Reviews

While stylishly shot and crafted (especially in its handling of the twin narrative threads) the movie is ultimately a failed exercise in exploring the nature of revenge as the characters felt sterile. When the plot and themes are as clear and straight forward as they are here, the only reason to take as long as this film does to get to its point could be to establish the audience empathy for the characters. But by cutting away from the characters' faces during the few moments when they actually betray any emotion and by relentless jumps in time that made the film feel like a bunch of vignettes, the film made me feel more and more alienated from them. And without any interest in the characters, the long sequence with (needlessly) large amounts of splattery stuff on scene ended up feeling tedious rather than shocking.

Beautiful locales, a brilliant score and sound track, a host of funny,colorful characters that manage to stay on just the right side of the quirky-annoying line, an extraordinary sense of place, Sam Neil with all the gruff you can ask for and the funniest kid you have seen in movies in a long time.. This movie was damn near 'majestical' for much of its run-time :) An underwhelming climactic 'War' segment notwithstanding, this is still a blast with bucket-loads of charm and some crackling chemistry between the two leads played by Sam Neill and Julian Dennison (the kid). And if you are not grinning like an idiot by the end of this movie you (I am sorry to say this) are dead inside!

What begins as a walk-and-talk with two middle-aged strangers at its centre, then turns into something much, much more intriguing. The reason for the intrigue is not the plot itself, but rather (my conception of) the point that the film raises.

Should we go along in the ride with characters exploring their (possibly faux?) lives in movies, or should we try to assign a truth value to their story within the world of the film - considering that the world of the film itself is not an 'original' but just a 'copy' in the first place? Is there any point in doing the former, and does art lose it's intrinsic value if we do the latter? Does art have any intrinsic value to lose at all in the first place?...

At the hands of a great director and supported by a mercurial performance by Juliette Binoche, the movie should have been something incredible. But sadly, it falls short as the perseverance with which it raises its points about truth distracted me from staying emotionally involved with the characters as I couldn't help but feel that all the interactions were nothing but a play staged to make the film's point about art and truth. A finely-crafted academic exercise, with some intriguing ideas, that left me a bit cold at the end.

Pan's labyrinth is a fairytale, set against the backdrop of a civil war and it straddles those two story lines incredibly well. When dealing with such seemingly incompatible themes, it avoids striking any discordant chords, not by making the war part of it palatable, but rather by making the fairytale darker, and this works remarkably well. The movie does not waste even a frame, and feels almost as tight as "Infernal affairs".

I loved Del Torro's aesthetic for this fantasy world and especially his creatures. In this day of CGI overuse, it is gratifying to see such a minimalistic world, and this makes the story feel much more personal and, to me at least, the fantasy much more believable. That, along with superb performances from all the cast, especially Ivana Baquero as the lead, has made this film my all time favorite fantasy movie.

The initial 1:30 hrs was a pretty solid romantic comedy with a tinge of fantasy. If the movie had aimed for nothing more, it would still have been a decent addition to Curtis' filmography. A solid 6.5-7/10. But it is the last half an hour when the movie does indeed follow a different tread than typical romcoms and, at least for me personally, succeeded spectacularly. May be I am projecting my own emotions on those scenes (which beautifully depict a father-son relationship) for them to have the effect, but I do not consider that to be a flaw. Rather, it takes the sublime touch of a great artist to get people to do that, without the attempt seeming too on the nose or sappy.I think Curtis proves that he is one of those rare few who can achieve it.

'Infernal Affairs' is one of those rare movies that grips you from the start to finish. The tight,focused story and a fantastic background score make for an exhilarating movie-watching experience and the tension on the screen is almost palpable. The romantic plot-line with the psychiatrist, was probably the weakest link in an otherwise extraordinary film. To me personally, this movie surpasses 'The Departed', its American remake, in that there is a much stronger emotional connection with the two lead characters played superbly by Andy Lau and Tony Leung Chiu Wai here unlike 'Departed', whose execution, while felt clinical was nevertheless cold and detached. While Lau's character is the obvious bad guy, I still could not help but root for him too. And this speaks volumes about the level of humanness that Lau brings to the role of such a flawed character. Overall, this ranks among the very best HK films and indeed, among the greatest crime-thrillers ever made.

This movie keeps throwing twists your way repeatedly. But the problem is, people who have seen too many of these 'heist/con' movies might guess each curve ball (including the ending) some time before it comes along, so the effect of the 'aha!' moment is slightly reduced. Be that as it may, the plot is smart enough to at least force us to be alert if we want to stay ahead of it. The entire movie becomes a game of whack-a-mole, where you see a twist coming up in some time, think you have a grasp of the plot in its entirety, only to notice small signals of another one coming right ahead. All the characters were really well played (especially Marcos(Ricardo Darin)), which is rare for a movie of this genre. On the whole this is a fun movie with a taut script.