one can get out of this simple little film. However, as others have stated, the material feels stretched out (more appropriate for a one-hour special). Jiro tells of many things but does not really tell a story. That said, I would recommend it to the hard workers out there that could use a bit of inspiration and a sense that dedication does pay off.
Indie Game works very well as a documentary about what it takes and costs psychologically to do your own thing and get it done. The movie has a nice, clean "professional indie" look reminiscent of Helvetica (the movie). The subjects are not easily likable but that makes them much more interesting and real than the boring bios network television typically puts out of, say, Olympic athletes. The main knock against it is the lack of time spent documenting what the creative process involves. There is a bit of that, but still the film could have used more. Overall, however, Indie Game is a good film for dreamers thinking about doing and entrepreneurs working at it.
In the Mood for Love is a very slow, moody, and stylized film. If in "Days of Being Wild" you can feel the humidity, in this one the feeling is like coming into an air conditioned room out of a hot day being in the city and the sense of quiet ease and nice refreshment. That is what the relationship between the main characters feels like in the beginning, and through much of the film. The main tension comes from the fact that things will inevitably change and the question is whether these two people, who seem to deserve more out of life, can get it without becoming undeserving themselves. (And on a side note, Tony Leung and Maggie Cheung both look quite beautiful in this film.) Recommended to art lovers and people watchers.
In Time is a substandard move in most respects (acting, plot, effects) but still worth a view for sci-fi fans. A world is built around the concept (time is money) and the film takes us on a ride through it. Most times serious, sometimes comical, In Time is an interesting watch.
The House of Sand features excellent acting and good storytelling. While there may be some problems with the plot itself, it was believable that it was happening to the characters on-screen. I rate it up mainly on account of the fact that I cared about what happened and was rooting for the character played by lead actress to make it out.
Grbavica delivers as a real-life family drama. It is refreshing to see acting more genuine than melodramatic, and yet still make for dramatic effect. The film may be a bit difficult to follow in places if you are unfamiliar with the culture (I am) but overall, the cultural aspect makes the film moreso interesting than confusing. All-in-all, Grbavica is a refreshing change from your typical studio films.
Gravity is an effects extravaganza with near miss after near miss. The action is almost continual, of the "out of the frying pan, into the fire" variety. If the trailer piques your interest, you are unlikely to be disappointed. Sandra Bullock's performance is solid. Gravity's main drawback is lack of pacing and lack of dramatic tension. There are no flashbacks and many sequences are long shot after long shot to the point where it goes from impressive to showing off. Still, I'd have to say Gravity is what it is supposed to be: action-packed and thrilling.
Glengarry Glen Ross is the type of movie where if you enjoy it once then you will enjoy watching it again. Why? It has excellent dialogue and acting, which do not get used up in one viewing (vs. special effects or plot twists). Jack Lemmon gives a stand-out performance, great characterization and reactions. This is a film you will want to view since it may become one of your all-time favorites.
Gerhard Richter Painting gets low marks due to the lazy filmmaking (with the boom coming into shots) and is overall not very good as a documentary. It gets interesting in a few spots but overall feels flat. See Jiro Dreams of Sushi as a positive example of a documentary about a man and his dedication to his work. Note that this review reflects on the film and not its subject.
The problem I had with From Hell was that it felt like I was watching a movie about Jack the Ripper, set in London. I never got that immersive cinematic experience. While the production values were fine, the way things came off reminded me too much of History Channel dramatizations. I'd put that down to overacting on the part of the supporting cast; Heather Graham and Johnny Depp were fine, as was the directing. I must admit that I ended up returning the disc early to get to the next one in my queue. I read spoilers for the rest of the film and the story sounds much more interesting than what I had seen up to that point.
Footnote is a very engaging film with strong acting, storytelling, and cinematography. The culture and setting of Israel are interesting as well and add to the film's depth. The strong negative reviews are surprising, though the film is mislabeled as a 'comedy' when it is a family/political drama. I go the other way and highly recommend it.
Far from the Madding Crowd lives up to the expectations for a period epic (a la Ben Hur, the Sound of Music, etc.) made in the 60s. The transfer is surprisingly good. The characters are enigmatic and the plot does not conclude with much catharsis (which probably figures into some of the low ratings). But all-in-all Far from the Madding Crowd is fine for what it is.
Eyes Wide Shut has a good story for a psychological thriller. Overall, it is a good film (better than most films) but a low four stars, not at the level of the Shining or 2001. The film lacked in style and vibe, especially when I am reminded of American Beauty. Eyes Wide Shut may have been great if it were shorter and had an eerie, melancholy, wandering/lost vibe and camera style to match. But, again, it is a good story for a thriller, so give it a view if you in the mood.
Eternal Sunshine is a difficult film to rate. Despite misgivings, I find myself rating it up because it has imagination both in terms of the visuals and the story. Personally, I am disappointed that it was not a great film, which in the beginning I hoped it might be. The problem, I think, is that I wanted to be wrapped up in the experience with a sense of delight. Instead, the pessimistic undercurrent brings a sense of despair. When it was over I didn't get the "feel good" feeling I wanted, but still, it was one the better films I've seen.
Enter the Void is an amazing film and a unique experience. It is refreshing to watch a film that is challenging and conveys an author's vision. Recommended to those who crave the extraordinary.
Election is the type of satire where one is more likely to wince than laugh. It is a bit dark and edgy and is reminiscent of American Beauty. The performances are good, though a bit overwrought. Election, while not thoroughly enjoyable, is a still a remarkable film.
Johnny Depp gives a great characterization of Ed Wood as this cheerful, upbeat, persevering guy that you root for more than you laugh (or cringe) at. The filmmaking and storytelling are well-done, but make no particular impression. Watch Ed Wood mainly for the acting of Johnny Depp and Martin Landau.
Dr. Strangelove has a dated yet classic 50s/60s feel to the filmmaking and acting, and it also has timeless comedic appeal. Perhaps the degree of its humor has increased, since what was absurd then seems even more so now. The action moves along and switches between the three locations, without going on (much) too long in any scene. The length of the film is just right -- perfect for a laugh on a Saturday afternoon.
Dogville is a talented work, yes, but is it a great film? No, It's not great. The ending is flat, especially for such a long buildup. It's not wholly a film either. It's not that the stage play thing is wrong, it's fine (especially since the story is reminiscent of Greek tragedy). The problem is that it is lacking in light and sound. Maybe that is a good thing since the second half is heavy and long and feels real enough as it is. Still, Dogville is definitely a film to watch for two reasons: (1) an excellent performance by Nicole Kidman and (2) food for thought, one is definitely given a few things to think about. But be warned, this is not a film one watches to be entertained.
Dogtooth is a film where the viewing experience is very much dependent on the sensibilities of the viewer. For myself, I found it quite absurd and ridiculous from the outset and was not shocked (much). I rate Dogtooth up mostly because I enjoyed the indie style of shooting, reminiscent of Submarine and Wes Andersen films, which made gave the film a more satirical than disturbing character. After reading other reactions, I wondered whether this is a film that ought to be laughed at or if it ought to induce cringing (at least one scene, in particular does). After thinking about it, I thought that yes, satire ought to be laughed at and the subject matter ought to be seen as quite stupid; horror and fear are not an appropriate response. If anything, horror and fear bolster something that should be opposed. However, having some parts, here and there, that are more serious than funny is also good, since we do not want to just totally laugh off topics that are important.
Devils on the Doorstep is a comically told tragedy. The characters and story-telling are great. It is a shame that the film was banned since it is very Chinese in spirit -- full of cynicism, vitality, and humor. Compared other war movies, DoD was not hard to take. The film prepares the viewer for its darker moments with its pacing and emphasis on absurdity. Because it winds up pretty grim, I could not recommend it to someone as a comedy but definitely recommend it as a film.
Delicatessen is a very visually stimulating film. Despite the impression that the description creates, the film is about as much a horror movie as Army of Darkness is. Rather I would say the film is a fiendish and surreal comedy. Whether you enjoy the film or not will largely come down to taste. The acting and filmmaking are good enough to at least warrant a view so you can see for yourself.
Dead Man is not as cool as it wants to be but I have to admit I liked it. At times it is cheesy but at times the laid back, surreal vibe works. Also, I am a **** for black-and-white photography. Better to not have high hopes when queueing this one, but rather sometime give it a try and perhaps be pleasantly surprised.
Days of Being Wild delivers as expected: a highly aesthetic and enjoyable film. You can feel the humidity of melancholy summer nights and sense the fatalistic but untragic vibe the characters give off. This is quintessential HK cinema and easy to recommend.
Dark City is fascinating for those who can enjoy a good nature documentary or travelogue. The sets, shooting, and effects are all well-done and it is refreshing to see something from the pre-CG era. Dark City is not particularly dark or scary but has a rather curious (a la Alice in Wonderland) and, at times, campy vibe. The style is noir, the city looks European, Jennifer Connelly is stunning, William Hurt lends a bit of gravitas -- all this makes for a very odd mix that is very interesting and dream-like. The ending is quite silly and the film does have many of the flaws other reviewers point out, but these are all outweighed by the things Dark City does right.
Croupier is an excellent British noir film. Clive Owen is great in the lead role and proves that voice over can work very well (hard to imagine the film without it). The film is somewhere between a thriller and a drama. It is very low-key and very different from British crime/gangster films. Croupier watches more like a mystery, keeping the viewer in wonder as to how it is going to turn out. Overall, the film is very well put together and a solid recommendation.
