I agree, but didn't you find the ending to be sickeningly melodramatic? It even had swelling strings on the soundtrack to jerk a tear from your eyes.

Happy-Go-Lucky (2008)
A character study of Poppy (Sally Hawkins in a fantstic performance), a relentlessly chipper, irresistibly optimistic and all-round good-humoured elementary schoolteacher in North London, who lives with her flatmate for 10 years, takes driving instructions and Flamenco classes, goes clubbing with her mates, helps pupils in need etc.
British auteur Mike Leigh is best-known for gritty and bleak dramas (check out 1993's 'Naked', if that's your kind of thing), but 'Happy-Go-Lucky' is all about the life-affirming optimism of its protagonist. In fact, although 'Happy-Go-Lucky' is a quite realistic movie stylistically, Sally Hawkin's Poppy reminded me a lot of Audrey Tatou's Amélie Poulain. That's not a good thing, because - call me a misanthrope, if you like - characters like this grate on my nerves. If the movie hadn't been as well-acted (and occasionally funny) as it is, I would have hated it. 5/10

That's your misanthrope showing.

Yes, it was melodramatic, and 100% predictable, but I felt the movie earned it through the strength of the characters' performances. And they thankfully didn't linger TOO much.

Maybe I didn't find it too melodramatic since I saw it in French with German subtitles. I don't speak French, and German naturally dampens melodrama. Much too pragmatic and emotionless a language, when reading it.

I could have done without the ending AFTER the ending, when they showed the real people. Perhaps if they hadn't changed their names for the film. Showing them with their real names struck a bit of a discordant note for me. I mean, if they were going to show the real people with their real names, why not use the actual names during the film? You could have still changed the other characters' names, if it was some legal problem.

Awww, try reading some German poetry sometimes Heine or Rilke perhaps.

I watched the dubbed German version and still thought that the film was a bit too melodramatic.

I don't think that there was a legal problem considering that the real people have done a lot of promotion for the movie. Perhaps the filmmakers couldn't find a suitable French-Algerian actor (the real "Driss" is Algerian) and had to change the story to fit Omar Sy, who is the best thing in the movie, in my opinion. I don't understand why they included shots of the real persons either, though.

The Big Lebowski

My first time viewing this Coen cult classic. I enjoyed it, but not so much for the story. The interestingly wierd characters and the quality of actors playing them, mostly against type, made for a very entertaining two hours. I'd go 7/10. Good entertainment, but as low as I've gone for the Coens.

I first watched it in 98 and at the time 7/10 would have seemed fair. But like many Coens Bros films, it grows on you and 50 watches later it is set in concrete as a 9/10.

I mostly found Poppy annoying so I didn't like the movie. I've seen Hawkins do fine work in other movies. I found Amélie coy rather than endearing.

Great points. Omar Sy was fantastic. As for the melodrama, I think it is a bit or "truth being stranger than fiction" as



In any case, with or without excessive melodrama, it was definitely a good watch.

I'll have to second this. I, too, was only moderately impressed the first time, but its qualities are subtle. It is a very well-constructed, dare I say artful movie. How many comedies can you say that about, especially nowadays?

I wouldn't call the film "artful" myself, I thought it was moderately entertaining at best, I can kind of see how it's become a cult classic, but i'm just not head-over-heels in love like most people are.

"Artful" referring to the quality of the storytelling technique, not as a value judgment for the movie itself.

This is most definitely a film that gets better with each repeat viewing. Every time I've seen it, I've found something else to love about it.

As I've just read, quite predictably, the remake rights have recently been picked up by The Weinstein Company.

Frantic (1988)
Surgeon Dr. Walker (Harrison Ford) and his wife are attending a medical conference in Paris. While the jetlagged doctor takes a shower in the hotel, his wife receives a telephone call, says something inaudible, leaves the room and mysteriously disappears. Dr. Walker searches for her and soon suspects that she has been kidnapped. The hotel staff, French police and the U.S. embassy react bureaucratically indifferent to his claim of a kidnapping, so Dr. Walker must work out what happened on his own (with the help of Emmanuelle Seigner), thereby entering a world of drugs, smuggling and espionage.
If the imdb trivia section is to be believed, Harrison Ford - to the displeasure of director Roman Polanski - suggested that “moderately disturbed” would be a more appropriate title for this suspense thriller, which is indeed neither very thrilling nor suspenseful. The premise is promising, albeit not very original, and the plot vaguely Hitchcockian - with McGuffins and all - but the execution is surprisingly poor in the light of Roman Polanski being usually quite adept at making thrillers (cf. the recent “The Ghost Writer”). The first part works reasonably well with a jetlagged Harrison Ford trying to figure out what’s going on, but once Emmanuelle Seigner enters the picture, the movie slowly unravels, the “highlight” being a mystifyingly long dancing sequence, which can only be explained by Polanski enjoying the sight of his wife Seigner writhing to the 80ies pop of Grace Jones. Not exactly a bad movie, but below average - 4/10

Thanks to Munich's pimping of this one, I rented it OnDemand a few months back and loved it. I've since bought the Blu-Ray and have been shown it to most of the folks I know. Everyone I've shown it to has thoroughly enjoyed it. It needs a bigger audience.

As for The Big Lebowski, I part of me wishes it didn't have the cult status it currently enjoys, because it's easy to write the film off an either-you-get-it-or-you-don't type of comedy. That ignores how smart it actually is, and the countless observations it makes on our culture, and that's just a shame. It may be appreciated, but I think it's mostly for the wrong reasons. That probably sounds pretentious, and for that I apologize.

I've seen a good deal of movies over the last few days, but the only one I feel any obligation to write about is The Grey. It's just wonderful. I haven't seen something this hopeful and life-affirming since 127 Hours. The film is essentially an parable about life, death, and existence. I can always get behind films that put forth a definitive worldview to the audience, and it's even easier to get behind a film you agree with. I had heard the movie was better than expected, but even with sky high expectations, it managed to blow me away. It's just a great story and the perfect canvas to explore the issues it raises.

The Descendents - Good with and because of Alexander Payne's usual bag of tricks. I always like his narrators. Payne always gets the beat of 'regular people' down. Moving on. ***

Bunraku (2010)

An incredibly stylized movie where Josh Hartnett and Gackt play a cowboy with no guns and a samurai with no swords fighting gangsters in a post apocalyptic city. A lot of CG was used around them, deliberately creating a sense that the viewer is watching a comic book unfold at times.

Unfortunately, some very annoying elements kept me from enjoying it as the pure martial arts/samurai/noir hybrid. Namely, the almost constant narration and lampshading by Mike Patton, who often spouts pithy phrases which work for maybe the first couple of minutes but quickly become tired. Also, the eye-rolling dialogue and the under-developed villains were also a downer. The movie also goes on 30 minutes longer than necessary and wears out its conceit midway through.

Still, it's decently fun. 6/10.

The Secret World Of Arrietty

The earliest theater experience I can remember was seeing the Studio Ghibli film My Neighbor Totoro back in 1993. I was around five years old, and I remember being completely enraptured by what was happening on the screen. There was a simple moment very early in the film that captured my attention, of the two little girls riding in the back of a moving truck, having discovered a small makeshift fort in which to hide. It was such a simple moment, a pure moment of childhood and imagination, and yet it was something you rarely ever see in children’s films from America. Looking back on the film years later, it’s amazing how well it has held up, and how it stands completely apart from today’s popular animated films; there are no pop culture references, no artificial plot developments, no wise-cracking animals voiced by celebrities picking up a paycheck. My Neighbor Totoro stands above all that, and remains an absolute classic in film animation and a personal favorite to this day.

And yet, for a number of years I never really felt the need to delve into Studio Ghibli’s catalogue any further, and I’m still struggling to figure out why that was. The closest explanation I have is that I developed a grudge towards Japanese animation due to the popularity of television programs like Pokémon and Dragonball Z, the appeal of both I never understood. Anyway, it wasn’t until the later half of the last decade when I finally got around to Spirited Away, and it was as if a floodgate had been opened. In the years since, I’ve seen most of the Studio Ghibli films, with particular focus paid to the masterworks of Hayao Miyazaki. Not every film has the charming minimalism of My Neighbor Totoro, but every film has something unique and wonderful to offer.

All this is my long-winded way of getting around to saying that there is a new Studio Ghibli film out in theaters, called The Secret World of Arrietty, and it’s the first Ghibli film I’ve seen on the big screen since way back in 1993. This newest release is based on Mary Norton’s classic children’s series The Borrowers, about a family of tiny people who live under the floorboards of a large house, “borrowing” food and other small items from the humans in order to survive. Throughout the course of the film, a friendship is established between the 14-year-old borrower Arrietty Clock (Bridgit Mendler) and the sick human boy Shawn (David Henrie). This sets off a chain of events that threaten the lives of Arrietty and her parents (Amy Poehler and Will Arnett, remarkably restrained and almost unrecognizable).

I don’t want to spoil anything by revealing too much; suffice to say, the film is absolutely wonderful. Hayao Miyazaki takes a supporting role for this film, serving as both producer and writer, while leaving the directing duties to first-timer Hiromasa Yonebayaski, who is more than up to the task of following in the famous director’s footsteps. The Borrowers story has been told on the screen before, most notably in a 1997 film starring John Goodman. My memory of that film is hazy, although I seem to remember Goodman getting tied up and falling down a lot. Arrietty takes a calmer approach. In a way, it has a tone that closely mirrors Totoro: both films take place predominantly in a limited location, both films feature magical beings interacting with the ordinary, both films feature characters with illnesses, and both films emphasize the importance of family and facing difficult situations with courage. Arrietty is more plot-driven than Totoro, but both films have a general calmness that stands in stark contrast to the loud and overstuffed style that we usually see in animated films nowadays.

Also in stark contrast to modern spectacle is the look of the film. Like the classic Ghibli films before it, Arrietty is hand-drawn, a technique that has become so rare but still has its own overwhelming power. The film alternates between different styles: there can be tremendous detail, as when Arrietty and her father are moving around behind the walls, or there can be moments that have an almost painterly quality, as when Shawn lies in an open field under the sunlight. Any way you look at it, the film is beautiful to look at, and it should be seen on as big a screen as possible.

If I were to single out one thing that could have been executed better, it’s the actions of the film’s villain character. While not in any way evil, her motivations feel slightly artificial, there only for the purpose of providing some action in the film’s final act. But honestly, attempting to find significant flaws in a film like this is ridiculous and just ends up looking like nitpicking. This is a better animated offering than anything we got in 2011, and it’s currently the best film I’ve seen so far this year. While it may not reach the unbelievable heights of the best Studio Ghibli works, it’s another quality film to add to their nearly spotless record. 9/10.

Glad I could be of service. The more people who see it, the better. Why is it that smart, well-made, funny, quality films like T&Dvs.E struggle to even get a distributor when so much dreck has money and marketing budget thrown at it?

I mean, nearly two years to get a very limited distribution in the US despite being a huge hit and audience favorite at every festival where it was shown.

I saw Star Trek: the Wrath of Khan theatrically last night. Some friends and I got together to make an evening of it: first, beers and "The Space Seed", then the movie.

One thing that surprised me was how well the movie holds up in all its big screen glory. Wrath of Khan was made relatively cheaply after the unpopularity of the much more lavish first film, but they certainly made every dollar count. I also appreciated the clarity and detail of the visual technique. Next to the suffocating style of the Abrams reboot, Khan is a breath of fresh air.

I'm not sure what new insight I can bring to a movie that everyone already knows about. Of course it's the best of the original series movies, of course it's a rousing old-school adventure story, and of course it features the best performances that the three principle actors have ever given in their long-running tenures in these roles. And, of course, Ricardo Montalban is awesome, playing Khan as a dastardly villain of the mustache-twirling variety.

Saw Thin Ice today. Not bad for what is more or less a Fargo rip. It's not great at all. But it didn't deserve to get fumped into teh February doldrums and it's most likely going ot have a short run at teh box office before a Netflix/Cable fate.

The Secret World of Arrietty, if not too exciting Studio Ghibli adaptation of a Borrowers novel, and is really striking when you see things from Arrietty's point of view. There is a dollhouse built by suspecting humans that is really beautiful. There's a theme running through it about the dangerous, often fatal world the Borrowers live in. It's not too intense for small children, but it may leave them thoughtful.

Miyazaki adapted it into Japanese, but for American audiences it's been flawlessly dubbed into English, and the voiceovers are impeccable.

14 year old Arietty lives with her mother and father beneath the floorboards of a house occupied by a caretaker when a human boy about her own age sees her but is quiet about it. That night he sees her during her "borrowing" and talks quietly to her, but she is too scared to talk back. Borrowers have an unpleasant history of what can happen to them when humans find out about them; indeed, this family worries they may be the last three Borrowers left.

The boy has a dangerous heart condition and is resting in preparation for a operation which he half-expects may kill him. He's come to terms with this, which makes him more sympathetic to the dangers faced by a four-inch tall girl.

This would probably have been an Oscar nominee in 2010 or 2011, but it seems to have fallen through the eligibility cracks. Either that, or it's eligible for the next Oscars.

It looks like we're going to have some excellent animated films this year after a lackluster 2011.