skip to main |
skip to sidebar
French new wave cinema at its best. This is a musical opera (all the lines are sung, but in a more musical songy way then opera-esque). The plot is nothing complex, man meets girl, man gets girl pregnant, man leaves for war, man returns and girl has moved on. What the narrative does with this simple story is exquisite though. It really is saying a lot when I say this film doesn't play to cliches. Ok so the basic storyline I have written may sound cliche, but the film doesn't fall into those cliche ditches that narratives have become oh so comfortable with. Also the films novel use of color, music and singing keep this film interesting, entertaining, heartfelt and beautiful to the last drop. I give Umbrellas of Cherbourg a 8/10, because I think the ending a lone will be something I never forget.
8/10
A simple film that consists of a director, writer and team of actors who I don't know at all. Simple shouldn't be thought of a negative though and in fact is what really won me over. All the film does is tell the story of two friends who haven't seen each other in many years, perhaps almost a decade, who reconnect for a short camping journey. There really is no more plot then that. They don't get into the woods and have a homosexual romance or even get attacked by some weird forest monster. The story is so simple that it is something that one day down the line all of us will run into if we haven't yet, which is why the film is so perfect. Everyone knows they have friends who they have fallen out of contact with and this film documents what happens when people reconnect with those individuals. Perhaps one of you has succeeded and one has failed, one has followed their dreams and one has sold out to the man. Whatever the case is it is an experience each one of us will likely face one day and while nothing dramatic is happening on the exterior, most of the time the interior drama is endless. What to say? What you remember? I give Old Joy a 9/10, for documenting life and nothing else, but coming a little short in some departments. At only 90 minutes the film leaves too many areas unexplored.
9/10
If you run into anyone who says the movie was too slow, there wasn't enough action or there wasn't enough of a story, then I think they have missed the point. This isn't like any Vietnam movie I have seen before. All this movie is about is people getting captured and trying to escape, yet somehow it leaves out one of the most common things depicted in Vietnam War movies which is the physical torture scenes. Honestly the film doesn't need them and benefits greatly from their omission. Instead Herzog makes you watch something even more painful. We are subjected to watching the main character, played by Christian Bale, disintegrate in front of your eyes. The amount of weight he lost for the Machinist, added for Batman, lost for this and then added again for Batman must be ridiculous. No one should ever have the right to say Bale isn't dedicated to his profession. I give this movie an 7/10, since it certainly won't be everyones cup of tea, though those that can bare it should got lost in the jungle with Herzog and Bale.
7/10
Historically inaccurate yes. But that isn't what we have come to see in this film. Instead you get a unique love story, a fairy tale. Something that paints you a picture and perhaps gives you new insight into Shakespeare. I feel like while this isn't obviously one of those new modern adaptations of Shakespeare like Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet (1996), in many ways this film does a better job of relating Shakespeare to a modern audience that may feel distanced by his work. It gives the non-Shakespeare fan, concrete (though non-historically correct) proof that Shakespeare in many ways acted and thought like us (just smarter) and that he had the same desires and feelings as us. It taps into his brilliance and lets it spill out for the masses. I give Shakespeare in Love a 8/10, for all the reasons I have already given minus the fact that for Shakespeare fans the work seems a bit shallow at times.
8/10
Based on the book of passions, loss and war comes the movie that captures the books passion, loss and war. What more could you ask from an adaptation then? Having read the book, I'll say what I have to say "The book was better" and attempt to move on. Having an acting core made up of Juliette Binoche and Daniel Day Lewis certainly gives the move an equal depth as what I remember from the movie, but where the two differ is on the creativity and ingenuity the books structure and language. The movie also cuts things which I believe were crucial to what makes the book and classic and instead cut it into a bizarre love story that contains the same name. I give Unbearable Lightness of Being a 6/10, since lets be honest it could have been a lot worse and Binoche in particular is her character.
6/10
Having seen everything Wes Anderson had to throw at me I decided to venture back to his feature film debut. At first glance it may appear like a normal Anderson romp: Luke and/or Owen Wilson CHECK, Quirky and/or dysfunctional characters CHECK, Overhead camera angles, wide shots and slow motion conclusions ALL CHECK. While this may sound like the formula we have become pleasantly used to and content with seeing from Anderson, Bottle Rocket is how to say it, well Anderson's first film. The story seems weak and I really just didn't get into these quirky characters like I normal due. And the laughs really never seemed to come. Then again I probably would have given a similar review to Life Aquatic (2004) after seeing it the first time and now deeply regret everything thing there were faults with that movie. So while I give Bottle Rocket a 5/10, I do so tentatively remembering how his films have surprised me upon a second journey.
5/10
So I know I've seen Die Hard (1988) and who hasn't seen Die Hard: With a Vengenance (1995), that must play every single weekend on at least one channel, but somehow I have missed out on seeing Die Hard 2. After watching it, now I know why. Don't get me wrong, while I maybe a stuck up movie snob I like to think that I still know there is a place for mindless actions films which is why I love Die Hard and Die Hard: With a Vengenance, but there is clearly something lacking in this installment in series. Perhaps its that the cliche characters are even more cliche then normal, the characters stupidity (besides Bruce Willis of course) is even more present then normal or perhaps (and I hate to become the person who always references 9/11 changing everything) in a post-9/11 world its difficult to get as lost and involved in an action movie involving plans falling out of the skies as is required to truly enjoy an action movie the way you are supposed to. I give Die Hard 2 a 5/10
5/10
So I should start of by saying that I'm not really a big Mike Judge fan. While I think Office Space (1999) should be hailed as nothing less then an instant classic, both King of the Hill and Beavis and Butt-Head have never been shows I have got the least bit interested in, but lucky for me Idiocracy isn't animated so I approached the film expecting something with a similar vain of humor as Office Space. I can't really say I got that at all. Idiocracy stars Luke Wilson and is a satire on the stupidity of America. Let's go down to the point, I laughed twice as a courtesy in the movie, maybe. The movie appeared to be some bad Sci-Fi movie that attempted to be really gutsy and not only tackle what the future was going to be like, but also make it satirical. Something the Sci-Fi channel has no rights or talent in accomplishing. As you can guess I would say miss this one. I give Idiocracy a 2/10, since it is probably the worse movie I have seen since Curse of the Golden Flower (2006).
2/10
The newest effort by Micheal Gondry proves once again that the french director doesn't want to be boxed into the romantic genre his first two films cast him as. His new work stars Jack Black and Mos Def and reads like almost any mainstream comedy (not that that is a bad thing). After our two clumsy heroes erase all the VHS tapes in their videostore they are forced to choose the only logic solution and re film each tape they own with themselves as the stars. Now here is where Gondry's genuis becomes present as our stars have to tackle the technical feets of many of our most beloved films (King Kong, Ghostbusters, Driving Miss Daisy, etc.) with no budget or sometimes knowledge of the film. While this does produce many good laughs the plot is just as cheesy as any mainstream comedy. I give Be Kind Rewind a 6/10, since it does manage to make you laugh but the fact that Gondry is directing it makes me think there could have been so much more.
6/10
