Category: Cinema

{sidebar id=32}Guy Ritchie became one of my favorite (and
many others delighted fans`) directors after masterpieces like Lock, Stock
and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch. But the higher you climb, the
hardest the fall is, and that exactly happened with his previous work: Swept
Away, a movie to forget, featuring his wife Madonna, which was smashed
without mercy by critic and public.  

So there was a lot of curiosity around his
new film, Revolver, to see if Ritchie would come back to his origins.
And the initial plot certainly reminds his earlier films: gangsters, action,
acid dialogues… He even eliminated the scenes where Madonna appeared trying to
avoid the “kiss of death” that his wife had given to the previous failed work.
But once you get immersed in the story, you can see that there is not much left
from the first successful films mentioned above if not for the repeated
appearance of his “fetish” actor: Jason Statham, perfect in his work as
usual.  Ray Liotta appears as
maybe the best of the whole film, in the role of a tanned and despotic mafia
boss that totally suits him.

Ritchie had warned that this time he wanted
to make a film for intelligent people… and alas that the movie is not easy to
follow! The timeline is broken successively, the thoughts, the real facts and
the imagination of the characters is often mixed, and you really have to pay
attention to catch the subtle angles of the story. This time the sharp
dialogues are not aimed at making you smile, but at making you reflect about
some philosophical questions. The chess game and strategies to win is a great
leitmotiv all over the movie, and looks like Ritchie wanted to create a chess
game also inside our minds. But at the end my feeling is that the product got “over
baked”. Ritchie wanted to play to be a director resembling Christopher
Nolan, David Fincher and himself at the same time, instead of just being
happy of showing his personal style, leading to the viewers and critics to be
still trying to decide if this is a masterpiece, or a piece of shit. Decide
yourselves, but my advice is that maybe watching the film for a second time can
help you understand it more (or maybe not). I still prefer the Guy Ritchie less
philosophical and more into purely entertainment.

{sidebar id=28}Jim Carrey continues struggling with his status of comedy
actor trying twisted roles where he can show that he is able to provoke more
than laughs from the spectators. Sometimes results are huge successes and great
interpretations like in The Truman Show (1998), Man on the Moon
(1999) or Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004) and some other
times we have to resign with a weaker result as happens in this Joel
Schumacher’s The Number 23.

The first half of the film looks promising, with Carrey in the role of
Walter Sparrow, a normal and good citizen that gets hooked step by step and by
some mysterious circumstances to a book that keeps plenty of reminiscences with
is own life. But an initial plot that could have been turned by Schumacher into
an exciting and mysterious exploration of the human mind starts to feel predictable,
boring and dull from the moment when Sparrow’s family takes an active role in
helping with the investigation.

The product smells too much of Carrey needing once more to reaffirm
himself as a “serious” actor, repeating once more registers seen in previous
works. At this level most of the audience already knows about the good skills
of Mr Carrey, so he could try to focus on choosing a bit more solid scripts
that can offer more extra excitement during the last and final twist. Virginia
Madsen and Logar Lerman are just correct in their roles of wife and
son of Sparrow without any special brightness in their work, while Ronda
Mitra and Lynn Collins bring some fresh and needed sensuality to the
storyline.

Not a bad effort by Schumacher, but the film had all the ingredients
needed to be the main course of the menu, and finally lacked of some spices
that turned it into a normal appetizer.

{sidebar id=29}In the world
where we live nowadays, full of intolerance, racism and hate that seems to grow
up without reason from every corner, films like Freedom Writers
are needed and received as a fresh breeze that brings some hope.
 

Based on the
book The Freedom Writers Diary that compiles the story of Erin Gruwell
and her pupils during her first years as teacher in a problematic and violent
high school in Los Angeles,
the film teaches that the first knowledge that the pupils must learn in the
classrooms is respect for the others. Hilary Swank is convincing as the
naïve but strong idealistic teacher, and Jack Dempsey plays his part as
forgotten husband who spends his lonely hours watching matches on TV.

The story,
which happens mostly inside the classrooms, has some really emotive moments
when the youngsters remember their relatives and friends fallen due to
violence, or when Gruwell make them face the story of Ana Frank and the
Nazi Holocaust.  Sometimes situations
cross the border of melodramatic and turn into ridiculous, with some dialogues
that we hardly expect to happen in a real classroom, but all in all, the film
is well enough balanced and achieves the goal of transmitting a message of
hope, understanding and equality for those viewers who want to listen to it.
For some of you, it can make you take a pencil again after a long time and
forget for some hours the personal computer on exchange of the familiar
notebook, or simply make you reflect for some minutes that the problems of your
neighbour are not so far from your own ones.

{sidebar id=31}After
watching this film, my first feeling was of annoyance. I was feeling
quite angry at the point that the main core of the events (although
modified for the film) had really happened in real life years ago.
That made me reflect how stupid the human being can be when we see a
tragedy coming on and we do nothing to solve it, thinking that others
will make us the favour to erase the problems.

In any case, the
feeling of annoyance also made me realized that the acting skills of
the young actors had been pretty good, since they had reached the
point of making me hate them during the last scenes. I must say that
I have never been a great fan of Justin Timberlake, but I must
admit that here he is probably the best of the whole film: A
character that can be sweet, naïve, stupid and cruel at the same
time. Alpha Dog features young guys playing to be big fishes into the
crime world surrounded by an environment of luxury, parties, pretty
girls and drugs. Maybe the atmosphere is a bit exaggerated, but it
adds a good touch of decadence to the action.

Ben
Foster as the histrionic older brother of the kidnapped child has
some brilliant moments, although sometimes he suffers of overacting,
like in the scene when answering the telephone call that turns to be
stupidly unmeasured. Saving the distances, during some moments he
could remind you of Edward Norton in American History X.
Bruce Willis is correct in his small role, but Sharon Stone
is not in her most brilliant movie. The part where he appears
interviewed at the end of the film disguised as a fat woman does not
make much sense with the rest of the plot, and does not add anything
to the film. The last minutes could have been perfectly erased, but
Casavettes wants to stretch the storytelling too much, and that
makes the film to lose power after the climax. Not a bad reflection
about the MTV American way of living, where owning in a big villa and
playing to be the hardest gangster seems to be the coolest ultimate
feature to gain respect in a group of friends, but the film in
general turns to be a bit too much artificial.

{sidebar id=26}I read in an
interview made to Brad Pitt years ago, after having acted in Troy, that
he had to work his ass hard to look as fit as Aquiles since the guy was the
best warrior in all the history. Then imagine the best gang of warriors of all
the history, 300 men whose only purpose was to fight and die in the battlefield
and your mind can go with no difficulty directly to the festival of biceps,
six-packs and flesh shown in 300. Many have complained about the
excessive cult to the perfection of the bodies exhibited all around the film,
but for me the explanation is quite much simple: they look fit because those
warriors had to be fit.

Although the
film is not as bright and revolutionary as Sin City,
director Zack Snyder accomplishes a more than decent job here,
considering the extreme difficulties when facing an adaptation of this kind. At
least the main point of the story is clear; Spartans are a warrior society so
the backbone of the films is the battles. There is a lot of blood spilt and
some artistic slow motion footage that brings fight scenes into a new level of
plasticity. But the bellicosity of the film makes otherwise boring the scenes
when the action slow downs as the political plot inside the walls of Sparta and
the continuous narration in voice over turns to be annoying and excessive. Gerard
Butler plays a convincing role as Leonidas, carrying a look that oscillates
between anger and madness that suits the historical character perfectly, and Lena
Headey as Queen Gorgo, plays effectively her role being sensual and
beautiful but also a firm and strong Spartan woman (nothing to do with the
ridiculous role of Angelina Jolie in Alexander).

It seems
that Iranians are quite busy lately filling complains about western films
(recently it happened also with the adaptation of the comic Persépolis
by Marjane Satrapi) since some sectors do not seem much happy about the
treatment given to their nation. In any case, do not look here for veracity or
historical accuracy because the main goal of 300 is to entertain. And
the mission is accomplished.

{sidebar id=23} Director Mark Steven Johnson was not very popular character for
comic fans after his weak adaptations of previous comics Elektra and
Daredevil. It seems that he does not want to “disappoint” anyone with this
reputation completing with this Ghost Rider a trilogy of films to forget.
Not even a couple of Hollywood super stars as
Nicholas Cage as Johnny Blaze/Ghost Rider and Peter Fonda as the devil
himself are able to disguise the lack of quality all over the film.

The storyline is very weak, the film is as predictable as it can get, so
it turns to be horribly boring. The decoration look cheap and the special
effects look totally artificial. Dialogues make you laugh, but not exactly due
to their inventive and nobody believes even that Cage has that hyper-muscled
body for real. Peter Fonda looks plausible but the gang of demons that wander
with Blackheart would not scare a 5 year old child. I think that Wes Bentley
was looking even scarier when filming a plastic bag in American Beauty
than here…

Added to all this Eva Mendes’s and Brett Cullen’s lines
can make you feel like going to prepare some popcorns in the middle of the
action.

The question is: Was this adaptation needed? In recent years we have
assisted to the chained release of many movies whose inspiration is taken
directly from such a rich source as comics is. There have been products for all
kind of tastes, and not all the adaptations are bad (look at the excellent Spiderman
3 released not a long time ago). But maybe it is about time in Hollywood industry to think twice before wasting budget
in another bad film that will pass to story with no glory. Next time that
Steven Johnson’s name will be announced for a new adaptation, I am afraid that
more than one comic fans body will shake in pain. It is known that Cage
collaborated actively in the writing process of the film. From here, we can
just advice Nicholas to keep just in acting roles.

{sidebar id=21} The king of the
comedy is back, and stronger than ever! 2006 was an important year for Eddie
Murphy with two new films released: Dreamgirls and the one in
spotlight here: Norbit.  

After making us laugh with his voice as the Donkey
of Shrek, the help of new technologies plays an important role again, (same
than happened in latest products as The Nutty Professor 1 and 2), to
transform Murphy into three totally opposite characters: The young, sweet, naïve
and sometimes slow minded Norbit, his ugly fat wife Rasputia and the Asian
owner of the orphanage where Norbit was raised, Mr Wong. A multi-role formula
that has worked pretty well for Murphy all over the years.  It comes to my mind in his extended filmography
the exhilarating title Coming to America where he played already four
different roles! Those were “Chocolate sexy” times!

And what can you expect from Norbit?
Well, the story is well known: A poor guy married to the wrong woman, and whose
old love from child times appears again to bring fresh air to his life. But in
this case, the cocktail has tones of…weight personified in Rasputia, Norbit’s
dominant and monstrous wife, who heads the clan of brothers that rule the city
with the muscle: the Latimores.

Murphy’s biggest virtue is that he knows how
to make fun of everything, starting from his own black race and continuing with
all kind of stereotypes. The movie does not bring anything new to the comedy
genre, but I must recognize that there were some exhilarating moments where I
could not stop laughing. As co-starts, a couple of big names in Hollywood: Cuba
Gooding Jr. and Thandie Newton, but the ones who really take the
glory after Murphy are Norbit´s curious pimps friends Eddie Griffin and Katt
Williams. Norbit is recommended for watching with the family or with
the girlfriend in a rainy evening.

{sidebar id=22} We saw snipers in
films like the new version of The Jackal (1997, and by the way, for
those lovers of the detail, the action of the movie was starting in Helsinki) or most
recently with Jarhead, a shout of alert against the paranoid mood that
accompanies the American soldiers while staying in Iraq.

I must
recognize that until now, Antoine Fuqua was a director that had never been
able to convince me. I always consider him too lucky to handle enormous budgets
for creating mediocre products. He is the man behind movies like Replacement
Killers or Training Day, and although he always achieves some
exciting action sequences, their films have always lacked some “punch” to turn
them into real classics. But well, it seems that he has finally
achieved it with The Shooter, his most solid film so far.

The storyline
is good with excellent twists; the action is astonishing, the actors are credible
all the time and you feel hooked to the plot from the beginning to the end.
Probably the success is in great part due to the excellent cast: big names and
great recognized actors like Danny Glover, Elias Koteas and Rade Serbedzija
together with promising new blood like Rhona Mitra and Michael Peña.
The main role as the “difficult-to-kill” sniper goes for Mark Wahlberg,
who shows film after film great skills and good taste when choosing new works, not
only like a tough guy but also touching other genres like comedy (check the
excellent I love Huckabees). Does anybody still remember him in his young
years as the political non-correct white raper singer Marky Mark? The
times are changing…

I hope that Fuqua
can make honour to his status in Hollywood
in the future with more interesting works like this The Shooter. One of
the best action movies of the year.

{sidebar id=19}
Reality and
fantasy world get mixed in the last work of director Guillermo del Toro: Pan´s
Labyrinth, being the second of his films framed on times of post civil
war in Spain,
after his terror tale in an isolated orphanage in The Devil's Backbone
(2001).  

The film is
visually astonishing, with detailed and marvellous scenarios that catch totally
the attention of the spectator in the fantasy sequences, all seen through the
eyes of Ofelia (Ivana Baquero) who turns to be one of the youngest
revelations of Spanish cinema. But the narration has undoubtedly its best
moments when the very real characters step into screen. The cast of Spanish
well known actors is simply magnificent, with an excellent Álex Angulo
as the rebel rural doctor and one none less excellent and more mature Maribel
Verdú, far from the usual erotic roles of years ago. All of them turning
around Ofelia's stepfather, Captain Vidal interpreted by Sergi Lopez in
a superb role  as a violent fascist who
has to face the guerrilla hidden in the mountains of north Spain 4 years after
the end of the Civil War. Lopez is almost better known in France than in Spain and after
this praising work, it is about time that his skills get more recognized
internationally.

The film is
a beautiful cry in favour of the liberty and the hope in own believes until the
end, surrounded by a fairytale atmosphere. But do not get mistaken, this is not
a film to offer to your children while eating popcorns in front of the TV set.
Violence is often and brutally present all over the film, and the final is not exactly
what you would call “happy made in Hollywood”.
All in all, Del Toro has achieved a very difficult task: fidelity with history in
a film where historical happenings are wrapped into a fabulous atmosphere,
achieving a product that can satisfy equally to fans of American and European
cinema. Brilliant!

{sidebar id=15}The first
feature film of Scottish director Kevin MacDonald focuses on the figure of Idi
Amin, army officer and president of Uganda between 1971 and 1979. But rather
than being a biopic of the atrocities and actions of the dictator, the film shows
the relationship between Amin, played by Forest Whitaker, and the fictional
character of his personal physician, Nicholas Garrigan (James McAvoy). It is this
relationship what creates a consistent story and takes a glimpse at Amin’s
brutal regime.

The viewer
discovers the character of Idi Amin through Dr Garrigan’s eyes, whose vision of
his friend and leader drifts from sympathy to fear. And so the mood of the film
varies. Considering the subject matter, there is much comedy. The funny first
part of the movie precedes the uncomfortable course of events.

Much has
been talked about Whitaker’s performance, including an Academy Award. But
indeed, his performance is impressive. He steals the show, even though the
screenplay seems to appoint the physician as the main role in the film.
Whitaker recreates the complex psychology of Idi Amin and presents the leader’s
paranoia and egomania.

The Last
King of Scotland lives up to the hype with a solid narrative and its focus on
people and its relations, putting aside easy clichés.

{mosimage}Based on Zoe Heller's book, one of
the most exciting female acting duels that you could imagine has arrived on DVD:
Barbara vs. Sheba,
or what is the same, Judi Dench vs. Cate Blanchett, both winners
of the Academy Award in previous years. Notes on a Scandal, directed by Richard Eyre,
introduce us into a normal English school scenario where two different
professors will become close friends, linked in their destinies in a fatal way:
The old and grumpy Barbara trying to guide the young and beauty Sheba.

{sidebar id=9}Cate Blanchett really looks astonishing in
the film (not a surprise for many since more than one fell in love with her
ambiguous Galadriel during Lord of the Rings, even rejecting Arwen’s
charms). The friendship relation will became vicious when Barbara discovers
that Sheba, who is married and with a daughter of 16 and a son with Down’s syndrome,
is having sex relations with a 15 years old pupil from her school. But more
than judging the morality of the actions by the professor, the plotline is
aimed at showing how dangerous can be to share secrets with the wrong friends. Both
actresses are superb in their roles, but I was expecting a bit more of “punch”
for the last third of the film.

The role of the young boy is pretty much
obliterated in many parts of the movie, and the shared scenes between Dench and
Blanchett turn to be a bit boring at the end. The best moments usually happen
when there is a third guest between the two main characters, as when Barbara is
sharing dinner with the family (mention apart for the great job of the betrayed
husband Bill Nighy), or in the erotic scenes with Blanchett and the
young Andrew Simpson (who made his debut here while having to assist to
his own normal lessons at school).

There was quite a polemic when the film was
about to be released about the sex scenes in the British media, but from my
point of view, that part has been treated with extreme delicacy. In any case,
if you want to find the “leitmotiv” that leads to the female characters in the
film, think more about loneliness and boredom than about lust.