City of God
"City of God is based on a true story that takes place in the 60's where in the slums of Rio De Janeiro two boys growing up in the neighborhood take on different paths in life. The story is told through eyes of Buscape, a poor young fisherman's son who dreams of becoming a photographer one day. His story narrates the violence and corruption surrounding the city and the rise and fall of one of the city's most notorious boss'. Li'l Ze. As war wages on the streets Buscape's only way out of this violent life is to expose its brutality the world through his pictures. Along the way the lives of other are put into perspective as their stories intersect with the events that take place."
5 stars
This movie has actually been sitting in my 'Coming Soon' folder for a while. The reason that I didn't want to write the review was because I was deathly afraid I wouldn't do the film justice. It's an automatic lock for my Top 10 Films of All Time list, and I'm a guy who has seen A LOT of movies, so that is saying something. Because there is no way to do it justice, I am going to stick with the theory that 'less is more', so this review will be short.
At it's very core, this movie is about the struggle between doing what is right and doing what you have to do in order to survive. From its basic premise, the story develops into one that is as beautiful emotionally as it is visually. It transitions effortlessly from scenes of sweetly tender innocence to moments of heart poundingly intense reality. The lines of right and wrong are instantly blurred in a hellish world that most of us couldn't even begin to comprehend. Add all of this to the fact that this film is based on a true story, and I find it hard to believe that anyone will walk out of the theatre without opened eyes and a dropped jaw.
As difficult as this film is to review, it's ever more difficult to categorize. After some serious thinking, this is what I have decided on. When trying to anticipate the scope and theme of this movie, imagine that the movies Snatch and Goodfellas had a baby. Then imagine that this baby grew up a hard, sobering life but was lucky enough to eventually meet a beautiful, sophisticated woman who was the result of a single drunken night of passion between The Lord of the Flies and Blood Diamond. Now, if these two star-crossed lovers (born from greatness) were to have a child themselves, City of God would be it. You don't have to understand that convoluted analogy, you just have to watch the movie.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Monday, July 26, 2010
I've Loved You So Long
I've Loved You So Long
"Former medical doctor Juliette Fontaine travels to Lorraine to live on probation with her younger sister Léa and her family. The bitter, introspective and reclusive Juliette has spent her sentence without any visitors and totally forgotten by her family and now she has problems interacting with her brother-in-law Luc and her nieces. She has to visit every other week her probation officer Captain Fauré and seeks a job to rebuild her life. As days go by, Juliette gets closer to the family of her sister and befriends Luc and Léa's friends, specially Lea's colleague Michel. She slowly changes her behavior until the day Léa discovers the truth."
4.5 Stars
Well kids, it looks like you’re going to have to rely on my review for this movie because Robyn decided to read a synopsis before watching it. I usually do the same thing, but the synopsis she read unfortunately gave away an integral plot point that pretty much ruined the whole thing for her.
That being said, I would highly recommend that you avoid reading anything similar before you watch the movie because you really will be robbing yourself of a great film. You probably need to be in a certain headspace when you watch it as well. The pacing is somewhat slow, but it doesn’t really hurt. In fact, I actually think it adds a great deal to the depth and seriousness of the subject matter. The average viewer’s attention span is so short these days that many movies speed through a characters development in an effort to keep the audience interested. All too often, in my opinion, the pace is so fast that it makes development unbelievable. A character can’t be suckin’ dick for blow in one scene and then be driving the kids to soccer practice in a mini-van 10 minutes later. Sorry, was that analogy a little too on the nose? If a movie asks us to buy into a character they have to make his or her development believable.
But don’t think that you will be bored waiting for something to happen in this film. The mystery and intrigue are very strong and the director does a good job at only revealing small bits of information at a time leaving the viewer desperate for the next piece of the puzzle. When the truth is finally revealed, it is definitely a WHOA moment and one that truly causes an introspection by the viewer as to what they would have done in the same, tragic circumstances.
Now, I don’t say this too often, but no one really could have played this role but Kristin Scott Thomas. Aside from the fact that she had to speak in French for the entire movie, the role was so emotionally complicated only a veteran actress like her could even attempt to take on the material. Needless to say, I think she did an exceptional job (one very worthy of the Oscar nomination).
There aren’t a lot of films today that really make you think the way that this one does. You may have to work a little bit for it, but the reward in the end is definitely worth it.
"Former medical doctor Juliette Fontaine travels to Lorraine to live on probation with her younger sister Léa and her family. The bitter, introspective and reclusive Juliette has spent her sentence without any visitors and totally forgotten by her family and now she has problems interacting with her brother-in-law Luc and her nieces. She has to visit every other week her probation officer Captain Fauré and seeks a job to rebuild her life. As days go by, Juliette gets closer to the family of her sister and befriends Luc and Léa's friends, specially Lea's colleague Michel. She slowly changes her behavior until the day Léa discovers the truth."
4.5 Stars
Well kids, it looks like you’re going to have to rely on my review for this movie because Robyn decided to read a synopsis before watching it. I usually do the same thing, but the synopsis she read unfortunately gave away an integral plot point that pretty much ruined the whole thing for her.
That being said, I would highly recommend that you avoid reading anything similar before you watch the movie because you really will be robbing yourself of a great film. You probably need to be in a certain headspace when you watch it as well. The pacing is somewhat slow, but it doesn’t really hurt. In fact, I actually think it adds a great deal to the depth and seriousness of the subject matter. The average viewer’s attention span is so short these days that many movies speed through a characters development in an effort to keep the audience interested. All too often, in my opinion, the pace is so fast that it makes development unbelievable. A character can’t be suckin’ dick for blow in one scene and then be driving the kids to soccer practice in a mini-van 10 minutes later. Sorry, was that analogy a little too on the nose? If a movie asks us to buy into a character they have to make his or her development believable.
But don’t think that you will be bored waiting for something to happen in this film. The mystery and intrigue are very strong and the director does a good job at only revealing small bits of information at a time leaving the viewer desperate for the next piece of the puzzle. When the truth is finally revealed, it is definitely a WHOA moment and one that truly causes an introspection by the viewer as to what they would have done in the same, tragic circumstances.
Now, I don’t say this too often, but no one really could have played this role but Kristin Scott Thomas. Aside from the fact that she had to speak in French for the entire movie, the role was so emotionally complicated only a veteran actress like her could even attempt to take on the material. Needless to say, I think she did an exceptional job (one very worthy of the Oscar nomination).
There aren’t a lot of films today that really make you think the way that this one does. You may have to work a little bit for it, but the reward in the end is definitely worth it.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Paris, Je T"aime
Paris je T'aime
"Paris, je t'aime is about the plurality of cinema in one mythic location: Paris, the City of Love. Eighteen filmmakers have five minutes each; the audience must weave a single narrative out of eighteen moments. Each transition begins with the last shot of the previous film and ends with the first shot of the following film, extending the enchantment and the emotion of the previous segment, preparing the audience for a surprise, and providing a cohesive atmosphere. There's a reappearing mysterious character who is a witness to the Parisian life. A common theme of Paris and love fuses all."
5 Stars
Paris je T'aime is the first in a series of movies produced by (Tristan Carne). They all follow the similar format of being a collection of short films rather than one long, cohesive film. However, the one unifying theme is love. I recently reviewed New York I Love You, which is the second film in the series. Now, I hate to sound like an old man on this one, but the first one was the best and, unfortunately, I really can’t explain why.
The format in this film is similar to NY I Love you, but instead of compromising of ten 8 minute segments, this version contains eighteen 5 minute segments. And it’s very possible that this format change is the reason why I liked this film so much more. Since each short is directed by a different person, the film is inherently very eclectic. This serves a dual purpose. If you are not really getting drawn into the current vignette, you really don’t have time to get bored with it because once you start to, it’s on to the next one. By the same measure, several of these films draw you in very quickly so, when it ends it just leaves you wanting more. One would think that this paradigm would not work when you first conceptualize it on paper, but once it translates to the screen the results are brilliant.
Obviously because this film has 16 separate parts, I am not going to try and review each segment like I did with NYILY. All I can say is that, after seeing this film, I can see why so many people in other countries have tried to emulate it. It may range from the sweet to the intriguing to the weird, but then again so does Love.
"Paris, je t'aime is about the plurality of cinema in one mythic location: Paris, the City of Love. Eighteen filmmakers have five minutes each; the audience must weave a single narrative out of eighteen moments. Each transition begins with the last shot of the previous film and ends with the first shot of the following film, extending the enchantment and the emotion of the previous segment, preparing the audience for a surprise, and providing a cohesive atmosphere. There's a reappearing mysterious character who is a witness to the Parisian life. A common theme of Paris and love fuses all."
5 Stars
Paris je T'aime is the first in a series of movies produced by (Tristan Carne). They all follow the similar format of being a collection of short films rather than one long, cohesive film. However, the one unifying theme is love. I recently reviewed New York I Love You, which is the second film in the series. Now, I hate to sound like an old man on this one, but the first one was the best and, unfortunately, I really can’t explain why.
The format in this film is similar to NY I Love you, but instead of compromising of ten 8 minute segments, this version contains eighteen 5 minute segments. And it’s very possible that this format change is the reason why I liked this film so much more. Since each short is directed by a different person, the film is inherently very eclectic. This serves a dual purpose. If you are not really getting drawn into the current vignette, you really don’t have time to get bored with it because once you start to, it’s on to the next one. By the same measure, several of these films draw you in very quickly so, when it ends it just leaves you wanting more. One would think that this paradigm would not work when you first conceptualize it on paper, but once it translates to the screen the results are brilliant.
Obviously because this film has 16 separate parts, I am not going to try and review each segment like I did with NYILY. All I can say is that, after seeing this film, I can see why so many people in other countries have tried to emulate it. It may range from the sweet to the intriguing to the weird, but then again so does Love.
Monday, July 19, 2010
New York, I Love You
New York, I Love You
"Ten vignettes in New York City: a pickpocket meets his match; a young Hasidic woman, on the eve of her marriage, reveals herself to an Indian businessman; a writer tries a pick-up line; an artist seeks a model; a composer needs to read; two women connect; a man takes a child to Central Park; lovers meet; a couple takes a walk on their anniversary; a kid goes to the prom with a girl in a wheelchair; a retired singer contemplates suicide. There are eight million stories in the naked city: these have been ten of them."
4 Stars
This isn’t a movie for the casual viewer. Hell, this isn’t even a movie, it’s a film. It’s very important that your understand that going in. It’s not going to have your normal plot lines and story arcs, and there isn’t really going to be a resolution at the end. The way that I interpret it is that this is a snap shot of several lives. This is a film compiled of 10 very different segments directed by 10 very different filmmakers with one unifying theme, the hope for love. Because of this, your opinion of the film needs to be based on the whole thing instead of each segment because it truly is a sum of its parts.
Technically this is a “sequel” to the film Paris je t’aime (Paris, I Love You). I haven’t seen that film, but I do plan to because I think it will give me a better perspective on this film. Because the stories are so different, I think each viewer’s experience will be unique. Some people may end up taking different things from the stories than I did. Some segments that I hated may be the ones that you most connect with, and I think that’s really the point of the movie. That being said, here is my quick rundown of the stories:
SEGMENT 1 – This one is forgettable. Andy Garcia still plays the role of “intimidating man” to a T. If God himself were to square off with Andy Garcia, I truly think he could make the Almighty cry. Unfortunately he’s the only good thing in this segment. As usual Hayden Christensen exemplifies the stereotype that you don’t have to be a good actor as long as you’re pretty. Rachel Bilson tries to make her performance memorable, but it feels forced and she and Christiansen just look like rookies in the presences of a veteran Garcia.
SEGMENT 2 – This one is confusing. It feels like it is trying to convey something meaningful, but I just can’t discern what that is. Natalie Portman and Irrfan Khan portray two people who seem imprisoned by the life paths they have been forced to choose. Their only way of coping with the suppressed sadness is trough witty, sometimes sexual banter they exchange in their business dealings with one another.
SEGMENT 3 – This is another one that’s just forgettable. Orlando Bloom does a good job at playing the starving artist trying to stay true to himself, but the mysterious chemistry that he and Christina Ricci develop through a phone relationship completely fizzles to me when they finally meet face to face.
SEGMENT 4 – This one is GREAT! The entire story is just a dialogue between Ethan Hawke and Maggie Q on a New York street corner, but it stands head and shoulders above the rest. The writing is at a level I haven’t seen in a while in any film, and the back and forth between Hawke and Q really develops it into something poignant. Plus there is a slight twist at the end that really makes it one of if not THE best vignettes out there.
SEGMENT 5 – Can’t say too much about this one. Don’t get me wrong, I think Anton Yelchin and Olivia Thirlby are two solid up and comers in Hollywood, but I can’t see any reason that they included this story line other than for comedic relief.
SEGMENT 6 – This is the ones that seems the most “real” to me. Bradley Cooper and Drea de Matteo separately re-hash the one night stand they just spent together and struggle to decide if they should risk ruining a perfect memory with an attempt to recreate it.
SEGMENT 7 – I really need someone to explain this one to me. It seems like a very artsy, dramatic story full of metaphors, but again I wasn’t able to get my head around it. I almost found myself going out and buying the Cliff’s Notes just so I could figure out what exactly happened in the story. Visually, though, I have to admit it was beautiful.
SEGMENT 8 – This one was very different than all the rest in the sense that “love” in this story was really about the platonic love between a father and daughter. It was pretty brief, but definitely carried enough weight to be able tug at the heart strings a little bit.
SEGMENT 9 – Another artsy-er segment and, ironically enough, this one centered around an actual artist. It’s kind of interesting because neither the artist nor the muse that he has chosen can really communicate because they don’t speak the same language. Even without words, though, they seem to have a relationship that connects them more than most.
SEGMENT 4 (PART II) – I’m not sure why these two stories were considered the same segment because they don’t really tie in together which is why I am saying it is Part II. In this portion of the segment, Chris Cooper and Robyn Wright Penn have an intriguing conversation about how relationships can change over time and whether marriage really is for everyone.
SEGMENT 10 – This may take the title as my favorite. Eli Wallach and Cloris Leachman are old school Hollywood icons that I could watch anytime. Their portrayal of an aging married couple is definitely one that will make you smile, laugh, and even maybe cry.
So, with all these different stories, what can you really say about the film? For starters it’s unique. It’s fun but sad. It’s random but precise. It’s overwhelming but lacking. It’s narcissistic but humble. It’s eye-rolling but tender. It’s vibrant. It’s desolate. It’s uplifting. It’s depressing. It’s intense. It’s dull. It’s real. It’s fake. . . . It’s New York.
4 Stars
This isn’t a movie for the casual viewer. Hell, this isn’t even a movie, it’s a film. It’s very important that your understand that going in. It’s not going to have your normal plot lines and story arcs, and there isn’t really going to be a resolution at the end. The way that I interpret it is that this is a snap shot of several lives. This is a film compiled of 10 very different segments directed by 10 very different filmmakers with one unifying theme, the hope for love. Because of this, your opinion of the film needs to be based on the whole thing instead of each segment because it truly is a sum of its parts.
Technically this is a “sequel” to the film Paris je t’aime (Paris, I Love You). I haven’t seen that film, but I do plan to because I think it will give me a better perspective on this film. Because the stories are so different, I think each viewer’s experience will be unique. Some people may end up taking different things from the stories than I did. Some segments that I hated may be the ones that you most connect with, and I think that’s really the point of the movie. That being said, here is my quick rundown of the stories:
SEGMENT 1 – This one is forgettable. Andy Garcia still plays the role of “intimidating man” to a T. If God himself were to square off with Andy Garcia, I truly think he could make the Almighty cry. Unfortunately he’s the only good thing in this segment. As usual Hayden Christensen exemplifies the stereotype that you don’t have to be a good actor as long as you’re pretty. Rachel Bilson tries to make her performance memorable, but it feels forced and she and Christiansen just look like rookies in the presences of a veteran Garcia.
SEGMENT 2 – This one is confusing. It feels like it is trying to convey something meaningful, but I just can’t discern what that is. Natalie Portman and Irrfan Khan portray two people who seem imprisoned by the life paths they have been forced to choose. Their only way of coping with the suppressed sadness is trough witty, sometimes sexual banter they exchange in their business dealings with one another.
SEGMENT 3 – This is another one that’s just forgettable. Orlando Bloom does a good job at playing the starving artist trying to stay true to himself, but the mysterious chemistry that he and Christina Ricci develop through a phone relationship completely fizzles to me when they finally meet face to face.
SEGMENT 4 – This one is GREAT! The entire story is just a dialogue between Ethan Hawke and Maggie Q on a New York street corner, but it stands head and shoulders above the rest. The writing is at a level I haven’t seen in a while in any film, and the back and forth between Hawke and Q really develops it into something poignant. Plus there is a slight twist at the end that really makes it one of if not THE best vignettes out there.
SEGMENT 5 – Can’t say too much about this one. Don’t get me wrong, I think Anton Yelchin and Olivia Thirlby are two solid up and comers in Hollywood, but I can’t see any reason that they included this story line other than for comedic relief.
SEGMENT 6 – This is the ones that seems the most “real” to me. Bradley Cooper and Drea de Matteo separately re-hash the one night stand they just spent together and struggle to decide if they should risk ruining a perfect memory with an attempt to recreate it.
SEGMENT 7 – I really need someone to explain this one to me. It seems like a very artsy, dramatic story full of metaphors, but again I wasn’t able to get my head around it. I almost found myself going out and buying the Cliff’s Notes just so I could figure out what exactly happened in the story. Visually, though, I have to admit it was beautiful.
SEGMENT 8 – This one was very different than all the rest in the sense that “love” in this story was really about the platonic love between a father and daughter. It was pretty brief, but definitely carried enough weight to be able tug at the heart strings a little bit.
SEGMENT 9 – Another artsy-er segment and, ironically enough, this one centered around an actual artist. It’s kind of interesting because neither the artist nor the muse that he has chosen can really communicate because they don’t speak the same language. Even without words, though, they seem to have a relationship that connects them more than most.
SEGMENT 4 (PART II) – I’m not sure why these two stories were considered the same segment because they don’t really tie in together which is why I am saying it is Part II. In this portion of the segment, Chris Cooper and Robyn Wright Penn have an intriguing conversation about how relationships can change over time and whether marriage really is for everyone.
SEGMENT 10 – This may take the title as my favorite. Eli Wallach and Cloris Leachman are old school Hollywood icons that I could watch anytime. Their portrayal of an aging married couple is definitely one that will make you smile, laugh, and even maybe cry.
So, with all these different stories, what can you really say about the film? For starters it’s unique. It’s fun but sad. It’s random but precise. It’s overwhelming but lacking. It’s narcissistic but humble. It’s eye-rolling but tender. It’s vibrant. It’s desolate. It’s uplifting. It’s depressing. It’s intense. It’s dull. It’s real. It’s fake. . . . It’s New York.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
The Book of Eli
The Book of Eli
"In a violent post-apocalyptic society, the drifter Eli has been wandering to west across North America for the last thirty years reading a unique book that he brings with him. He survives hunting small animals and seeking goods in destroyed houses and vehicles to trade in villages for water and supplies. When he reaches the village ruled by the powerful mobster Carnegie, the man offers a job to Eli to join his gang. Carnegie presses his blind lover Claudia to send her daughter Solara to convince Eli spending the night with him. The girl sees the book of Eli, and when Carnegie beats up on Claudia, she reveals that Eli has the sought book. Carnegie sends his gang to take the book from Eli, but the man is up for protecting the book with his life."
3 stars
The Book of Eli is yet another tale of a lone hero trying to survive in a post apocalyptic wasteland. As much as I hoped that this film would stand on its own, the similarities i t shares with Kevin Costner's Waterworld are hard to ignore. While Waterworld was set in a place where nothing but water existed, Eli's world is a vast desert where water is the most precious resource around. And in this version, there are still roving gangs preying on the weak, but instead of wave runners, these marauders do their duty on motorcycles.
One aspect of the movie that I probably liked was that they didn't delve too deeply into what created the wasteland. They mention that there was a "big flash" about 30 years ago, but any other details are left up to our own imaginations. I feel like it's a good artistic choice because it doesn't really matter to us why the world is the way it is. It doesn't really drive the plot, so there is no sense in wasting important time on it. The only pertinent information we do find out is that all religious texts were burned after the "big flash" because they are believed to have been the reason for the supposed great war that took place. This is really the point where the movie hit a crossroads. I believe that, had they expounded more on the religious undertones, it could have been a very interesting movie. Unfortunately they only touch on the issue briefly, instead choosing to waste more screen time on action sequences that really aren't that exhilarating to begin with.
The fact that all the bibles have been burned, makes Eli's possession of one all that more valuable. He believes that the book contains a message that could prove the be the saving grace of all mankind, while Gary Oldman's character is a tyrant who wants to use the book's words and influence as a way to increase his empire and become a despot. Again, another interesting point about modern religion, but one whose subject matter is dismissed almost as quickly as it is introduced.
The movie itself is just okay. Aesthetically speaking it is somewhat appealing, but that alone does not a great film make. We've all watched super hero and other action movies where we buy into the fact that our lone hero can take on a gang of 20 men and easily dispose of them with an array of well choreographed fight sequences. But this movie puts that faith to the test. After Eli manages to dodge about 200 bullets, he is miraculously able to take out 12 men (each with one shot a piece) almost making the viewer want to roll their eyes.
The pace of the film is almost unbearable for the first hour. While it's obvious the directors were trying to create a sense of drama with long, lingering takes, it instead has the opposite effect and in all truthfulness, made me glance more than once at my watch. Thankfully, Denzel (who had been "phoning in" his performance for the first half) finally comes alive and pulls off a memorable performance in the film's final 60 minutes. Mila Kunis does as good a job as I guess she can. While I respect her comedic ability, I've yet to see her in any dramatic roles that don't seem to be a casting choice based solely on her looks. But the best performance of all is given by Gary Oldman who just seems to be great in nearly every damn thing he does.
The ending does provide a couple twists, but they're more of the caliber that make you simply raise your eyebrows than jolting you to the edge of your seat in a sense of, well, . . . WTF.
The Book of Eli is yet another tale of a lone hero trying to survive in a post apocalyptic wasteland. As much as I hoped that this film would stand on its own, the similarities i t shares with Kevin Costner's Waterworld are hard to ignore. While Waterworld was set in a place where nothing but water existed, Eli's world is a vast desert where water is the most precious resource around. And in this version, there are still roving gangs preying on the weak, but instead of wave runners, these marauders do their duty on motorcycles.
One aspect of the movie that I probably liked was that they didn't delve too deeply into what created the wasteland. They mention that there was a "big flash" about 30 years ago, but any other details are left up to our own imaginations. I feel like it's a good artistic choice because it doesn't really matter to us why the world is the way it is. It doesn't really drive the plot, so there is no sense in wasting important time on it. The only pertinent information we do find out is that all religious texts were burned after the "big flash" because they are believed to have been the reason for the supposed great war that took place. This is really the point where the movie hit a crossroads. I believe that, had they expounded more on the religious undertones, it could have been a very interesting movie. Unfortunately they only touch on the issue briefly, instead choosing to waste more screen time on action sequences that really aren't that exhilarating to begin with.
The fact that all the bibles have been burned, makes Eli's possession of one all that more valuable. He believes that the book contains a message that could prove the be the saving grace of all mankind, while Gary Oldman's character is a tyrant who wants to use the book's words and influence as a way to increase his empire and become a despot. Again, another interesting point about modern religion, but one whose subject matter is dismissed almost as quickly as it is introduced.
The movie itself is just okay. Aesthetically speaking it is somewhat appealing, but that alone does not a great film make. We've all watched super hero and other action movies where we buy into the fact that our lone hero can take on a gang of 20 men and easily dispose of them with an array of well choreographed fight sequences. But this movie puts that faith to the test. After Eli manages to dodge about 200 bullets, he is miraculously able to take out 12 men (each with one shot a piece) almost making the viewer want to roll their eyes.
The pace of the film is almost unbearable for the first hour. While it's obvious the directors were trying to create a sense of drama with long, lingering takes, it instead has the opposite effect and in all truthfulness, made me glance more than once at my watch. Thankfully, Denzel (who had been "phoning in" his performance for the first half) finally comes alive and pulls off a memorable performance in the film's final 60 minutes. Mila Kunis does as good a job as I guess she can. While I respect her comedic ability, I've yet to see her in any dramatic roles that don't seem to be a casting choice based solely on her looks. But the best performance of all is given by Gary Oldman who just seems to be great in nearly every damn thing he does.
The ending does provide a couple twists, but they're more of the caliber that make you simply raise your eyebrows than jolting you to the edge of your seat in a sense of, well, . . . WTF.