Fucking A right, Balaji!

Hell yes! The emotional impact of that scene, along with the brilliant final scene are what made the film great for me. The movie is all about how these grown ups are concerned with what exactly happened and who's at fault that they don't even realize the effect their antics are having on their children. It mirrors how caught up the audience gets in the mystery portion of the film. It makes the look between the two children (a shot held just long enough to tell us there's something to this other than the kids just meeting eyes for a moment, but not long enough to feel forced or heavy-handed) hold a great amount of heft.

Just a brilliant film in every regard. 2011's best.

Ugetsu: It’s sixteenth century Japan, the time of the civil wars. A poor potter sees a chance to profit from the wars by selling his pots in the city, and when his first effort is successful, the vision of riches goes to his head. His neighbor accompanies him with visions of becoming a samurai, which is sort of difficult when you can’t afford armor or a sword. However, times are dangerous, armies are impressing peasants into service and raiding the towns for supplies, there are pirates on the lakes, and going into town means leaving their women and children unguarded, which is really not a good idea in times like these.

The story takes them to the height of fortune and disastrous depths, both from the chances offered by war. There are even touches of the supernatural.

This is my first Mizoguchi film, and it’s excellent in its storytelling, pace and direction. Mizoguchi was famous for his long takes, which work spectacularly. I was especially impressed by the black and white cinematography. This is one of the best-looking films I’ve ever seen. I was surprised by some comments that this is hard to get into, because I was absorbed from beginning to end.***** of *****; the best film experience I've had in quite a while.

Sansho the Bailiff: When I was watching Ugetsu, I thought of Shakespeare. When I was watching Sansho, I thought of Dickens, although there are Shakespearean aspects as well. It's twelfth century Japan, a time, we are informed, that mankind is not yet human beings, but some are headed that way. A lord is exiled because he is too humane. His wife and children are later traveling to join him to a new post, but a local lord has decreed that due to criminal activities by wanderers, there shall be no room at the ends. The lord's family are forced to camp out until they are given shelter by a Shinto priestess who also offers them advice to travel by boat because the roads are so dangerous. It's all a ruse to sell the mother into prostitution and the children into slavery. The titular Sansho is the brutal slavemaster; he would not be out of place in a World War II Nazi or Japanese slave labor camp. (The film was made in the early fifties and clearly is intended to make the Japanese think of their recent past.) For a while our hero, the son of the family, is willing to collaborate, but his sister, who has retained her father's ideal, eventually shames him to escape.

This is the one I found harder to get into, perhaps because it's more melodramatic, but still, it's often brilliant, and may fare better on reviewing. Unfortunately, it's also one of those films that has scenes that are almost unbearable to watch the first time. ***1/2 of *****, but subject to revision. More Mizoguchi to come. These were an experience like discovering Kobayashi a few years ago.

Another catch-up round-up. Sorry for falling behind again, fellas. Been a tough week to get through.

The Viking Queen - 5/10
A Safe Place - 3/10
The Bodyguard (1992) - 5/10
Fireball - 5/10
The Big Year - 5/10
Saint Nick - 7/10
Underworld: Awakening - 5/10
Haywire - 7/10
Much Ado About Nothing - 7/10
Afterglow - 5/10
Cruising - 5/10
Man, Woman and the Wall - 4/10
Man on a Ledge - 6/10

Interesting, I thought Sansho was the better film. It has such a great story, like Les Miserables almost

I don't mean unbearable in the sense of bad. I mean unbearable in the sense that some scenes in Sansho are so intense they're difficult to watch.

Chronicle - *** out of *****

See my longer post in the Chronicle review thread. This movie could have done a lot more with its premise.

Saw a very good movie about relationships and the language of human chemistry and it was called... Chronicle?! *checks ticket stub* Right. Chronicle.

***1/2 for the whole thing, just fair opening 20 minutes the weakest link.

Broadcast News

It's a love story, it's a character study, and it's a biting critique of the news media. I recognized the characters so well, from the guy who is confused about what his role in the profession is, to the person who is just ready to crack up despite their tough-as-nails exterior, to the person who is questioning whether they made the most of their opportunities.

Broadcast News is a story with no heroes, no villains, just people. I like these kind of movies. And as a former journalist, I saw a lot of myself in it. This one hits home.

Actually forgot to submit this before -

Girl with the Dragon Tattoo 2011

A technical improvement on the original, which I did like, but which also looked like the TV Movie I later found out it actually was.

There's not too much to fault here. But not too much praise I can sing about it either. One fault is the mystery itself which I felt was portrayed in a more involving fashion in the original Swedish version. Fincher has basically sexed it up putting James Bond as the lead, a more do-able Lisbeth, and an added a layer of atmospherics. It is a very well done film in some respects, but nowhere near great.

7.5/8 out of 10

Did the first person, documentary footage tactic bother you at all? I usually either think it fits the film or doesn't, but I was torn on this one. I worked well initially as a device used to develop the characters, but it kind of turned into a gimmick towards the end (even if it was kind of neat seeing how many different ways they could use it during the climactic battle).

That said, a very enjoyable movie. It's nice to see a smart superhero film that's more about the characters than it is about super powers and special effects. The concept of regular kids with regular (or at least fairly common) problems suddenly getting super powers is very well done. The characters here are much more interesting than that kid who got bit by a spider.

It always does and this movie was no exception. I wonder if my first impression was a bit too generous.

I don't know that I'd call this film a "superhero" film. It's more of a coming-of-age film if you look at Matt's character arc. However, that brings up another criticism of the film, which is that not enough time was spent with Matt, given that he turned out to be the hero at the end.

Saw Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (2011) and am very pleased to report that the film very much deserves both its nomination for Best Picture and for Best Director. It's sure to give something like Drive a good fight in both categories. What? Sorry, would you repeat that? *Not* nominated for Best Picture or Director? But...it's so well-crafted. Random CGI-animal-attacks aside I'm thinking that Tomas Alfredson is a major name to watch. Tinker Tailor is magnificently composed and the kind of film where you'll miss a fantastic shot (or transition!) if you blink. Oh, and the acting is pretty awesome too, but given the cast I almost feel as if that goes without saying. 8/10.

Reel Steal (2011) is supposedly not as bad as the trailer makes it seem. That is true, but the movie is still not very good. The father/son stuff is fairly charming but the end is some truly cringe-worthy stuff. 5/10.



I will assume (thus making an ass out of u and me) that your rating scale is of ******. Most logical thing I could come up with.

A theater close to here's been running a grindhouse program each month, and February's pick was The Brood, one of those movies David Cronenberg made before he got all famous and stuff. It's a good film, but also kind of an awkward one, stuck in that weird limbo between being a good-good movie and a good-bad one. On the whole, Cronenberg's clinical command of atmosphere is as steady as it ever was, but the acting and first couple of deaths are frequently silly and for a film that relies so heavily on emotional logic it spends an awful lot of time spinning its wheels on character relationships which are almost without a doubt the least of the things the film has going for it. The ending is something else, though, and the film is worth seeing for the "reveal," as obvious as it may be, alone. A 7/10 for me.

I actually rather hated The Brood. So much so that I wrote an Amazon review of it (this was before I could vent to you fine people). Here it is:

I liked Shivers well enough, I thought the Fly was pretty creepy, and I paid 7$ to see Eastern Promises. Ergo I am by no means anti-Cronenberg. However, the Brood is an utterly and unequivacably poor film. If anyone could please answer the following questions plausibly, be my guest--the comment link is at the bottom for a reason. Of course,if you like the film you'll probably just give me a negative feedback vote, but whatever.
Here are my questions (many spoilers) :
-How do the police not notice the obvious bloody handprints on the bannister that one of brood leaves? If they had, they might actually have thought to look for someone small.
-Because the brood are basically 2nd graders and not terribly intimidating, isn't it convenient that all their victims aside from Raglan (who is surrounded) are caught unawares so as to be plausibly dispatched?
-Nola is Raglan's prize pupil and he's dedicated to studying her, to the point of dismissing all other patients. So why does he help Frank in the end?
-If the brood attack who Nola is angry at, why do they attack Raglan in the end?
-If the brood act off Nola's rage, why send Frank in to calm her (which could easily backfire)? Why not just run up, get his daughter, and run away? Or drug Nola?

It's a flawed film and not even a terribly interesting one. What can happen when an inventive yet odd filmmaker is going through a tough divorce.

Crazy Love 2007

An extraordinary story told through the medium of neighbourhood gossip.

7/10

The Fountainhead

Okay... I have finally taken the time to watch this and wow. Just wow. Ayn Rand's philosophy is so bizarely irrational and self contradictory that I can only stare in awe at it's sheer anti-illectualism.

There are two fundamental claims being made here.

1) People should hold rational self interest above all else. No one in the film actually bothers with this so let's look at claim number 2.

2) A person's work is his own, and the only way society has advanced is thanks to the innovations to a small number individuals who were smarter and brighter than the unwashed masses telling everyone else to go fuck themselves and their conservative designs. Furthermore a man who refuses to compromise and lives only according to his own vision without *any* assistance or aid from anyone else is the ideal man. Also, you can blow shit up whenever things don't go your way and you can get away with this precisely because you are principled and uncompromising.

I will assert that this two concepts are in direct conflict with each other and the only reason they never come into direct conflict with each other is because of the complete fantasy land Ayn Rand created for her characters to play in.

The first instance where they almost come into conflict is when Roark almost manages to sell his first architectural design but refuses to compromise in any way because he's the poster boy for anti-capitalism and ant-rationale self interest. I mean in a capitalist society, where one should act only according to one's rationale self interest, compromising on the design would be the most rational choice, would it not? This is the first time Rationale Self Interest loses out to Adhering to Principled and Uncompromising Vision of the Artistic Genius. It happens later as well when Roark blows up the apartment complex that he designed but for which the design had been altered by others. Again, there is no reason the rationale self interested man should do this, only the visionary, uncomprimising artist would have any reason to blow it up.

In any case, I can't really see how this is a pro-capitalist/anti-communist screed, primarily because Ayn Rand keeps advocating for acting according to principle and vision, neither of which can survive in a capitalist society, which demands conformity and comprise. Furthermore, if one really wants to be principled, uncomprising, and completely self sufficient, then go be a hermit as that is the only way you can do all of that. It does not matter whether one lives in a capitalist or marxist society, if you buy stuff or have that stuff rationed by the government, you are still dependent in some way on others for said stuff.

Lastly, I just want to say this but Ayn Rand is clearly the anti-Christ. Not in a harbinger of the apocalypse kind of way, I just mean that her views are completely antithetical to the message of Jesus. This isn't a problem so much for Ayn Rand herself as she was an athiest, but I find it disturbing that so many who proclaim this to be a Christian nation and that they are fiercely Christian (or whatever), also practically proclaim Rand to be the second coming. Just saying.
-Jeremy

I suppose you're right. It's mostly a coming-of-age story with a good amount of origin story mixed in. The two concepts go well together, actually. A sequel would likely be a more straightforward superhero film.

The book is more rabidly anti-Communist, but I take your point.