Change Your Image
Illymovies
Reviews
La piel que habito (2011)
Bad for an Almodovar film, difficult to satisfy viewers, lack of connection
Normally a fan of Almodovar, I was waiting with anticipation to see this new film. The storyline and trailer seemed weird, raw, colourful, elements you come to expect from the director. However, the lack of story to bind the story to the picture, to make us identify in some ways with the characters, to make us discover existential meanings in the story/characters, all these things were missing. And it is difficult to rely purely on beautiful pictures and "weird" scenarios that for one, have been also used in other films by the same director. Thus, without a strong story I didn't feel convinced by the movie. Watching this film, I felt indifferent about the story and whatever twist was there in it. Almodovar usually is detail oriented and also allows actors to bring their interpretation and personalities in the movie. I also felt that the actors had such rigid roles that they didn't have much room to act and to really absorb into the movie. Antonio Banderas gave nothing to the performance as compared to his older performances in Almodovar films. Similarly was Marisa Paredes also not challenged or allowed to shine and Elena Anaya, although she was good, had no room to act. All in all, trying too hard to create mystery, suspense, while there is no story to add meaning to the somewhat "weird" events.
Sen to Chihiro no kamikakushi (2001)
Amazingly sensitive and imaginative
I only recently saw Spirited Away and I was extremely pleased with it. I searched out some of the negative comments out of curiosity to see what possibly could some people NOT like about this movie. Most reasons pointed to the lack of character development and the lack of a real story that made sense. In other words they expected something that fits perfectly together as often happens in all Disney movies. Not to say that Disney movies are bad, they're just different, they're very simplistic and offer nothing more than an hour's worth of entertainment. Spirited Away blew me away, all the motifs were portrayed so carefully and subtly and with such amazing animation visuals. It combined elements of many classical popular stories that I myself was familiar with and thus able to enjoy. It is probable that individuals exposed only to the Disney "culture" which comes very very close to no culture at all is negatively surprised by this movie. For everybody else who is familiar with coming of age stories, and other stories rich with fables and with lessons will see the lessons and motifs portrayed in Spirited Away and will not JUST look for a plot line and character development, but will see beyond that to discover that the plot was fantastic and there was also plenty of character development. For those of you who haven't seen this feature I wish you GOOD viewing! Do see this film on a rainy Sunday afternoon.
Ratatouille (2007)
Whose Paris is it anyway?
I recently saw this movie because I thought it would be cute movie, rats, mice, pigs, fish...monsters...they all can be so cute. I thought the movie was far from magical. This movie had problems because it tried too hard to combine things that are hard to combine such as: Rats, cooking, Paris, the English language and in the same time humor. Biggest overall disappointment was how Paris was introduced, unfortunately in a very American manner as the so called city of lights and high cuisine. I don't think the essence of Paris was captured in a nice way, and since the setting was in Paris, this influenced the whole movie in a negative manner. Also, speaking French-English doesn't help much with creating a french atmosphere at all. I liked the rat, because as always, humans look a bit creepy when animated in this manner. At one point, I was a bit grossed out by the rats because although it's just a cartoon, and it's supposed to be cute, I think I find mice sort of cute, but rats can be very big, and as cute as you try to make them it may still gross some people (like myself) out. The humor was poorly done: it borrowed a lot from other movies, and I found the jokes forced and not so funny. So, Pixar ran into a little bit of trouble in this movie because they tried to go in unfamiliar waters so to say. They tried to find an original story, and I guess with all the popularity of cooking shows they thought it would be a good idea. However, they could've tried harder if they wanted to capture Paris in a good, romantic manner rather than an American cheesy manner (no pun intended cheese-rats :)) Make it funny in a more subtle way make the characters less boring and more dynamic. Paris could be a great setting for a cartoon if done properly. Unfortunately, this was not accomplished and the result is thus mediocre at best. If you want to see a beautiful animation in a very Frech spirit then I recommend the Triplets of Belleville.
Så som i himmelen (2004)
Great movie that's appropriate and enjoyable for all ages
This movie was absolutely great and relaxing to watch. There was such a sense of relief in watching this. As it seems that everybody is in a hurry to achieve and consume and live life based on a lot of expectations you may actually forget what's really important in life. I loved how this movie portrayed simple people in a little village that yet had such familiar troubles and conflicts to resolve, conflicts that everybody can identify with. This movie is also about the true meaning of personal development, what it means to truly fulfill your dreams in life, and not just in an "on paper" manner that equals being rich and having a good job and career, but also at the end of the day asking yourself the question "Am I happy?" and if you are not to have the courage to go after whatever it is that will bring you more peace and happiness. I also felt that I got my "money's worth" going to this movie, because it is quite long. By long, I don't mean that it's boring, but that the story and its characters are given ample time to develop and so you really become involved in the movie such that there's nothing abrupt or happening in an unnatural way. There's quite a nice flow to it. I highly recommend this movie to everybody!
Death Proof (2007)
I forgot I was at the movies...
One word: Tarantino....is what made me buy a ticket and go watch this movie. I must admit that this movie had more of an effect on me after seeing it rather than during. There were times when I wasn't sure if I was at the movies and I kept asking myself: what am I doing here again? what is it that I'm watching? because the movie doesn't particularly make sense for the most part. However, that's not what's enjoyable about this movie. And don't expect tons of things to happen as it goes a little slow. There are things that are very well done, the transition to color at the convenience store is amazing. The suspense of the whole death proof car including Kurt Russel is nicely done. That he finally meets his equal in the end and becomes rather pathetic than scary is very much so in keeping with the "girl power" thing we saw in Uma Thurman in Kill Bill, and who better to portray this sexy yet strong atmosphere than a group of women. For the fact that it was a cool movie that I now remember and I'm just starting to enjoy and would definitely like to see again I give it an 8/10.
A fost sau n-a fost? (2006)
Hilarious!
I had no idea what this movie will be about when I went to see it. I definitely didn't expect it to be a talk show. And I also didn't expect it to be a comedy. At first, things were going a bit slow, although there was some character development. The teacher had debts and alcohol problems, the older man led a pretty quiet boring life in his flat. Most funny thing was that the host of the talk show was trying so hard to arrange something at the last moment for the show. The guests didn't even confirm whether or not they will be on the show and he couldn't get a hold of them on his cell phone. Also, the images of women doing the house work and not men, like: oh, here are your ironed clothes for the show and your food, very typical. Then the talk show itself, makes fun of these types of shows in general, where all time is spent on introducing guests and the topic of the show, and everybody gets so off-topic during the show that nothing is really accomplished and no questions are actually answered.
The movie was very simply done, and it starts off with the sort of depressing pictures taken from an empty town, in the winter. Also, there is a scene in the old man's apartment, where you can see the microphone hanging at the top of the screen...I'm sure this could have been avoided, unless it was left in for effect, but it's a little odd to leave that in there like that, it should have been edited out.
All in all the movie was simple funny. I was entertained seeing it.
Cum mi-am petrecut sfârsitul lumii (2006)
"our country is our country" says the song from the music class :)
I have seen this movie recently, and it wasn't bad. I was amused by some of the comments made on this site about the movie, like the one disappointed viewer that said "I'm not a fan of Balkan or gypsy music and especially not a fan of national anthems". From some of the comments you would think this movie was a musical. No, it contains very little music, and it is often obligatory to sing the national anthem at school, especially during communism, so it is not something you like or no, it is something that you do.
I understand that the title may be misleading, that one may expect something else, and especially if you are not Romanian, you may not "feel" the movie very well. One viewer that posted a comment said he was confused about the story line, that there was no plot, but only events and people that didn't make sense. I found the story line quite simple, and I found the so called mystery of it to be necessary. It made everything seem as if it was somebody's experience and not real events. I don't know how others found the camera work, some complained that there were objects in front of the camera that seemed carelessly done. I thought the camera work was like that on purpose. Again, for me, it was as if somebody was observing all this in a certain way, and thus the camera tried to adjust to it, to make it more into an experience rather than a clear cut picture. I expected myself the movie to be more about the actual revolution. However, this movie is not about the Romanian revolution as the events of the story only culminate in the revolution at the very end of the movie. The end of the world rather, contains of months that were spend before the revolution, and I think captures well the hopelessness of everything, and the feelings that something is about to come to an end, to change somehow. Thus, those sad months are the so called end of the world, and the end of the movie is a new start.
Last thing to mention was also that this movie does not offer a global view of Romania or of Bucharest or the Romanian Revolution. The story only centers around one family, and their situation, fears, friends, etc. Thus, restricting the story to such a small scale might make viewing harder especially for non-Romanians. Even for some Romanians it may seem pointless to watch this family for the duration of the movie. However, for others like myself, you may find that the story was nicely told, the characters were well portrayed and that the movie was well done. One can argue that it is not perfect, and that it could have been this and that, but generally I thought it was very nice to see.
Match Point (2005)
Dramatic work? More like comedy to me!
I enjoyed the movie, as I found it relaxing and I liked some of the landscapes and the story was sort of fun, although very stupid at times. The lead actor was very silly...but perhaps that's how his character had to be.
Before seeing this movie, I saw the trailer for it to get an idea about this movie. And it seems like you are better off just seeing the trailer, rather than the whole thing. There are a lot of things to criticize. First, there are certain phrases or dialog that seem extremely fake. And all the talking in between these fake phrases seem to be there just to connect them together. It's extremely cheesy/cliché..not sure what to call it. "I married a girl...family has nothing but money...". PPPppppplease! Although I understand what this movie was trying to be about, I don't like what it actually was. Yes, there are the so called "social climbers" that have the "luck" to get infiltrated into rich families like that, but it just seemed way too easy in this case. Everybody seemed to work just for the benefit of the lead actor. Scarlett J. liked him although she was involved with someone else, Chloe liked him almost immediately, the father liked him immediately...and the mother who apparently had a problem with Nola could see nothing wrong with Chris. I didn't like Scarlett's role (her acting was okay but I didn't like her character so much in the movie)...so she was American, so she was from a poor, broken family...so she didn't want to be poor...so she had no luck with acting...just a stupid character altogether. She was always giving interesting looks to the camera and she was always teasing with her presence and her eyes. She would go from being totally put together and relaxed about things, to drinking too much in the middle of the day and turning into a very lusty/flirty woman to taking pills and being desperate to confessing to us that she has had a few abortions before??? It all seemed very ridiculous..and if she was really that desperate she wouldn't look as well and as relaxed as she did at other times. Should I even go into the crime scene??? As soon as Chris made that pathetic move of stealing or borrowing the shotgun from the basement...I was just laughing ever since. The way he put it in his tennis bag and the way he had troubles putting it together and ...finally the way he killed the poor old lady....and finally...hello Nola...bang!...extremely stupid...!!! So, if you want to have fun, and maybe even laugh a little...while enjoying beautiful London images like the London Eye and the financial district (the camera work was good and I thought there were some great artistic shots that captured well the greatness of the city, and it tied in well with that great opportunity that London was for both Chris and Nola) and the calming yet very typical and simply presented life of the "higher class" then this movie is for you. Don't expect it to be great, don't expect any hidden or philosophical meanings, and please don't comment on how cool the whole LUCK thing was. He was lucky...ya, okay...but in a very simple, stupid sort of way!
A History of Violence (2005)
"graphic sex scenes and violence?"....then you missed the point!!!
I always try to read the good comments for a movie, but especially the bad ones before I see a movie. I must say that some of the bad comments on this movie are well...pretty bad themselves. And why are most comments coming from the US criticizing the so called "graphic sex". And I quote somebody from Austin TX saying "some of the sex is hardcore. I swear they're doing a 69 on screen). A lot of people seemed to think that the sex scenes were just put in to add interest to an otherwise boring movie. Why does everybody mention these so called "graphic scenes"? First of all, they're not that graphic, and they're done in a completely tasteful manner. And I found these scenes to be absolutely necessary for the movie and not a cheap way to "shock" us, as another writer put it. There was nothing shocking about them, and it defined a very important part of the couple's life (their love making). Obviously, as she learned something about her husband that she didn't know before, something pretty dark about him things changed between them. The way she perceived him as a person affected her in that she was both afraid and curious about this "new husband". Thus the kind of cute, love making scene was contrasted with the more lustful one in the second half of the movie. I thought this contrast was necessary for the movie. I also loved Vigo's acting and I thought he was a great pick for this role. He was always so extremely calm, and innocent and at times you couldn't really tell if that was the real him or if he was still Joey. I loved how this movie was really about a certain duality that exists in all men (meaning all people, men and women). And this duality can be anything and doesn't have to be attributed only to violence. I think the director was smart enough to use violence to capture our attention. Just like Kill Bill shocked us with the violence, this movie did too (only to a much lesser degree ...I thought). At the end of the movie, we don't care if Vigo is Joey or Tom, because he's back home, he's back to what's good and he's back to the only thing that he has left and at that point we know that he has managed to redeem himself. Some have said "Vigo was not effective, he was just quiet" and "it started too slow, it was boring". This movie kept me intrigued from beginning to end (it didn't drag on because it was only about 1.5 hrs.)and it was beautifully filmed. For all who thought that this movie was all about violence and a seemingly stupid plot with unnecessary added graphic sex scenes, I can only say that unfortunately you missed the point! Hopefully YOU won't.
Brokeback Mountain (2005)
two pretty , well dressed cowboys
I thought Brokeback Mountain was great. However, there were some interesting aspects of it that just didn't seem very realistic (maybe they weren't supposed to be). For instance, both guys were supposed to be poor, yet they were wearing very nice, fashionable clothing. I felt like this was some American Eagle commercial with all the nice denim and pretty shirts to match their pants, not to say the jackets. At other times, it almost felt like the movie was some Malboro commercial. It was a much too rough a job and the conditions were much too hard for two such clean cut, pretty boys to be around. Also, I understand that Heath Ledger was supposed to be "a man of few words", but I had a lot of trouble understanding what he was saying, and at many times I felt as if he wasn't doing much of the acting. On the other hand, Jake seemed to be more the main character than Heath Ledger was. He always initiated everything, and seemed to be more of a central character. He also spoke more clearly. But this movie was great for other reasons. First of all, this movie is NOT about gay people. I hope that people who think this movie is purely about 2 gay guys will go see this movie so that they can realize that the love portrayed could equally exist between people of the opposite sex as well.It is about "selfish love", emotional, obsessive, love that makes a mess of things.Surrounded by the despair of the little, ugly towns of America (in those times), the lack of jobs, and the simple, boring lifestyles, the mountain trips provided something completely opposite. Brokeback mountain was beautiful and true and it seemed as if the boys longed for something deep and true, and once they found that, it was hard for them to let go. However touching their story was, it was also marked by tragedy in that they both had to live "double lives" and never could really be with each other longer than a few days. All in all I enjoyed this movie and I recommend it to others. I thought it was carefully made and it got that feeling of loneliness and longing across very well. Afterall, if a movie can invoke such strong feelings about love, or sadness, or lust, or loneliness, then it has achieved its goal and became a great movie that is both believable and sensitive. The scene with the shirts did not impress me as much as it impressed others. The most touching scene in the movie for me was the one when they see each other for the first time in 4 years, and they start kissing right behind the wall. I thought that was a very powerful scene.
La mala educación (2004)
La Mala Education and ideal rather than true story
I have recently viewed La Mala Education mainly because of all the different reviews I have read about in newspapers, the internet, etc. I believe the movie is nothing more than a fun expression of an ideal homosexuality. The story has been said and done many times before. Do Catholic or any other religious all boy schools produce or encourage in some way homosexuality? But the movie was far from being about the catholic church. It was simply about beautiful colors and a very warm and beautiful setting. Beautiful young men are portrayed as gay and full of passion. I liked how the movie was able to show passion and love without "needing" to use females to do so. I think the author tried to make the story special in that he presented an ideal, what if story for us to see and not believe but for us just to enjoy along with the music, twisted plot and the mystery provided by father Manolo. It was an ideal story in that everything that was ugly, such as the transformed Ignacio and even father Manolo's mysterious ways from the beginning of the movie, were both slowly eliminated. The beginning of the movie even makes fun of the quintessential way of viewing gay people as drag queens that are desperate sexual predators. That ugliness and negative image of gay individuals was also eliminated because it was only on screen, in the movie, as part of "the visit" screen play and not a real scene. What was left was a relationship between two, beautiful, and young people that was far from disturbing or gross and that was able to show the same passion and emotion as any heterosexual couple in any other movie. Even the bad priest was saved from his disturbing portrayal that he had in "The Visit". In real life, he was just in love and obsessed with the image of Igantio that he now found in Juan. He is saved in that he is not a priest anymore and also in that he is willing to give up his new family for just being with Juan. The story is more or less this presentation of an ideal gayness taking place in a beautiful country. A gayness is given a reason for being there, a reason that makes it okay and natural and not typical of most media portrayals. For Enrique the movie is more like a coming of age story. Although he successfully moves on to be a director, he is still haunted by the possibility of his first love and the twisted stories he is presented with. He is fascinated by these stories, but in the end he realizes that the truth is not magical or beautiful and he gives up trusting Juan. His curiosity and emotions lead him to direct the movie, but his maturity and new understanding makes him forget the past and grow a little wiser.