Reviews

James Cameron, herewith referred to as JC, has done it again.

Oh, how I feared that Avatar would be a cringe-worthy snooze-fest but all the reservations have been unwarranted. JC has boasted that this movie would be a game-changer and I would say that on some levels this is definitely the case. The attention to detail of the visuals and the handling of the sound, which are all perfect on all counts, make this a movie experience beyond compare. The 3D does add a little to the experience but not as much as I expected.

All in all you are submersed in a world beyond description, a love story which is a little corny but heart-felt, and an experience that makes you forget your worries and woes for a few hours. That is what going to the movies is all about. Needless to say, I loved it.

I am really happy that this movie was made. It is a thing of beauty. A pink cherry blossom of a movie. I can understand that people who try to find anything more than beauty will be very disappointed, as there is no real plot to speak of. What it does, is it makes our jaded pallets appreciate more simple tastes..

Beauty can be expressed in many ways and Sofia has succeeded not only to deliver a visually stunning piece. She also created something that was beautiful in a more abstract way: The beauty of each spoken line by Scarlett Johansen. The beauty of simplicity. The beauty of dotting music here and there to make a particular kind of atmosphere that stays with you for a long time. The beauty of their relationship (but also this shows that this movie was made by a woman. I can imagine what would have happened if a man made this movie...)which was based on deep friendship and understanding.. The beauty of Bill Murray losing his jadedness. The way Charlotte sees him makes him feel whole again.

Just see this film literally as a 'moving picture". The joy you find in this film is that you KNOW deep down what these people are going through, what they are about without it being expressed verbally. It connects with you on a deeper level. It did with me and I loved it. Go see it. And let yourself be drawn in..and be moved/

Now don't get me wrong, I am not the greatest QT fan around. I simply hate reservoir dogs. (Overrated) and pulp Fiction was fun but is not for repeated viewing not to mention the dire Jackie Brown but I simply adore this movie. Maybe it is as simple as "finally movie about a girl who whoops everyone's ass". Although,I believe it has more to do with the layer upon layer of different influences, music choice, fighting scenes that put the matrix to shame and darn seemingly, effortless cool that is rarely attained in movies but frequently strived after. I have to concede that story, even though told in a novel fashion, is not the thing that got most attention, but then again, the premise of a woman out on righteous revenge is an avenue which has not been explored too often. It has a freshness about it that neutralises any thinness of plot. In fact, it would get in the way of the whole picture in my view. We get that she is p*ssed and we get that she is right to pursue the people who betrayed her. What more do we need to know than what QT so meticulously tries to unfold? That is the paradox in this movie. The story is told in a slow pace that belies the action packed scenes. No boredom here. Just total awe at the greatness of it all. I envy the talent.. I think every moviemaker in Hollywood is, right about now and might do their utmost to prevent this movie to get the credit it deserves. Let's hope that integrity will rule over egos this year.

This is one good looking movie and has many Coen recognisable signature quirks to make it worthy of a comparison to their earlier and later works. I will come back on those quirks later.

I love the way the Coens always combine high-brow subtlety with low-brow slapstick which makes it so accessible. This movie is not heavy on subtlety but there are some genius moments in it to make it watchable again and again. Newman for one is great in this movie and having the best of times. He makes minimal acting an artform. Really, he could act anyone of that screen with his eyes closed. Jennifer Jason Leigh is a contrast with her hand waving,her Katherine Hepburn- affected-ballsy way of speaking and general overacting but I guess she sets the scene quite brilliantly to complement the decor and general 30's feel of the movie. You see, apparently the Coens have a penchant for the 30's movies style(and so they should.. Many a great movie was made in that decade) but the story in which an imbecile's dingus, against all odds became a total Fad and all the rage, doesn't quite fit that decade. I can't think of any Dingus which became all the rage in the thirties (life was too hard for thingamabobs then, I suppose) and the earliest example, the hoolahoop, was definately a brainchild of the 50's (Life was good and spendable income to buy doodahs was more readily available ). I don't mind that at all but I was confused to find out that it was set in the 50's because of all the visual and audible references to the 30's. If Mussburgers office wasn't an art-deco Love-fest (that clock!)I don't know what is.

I guess this review is definitely style over content but you know what? That just doesn't matter because plot is secondary to the visuals, and dialogue in this movie. And that is just alright by me. It is the reason why these movies are so good for repeat viewings. Once you know a plot, you are not likely to watch it again just for the plot's sake. It is the sights, the sounds the dialogue that makes you want to watch a movie again and again. Oh you don't believe me? Name your favourite movie (not the one you tell your friends is your favourite but the one you watch again and again). What makes you want to watch it repeatedly? Is it because you want to know what happens for the 100th time? Ofcourse not! You want to watch it for the 100th time because of the dialogue, the fun, the special effects the object of your desire etc. etc...

Now I am not saying that plot is not important but I am saying that what makes Coen Brother's movies so good is that they think about their viewer/audience who wants to watch their movies until they can repeat every line in the movie(and becoming sad anoraks in the process). I actually know people who watched the Big Lebowski half way and walked out of the cinema only to find them Lebowski addicts after one more viewing. I am not naming names but you know who you are...

I liked this movie the first time round... I know I will love it later...

Now for the Coen parallels between this movie and the Big Lebowski:

Jennifer's way of speaking was similar to Julianne's Maud. They were both "feisty" Brunettes who fall for the main character(I wouldn't call 'em heroes)

The voice over to remind us that it is a fairytale at the beginning and end by guardian-angel-types. (Sam Elliot in Big and Bill Cobbs in the Hudsucker) Bizarre Dance Dream Sequences that have nothing to do with the plot but are hugely enjoyable. Blond Bombshell (Anna-Nicole Smith in Hudsucker and Tara Reid in the Big Lebowski)Who want to seduce the hero. Steve Buscemi. Memorable Lines...

So all in all I guess I recommend it!

****

I have never known an original to be less of a movie than the remake but in this case I have to give it to Gore Verbinski for keeping the tone of the original in-tact but amplifying the chills a few notches. I was disappointed with the original (I tried very hard to like it) although the tone was decidedly creepy. The remake really delivers. It is everything a scary chiller movie is supposed to be (including plot holes and far fetched premise). The story line of how the girl came to be so evil was nastier in the original (but why did they switch from the father being the culprit in the original to the mother in the remake??) but the tale around how the tape came into existence was more plausible in The Ring.

It gave me the creeps throughout without resorting to gore or special effects. Also,I thought that the character development of Rachel was very cleverly done and more developed. You were meant not to care for her parenting skills in the beginning as it gave the chance for her to redeem herself as a parent when the father did not. Naomi Watts character was certainly flawed and this added to yourself being drawn into the movie. Cardboard cutouts never do well in this type of movie. The role of the son was more prominent in this one which was no bad thing although 6th sense comparisons are inevitable.

All in all I would suggest to see both the original and then the remake and make up your own mind. I actually think they compliment one another. I certainly think more of the original now then I did before. This is maybe because I saw it in a more 'western' context and it filled in a lot of unanswered questions I had before I saw the remake.

I was bowled over by Mulholland. I had read nothing about the movie before I went to see it, just going on the merits of Lynch as a director. I have always loved his style of directing and vision. There is always a good-natured naiveté about his work. Something very pure and honest (this is why he goes on about the quality of coffee in his movies, I think). I am sure that most will not agree but that is the underlying feeling I get from it. He loves filmmaking and it shows. It is uncompromising and pure. It is brave and very rare in Hollywood.

Mulholland Dr follows into that vein but there is an underlying tone of evil from the beginning that is fed by the goody goody nature of Betty (just too good to be true..too wide eyed and innocent) and the leering old couple when they leave Betty on the pavement of LA airport. But you just don't know where Lynch is taking you with this. I just let it wash over me and it was astonishing. Creepy, funny and devastating the story is a loop but you only find that out, of course, at the end of the movie. Ending where it began. So I do not understand the notion that it is incoherent. It certainly isn't incoherent. It is a Loop. It doesn't deal with normal time notions but it gives you clues as to what state of reality Betty/Diane is in.

Just look for the ashtray in the shape of the Piano. The lampshade and the robe and the hairstyle... If you keep your eye on that you will know what is real and what isn't.

But then the question is.. What does it all mean? The Blue Box? The key? Silencio? The old Couple? The Thugs, No one can answer that (perhaps not even David Lynch) but one can only guess... and that is just part of the fun of this movie. There is no wrong answer but the symbolism is logical to a degree. (Think Pandora's box, the key is the key to Diane's release of her obsession, Silencio the calm before death, or death itself, The old couple her innocence lost..coming back to haunt her, The thugs are validating her belief that the director was bullied into choosing Camilla and had nothing to do with Diane's lack of talent or star quality) It stays with you long after you have left the cinema. Like some vivid dreams they can baffle you as to their meaning but make you richer for having them... I was bowled over by Mulholland.

What makes a story by Stephen King so adaptable for the screen? The green Mile is a great example of showing the worst and the best in human nature all in one fell swoop. Of course it is impossible to steer clear of comparison to the Shawshank Redemption, especially as it is directed by Darabont who accomplished to make one of the greatest films of all time. The green mile is arguably not as good as Shawshank Redemption but it is a prison drama told from a completely different angle and that is why one is not disappointed when watching it. It has very sentimental moments and it has a certain self-congratulatory and self-conscious feel when it comes to relationship between Coffey and all the "good white folk" in the sense of: "look how sensitive we are handling the race issue". The role of John Coffey is well portrayed and I love the way you can speculate about where he came from and how old he really is but the film does sometimes fall into sentimentality that evokes resistance to the fantastic story being told. Tom Hanks is reliable as ever in a story that would put anyone off the death penalty but then decides to change its mind in the end by condoning the death penalty after all but only for very, very, bad people.

So all in all a good movie that doesn't particularly linger on in memory mainly due to the deliberate tugging at heart strings.