Review CIII - Short Poppies

Review 103
Short Poppies (2014 - present)

Hello everyone! I'm done exams, though I think I'm about to get more busy than I was before. With trips being planned, work, volunteering, it'll be a busy summer, but it'll be a lot better than my past semester. Early classes and I just don't get along. Anyway, I've reviewed a show before and figured I would review another one since we're being all fancy this month. I finished watching this show a little while ago, but I remembered it the other day when I was thinking I felt like reviewing something. The show is by creator Rhys Darby called Short Poppies. If any of you know the show Flight of the Conchords - you really need to know the show, not just their acts - then you'll recognise Rhys Darby as Murray Hewitt, the really garbage wonderful manager of the group.

The show is a mockumentary where David Farrier, a real-life reporter and actor, interviews various "short poppies" from The Bay, a fictional town in New Zealand. While all these extraordinary people differ in what they do, what they enjoy, or what they obsess about, there's one thing they all have in common - they're all played by Rhys Darby. Each episode follows a new character, though we get an interaction between the characters - as well as follow townspeople - throughout the show.

I would explain the characters, but seriously, it would ruin the surprise. Thus, I will speak only general or mention in passing some characters, without going into too much detail. But guys? Guys. This show is adorable. I absolutely loved it. It's not necessarily laugh-out-loud every time, but situations happen that made me smile like mad, hug my pillow extra hard, and just want to drink the pure sugar it gave. Here I am complaining about Wes Anderson and the pure sweetness he delivers, but here, maybe because it was just cute and not trying to be adult, I loved it. Also, the opening was very creative. I loved it. I thought it introduced all the characters well, was quick, but explained what the show was about right from the start. Honestly, very, very impressed.

What if you don't like cuteness? Would you still like this show? Well... It's really cute, so maybe not. But some episodes are less cute. The Ron Taylor episode was by far one of my favourites because of the cuteness level, but the Mary Ledbetter one was less so. However, it was probably the least favourite episode of mine because of it. In fact, as the show drew to a close, I wasn't as impressed. The first few episodes were good, great even, but the last ones... I don't know. Not bad, but I guess the characters were not my thing. Still, I would tell you to sit down and watch the whole thing. What I really liked, you might not like as much, and the last few episodes were still good - just not my favourite. But that's just a minor "criticism"...

I guess I have to cut the review here because I don't want to reveal anything, yet all I can say is I liked it. It may be difficult to find this series, though I think it's available on Netflix or something of the sort, but I highly recommend Short Poppies. There's only one season so far, but I got the impression the show was done after its final episode. It's eight episodes long, so you could easily go through it. Thus, I say go for it. It's cute, sweet, and a short poppy on its own.

Review CII - Sullivan's Travels

Review 102
Sullivan's Travels (1941)

Hey guys! I'm so on a roll this month - I'm very proud. I think having the freedom to stay up until three in the morning is letting my creative side loose. I was studying, but decided that since it was almost two in the morning, it might be a good idea to take a break. What's a better break than to review a film? And in fact, I think this may be the oldest film I've ever sat through. I tried to watch Metropolis from 1927 once on a flight, but that didn't work out too well... Anyway, I introduce you to Preston Sturges' Sullivan's Travels starring Joel McCrea and Veronica Lake. And yes, it is referencing Gulliver's Travels.

John L. Sullivan (Joel McCrea) is a famous picture maker, a director known for his light-hearted comedies. However, given the times, Sullivan decides it's time to make a dramatic film. "But you know nothing about hardship!" everyone claims. In response, Sullivan decides to journey off as a tramp in order to find out just how hard life can be. Along the way, he meets a young girl (Veronica Lake) who decides to help him out in his endeavours.

The film, about a man trying to escape comedies, turns itself into a classic comedy. I've already stated before, I'm sure, that I'm not a big comedy fan in general. But I thought the premise of this one was interesting so I decided to give it a shot. It was wonderful. Already the opening thanks to "all the clown, the buffoons who make us laugh" made my heart melt. I realised with that opening that the film was released about the same time that the United States entered the second World War - around December 1941. I seem to be getting evidence it was released 1942 in January, but bear with me, okay? While the majority of the public opposed joining the war since it had started in 1939, I guess people realised that Franklin D. Roosevelt, the president of the United States at the time, was preparing for the war nonetheless. I don't know - I think that fact alone blows my mind. This film is pre-World War II. That's pretty damn old, no? Anyway, as I was saying, the opening was absolutely heart-warming given the circumstance at the time (I am a typical woman, aren't I?). So that already had the film on my side.

The dialogue/plot/characters proved themselves to be clever - and with just a little bit of sex in it! This poor guy (ironic on so many levels) thinks now is the time to stop making funny films because of dire circumstances, so he heads off to live like a tramp. Hilarity ensues. The car chase seems to come out of nowhere and it was great - my boyfriend and I were really impressed. When Sullivan ends up at some woman's house, helping her out, when all she's looking for is a nice, young, firm... *cough* Well, that was funny. It's typical stuff - by today's standards - but the film does it well nonetheless. I thought Veronica Lake's character was sweet, willing to help out Sullivan on his travels. And everyone else, from the following press, the butlers, and studio bosses... It just worked. It was fun and cute, light-hearted, but the ending really spoke volumes. I think sometimes, as I grow older, the world really weighs down on you and you sometimes find it hard to laugh given all the garbage, all the filth in this world. But you know what? We have to take things humorously at times in order to get by. And I can't help but agree with the ending. It has been shown that even just smiling can trick your mind into thinking you're happy - if only momentarily! So let's all get a little happy, shall we?

I would totally recommend Sullivan's Travels. It might be old, but it still deserves a watch. It's not too long, and some of the comedy is cute and just plain works. Preston Sturges? Wonderful job. Just wonderful!

Also, because I was curious about the height difference, Joel McCrea is actually pretty tall - about six foot two or 187 cm - but Veronica Lake was also short - 150 cm or about four foot eleven.

Review CI - Die Blechtrommel

Review 101
The Tin Drum (1979)

I finished reading Günter Grass' Die Blechtrommel, aka The Tin Drum, a few months ago, only to find out there was a movie adaptation that had won an Academy Award for Best Foreign Picture back when it was released in 1979. Of course this made me very curious because The Tin Drum is a magic realistic piece, i.e. a novel that takes a surrealist turn and everyone takes it as normal. For example, in The Tin Drum (movie and book), little Oskar Matzerath (played by David Bennent in the movie) decides, at three-years-old, to stop growing. So he throws himself down the stairs of the cellar so everyone believes that was the cause and blame Alfred Matzerath (played by Mario Adorf in the movie) for leaving the cellar door open. I kept meaning to watch it, but then other films got in the way. However, Günter Grass recently passed away, so I decided that I'd check out the film after much delay.

The story doesn't actually begin with Oskar - instead, we must get to know his family. In Kashubia (northwest Poland now), a young Anna Bronski (Tina Engel), who wears five skirts, is busy picking her potatoes and cooking them for consumption when she spots a young man being chased down by policemen. She allows him to hide under her skirts, but the two decide to dance the tango as he gets away, and she falls pregnant with Agnes Koljaiczek (Angela Winkler), Oskar's mother. Agnes begins a relationship with her cousin, Jan Bronski (Daniel Olbrychski), though marries Alfred Matzerath (Mario Adorf). A child, Oskar, is born, though his mind is not that of a child, deciding that he'd prefer to stay three for ever after receiving his red-and-white tin drum.

I should be honest right now and say the book was not a favourite of mine. It was an interesting read at times, but it was quite long and, though I have some Lithuanian/German/Austrian blood in me, I have never been to the area and know very little pre-twentieth century history of the whole thing, and so I have very little knowledge of the history behind Poland and Germany, let alone who the Kashubians were! Basically, from what I understand, the Kashubians are an ethnic group that were forced into modern-day Poland, so, as Jan Bronski says in the film (or maybe it was someone else), they're not Polish enough or German enough for either side. However, that is as much as I know. Wikipedia also doesn't seem to provide much information, mentioning that the people occupy a border region with Germany of Poland in the north. I even asked my grandfather, but he didn't seem to know who they were - though maybe it didn't help that I was probably confused as to the name of the people. All that to say, some of the stuff really flew over my head in the film and the book. Is that to say you won't enjoy it? Not quite. I mean, it still takes place during the Third Reich, as well as its downfall, so, slight spoilers I guess, you get to see how the Nazis tried to suppress the Polish resistance in Germany and how the Russians raped whoever they could. And this is stuff I'm sure you know about. It was just pre-World War I and II that the book just escaped me. I really ought to look up about the Kashubians!

Okay, I really went on a talk about Kashubia. As I was saying, the book was not a favourite of mine. Though not as detailed as a Russian novel, it nonetheless has that kind of feel, in a way. I really don't want to compare the two because it's different, but still, you really have to be in the mood to read that stuff. It's deep, strong, powerful, and detailed. So sometimes I'd pick up the book and ravish it, whereas other times, I was just reading for the sake of getting by. I wasn't sure how I'd feel about the film to start off with, but since the book did a great job with surrealism, I wanted to see how the film would handle it. And honestly, it did it surprisingly well! I was very impressed. The initial scene with the skirts was actually really good in my opinion. The birthing scene was creepy...? If only because David Bennent is playing the baby as well. But yeah, it took that surrealist feel super well. Good job, director Volker Schlöndorff! Very impressive! I thought it was funny how in the book, Oskar would see things going on between his mother and Jan Bronski and the descriptions were obvious as to what it was, but still kind of sugar-coated. In the movie, though, they just go ahead and show the sexual acts they had going on between them. I liked the way it was executed in the book a lot, but it's a film, so you can only show what they're doing. I guess they could have had a voice over instead, but this film is from the seventies - they're going to show nudity and sex whenever they can! And the book had sex, so the film takes every advantage.

I could go on about small details, but I don't think you guys would be too happy about that. The film ends with Maria Matzerath (Katharina Thalbach) moves away from Danzig, Germany to Düsseldorf, so stops short of where the book ended. That was a bit too bad because it would have been fun to see the whole story. But the film was already over two and half hours long, so I guess that would have meant another part. Anyway, the film is interesting. Not really my thing, but neither was the book. Still, looking back, I'm glad I read the novel because the whacky stories were quite imaginative and funny at times, while still providing a view of Poland/Germany, and the movie really tries its best to stay true to the source material, even the magic realism parts. Try reading the book - it's pretty crazy. And if you lose the patience to read it, check out the film. Not my thing, but I still managed to sit through the book and movie. That's saying a lot! Rest in peace, Günter Grass.

Review C - Bullitt

Review C
Bullitt (1968)

大家好! Hello everyone! Honestly, I've been feeling review-y lately, so I figure I should take advantage of this and watch a film. Also, there's a big "C" in the title. That's right - I made it to one hundred reviews! I've screwed up the numbering before, but this should be right. Somehow I had the dedication to write one hundred reviews and it only took three years (it's unfortunate sarcasm is not evident through a written text). It also really puts into perspective how many films I have watched. I mean, I've watched more than I have reviewed, but still. Damn. One hundred films? Crazy.

Anyway, I didn't take anything super special for my hundredth review because I just happened to watch Peter Yates' Bullitt after craving something a little sixties-ish. The film stars Steve McQueen, Robert Vaughn, Don Gordon, Jacqueline Bisset, Norman Fell (holy shit! Three's Company's Mr. Roper!), and Simon Oakland. With Steve McQueen, you know this is going to get dirty. Plus, you may have already heard of this film... But we'll get to that. Also, ignore the Polish (Polish, right?) on the poster - I just really loved the art design!

Jack Bullitt (Steve McQueen) is a sociable lieutenant for the San Francisco police, well known by the media, who is given an important assignment - he must protect a witness, Johnny Ross (Pat Renella), who will be appearing in a senate sub-committee hearing on organised crime (thank you, Wikipedia) for rookie politician Walter Chalmers (Robert Vaughn). Him and two of his colleagues, Dolgetti (Don Gordon) and Stanton (Carl Reindel), will be in charge of protecting Ross for the next forty hours. However, even before day one finishes, Stanton and Ross are shot after Ross unlocks the door for the unknown perpetrators. But why does he do this? Bullitt thinks there's more than meets the eye, and with Chalmers breathing down his back, he'll be sure to figure this one out, if only to prove to Chalmers exactly why the media is so impressed with him.

So why would you know this film? Could it be this?

This might be a scene you know since it's one of the most well-known car chases in all of Hollywood history - maybe even film history? I hadn't seen the film, hadn't known it by name, but I knew about this car chase. I remember seeing part of it when I was young. At the time, I didn't care for it, though I did find the cars bouncing around pretty funny, but now, I think it's super well done. There's no crazy music playing in the background - actually because Lalo Schifrin, an Argentine who composed the score for the film, said the score was strong enough as it is, so the car scene didn't need any music. And it really didn't. It was awesome to hear the screeching, the bouncing, rubber burnin', all that jazz. The way it was edited was legit - even if I noticed the repeated green Volkswagen Beetle! Yes, it really was super legit. And Lalo Schifrin was right - the music is sexy as it is. Yeah, yeah, it's got that sixties cop feel, but I would totally never turn that down. Ever. I've actually been listening to the soundtrack while writing this review. I fell in love with the music, really touched me. But I think maybe I'm taking it too far. Anyway, it really worked in the film!

While the car chase was spectacular, I have to say that the whole film was shot beautifully. It had interesting angles, interesting shots. Steve McQueen was beautiful, but seriously, those shots. It's sad that nowadays, you get a typical action film and it's just... bland. It's full of typical shots that never amount to anything. But back in the day, even with a simple film like Bullitt, people cared how the film's shots turned out. I mean, I remember watching Get Carter and feeling the same way. I'm sure I brought up the beauty of the shots of that film in my review. Maybe both are just exceptions, but I don't think so. I think back then it was something you cared to do, something you learned, but now, for whatever reason, you just get that one director that tries to speak to the audience through the framing of a scene. Otherwise, a typical action film will be cars, girls, and mediocre spam. But hey, I only hear about the good (and really bad) films of the sixties - I don't hear about all the films from the sixties, so I could be completely wrong.

The plot, well, is okay. I found it kind of hard to follow, but maybe it's because I was obsessed with yelling out "Bullitt" every time I had the chance. The plot also kind of took a downfall on characters sometimes, too. Slight spoilers but not really since it's in the trailer, when Cathy, Jacqueline Bisset's character, tells Bullitt he is too "violent" and led by "violence and death", I just shook my head. He's a cop and you thought he picked roses? Seemed like a useless scene. And Captain Bennett, Simon Oakland's character, seemed kind of... weird. I don't know. I liked how he believed Bullitt and didn't just break the book over his head like the chief editor or runner of the newspaper or whatever does in All the President's Men (spoilers for that movie - the guy basically just yells at Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford, saying they don't have enough, until the very, very end). Still, he just seemed kind of... weird sometimes. I can't quite put my finger on it, so maybe I'm just crazy.

Bottom line, while this film might not have the most exceptional plot, the shots are cool, the action scenes are cool, and Steve McQueen is cool. I'd recommend it to any movie fan, especially if you like cars. Vroom vroom, mustang go!

Review XCIX - Watership Down

Review XCIX
Watership Down (1978)

Hello everyone! I'm back and here to review a film you may have heard of. Remember when Donnie Darko was one of those cool films? One of those kind of weird films? Well, now I know films like Qui êtes-vous, Polly Maggoo? (don't watch it - it's bad), so Donnie Darko is really just typical American bullshit now. I say this after thinking the film was god-send when I was a teenager. Anyway, remember that scene with where they discuss that film there and Donnie's like screw the rabbits? I'm going to talk about the film they watched, Martin Rosen's animated film Watership Down, based on the awesome book by Richard Adams. And I really liked that book. I even read it again before watching the film for the first time so I could compare. And yes, it isn't fair, but the 1978 version of Watership Down is considered a classic, so I wanted to be especially critique-y about it.

Fiver (voiced by Richard Briers) has a vision one day that the warren he lives in will be destroyed. His brother, Hazel (John Hurt), is quick to believe him, but unfortunately the Chief Rabbit (Ralph Richardson) does not listen to their warnings, so they gather a group of rabbits to head off and face the storm. They include Bigwig (Michael Graham Cox), Blackberry (Simon Cadell), Pipkin (Roy Kinnear), Silver (Terence Rigby), Dandelion (Richard O'Callaghan), and Violet (no voice actress so you know she dies early on). The group will face new dangers with only Frith and El-ahrairah on their side.

All right, so, the film was very 70s. This doesn't mean it's a bad thing, but given it's animated, you can really feel it's dated in the techniques used. However, I still liked it. The story is about rabbits, so it's only dated in terms of the animation quality - otherwise, I think any child could understand the film. But by god is the violence real. People talk about The Lion King and the death of the dad (Mufasa was his name? I dunno. I didn't grow up with the movie and I didn't like The Lion King when I saw it). Guys. Watership Down takes it to a whole new level. The field covered in blood? That's only the beginning. There's blood and death all around this film - it's crazy. And that's why, while the book could probably be read to a child of six or seven, I'd wait to show them the movie. I could see a six-year-old crying in fear after this film. Maybe I'd be too soft a parent, but damn, guys, this film is violent. But I like it for that. It doesn't sugar coat anything. It shows the savagery of animals - including humans - and really puts death in your face. I mean, the book does it too, but when a child is that young, they might have an active imagination, but the details of DEATH might escape them. Anyway, violence aside, I didn't mind the film. I hated what they did to Kehaar (Zero Mostel... Now I understand), making him just some comic relief (as expected given the voice actor), and I was kind of sad that they took out some details, but I had to be realistic in my expectations given the film is a little less than an hour and a half and the book is almost 400 pages (my edition was, anyway. Either way, long!). They really did do their best to include all details from the book, just changing things around a bit. So really, the film did a good job of adapting the book. I would have liked to hear more from the characters, but again, if you're looking for the full story, go to the book. And as a stand-alone, the film was good. It was hopeful, cute, violent, and heroic. Hazel was awesome, Fiver was cute, Pipkin had the deepest voice and that was totally unexpected (I laughed every time, you have no idea)... It works. There's something to be said for it. And if you're interested, I'd say go for it. I had a good time, even though I balled my eyes out. I guess some things never change, even as an adult.

"But wait!" you say. "Is Donnie right? Are the rabbits not representing people?" Richard Adams, the author, claimed the book was about rabbits and nothing else, i.e. there were no political statements being made by the book. This gets more debatable. I've heard the argument countless times that maybe the author didn't mean for the pipe to be a penis (Freud), maybe we just assume that it has a deeper meaning. And that can be true. Still, though, I find it much more fulfilling to get more out of a story than just a superficial layer. And in fact, I think good authors can try and do that. Look at Stanley Kubrick and how deep his films can be. He is for sure trying to do something more with his films, and it's something he even seems to encourage. While some won't really want to look deeper than just, "He killed her with the penis-shaped statue" (I'm on a phallic roll here!), if it's something that interests you, why not? If you see something more and it helps you understand something, why not? And if the story is just entertaining to you, then why not? It goes either way. Maybe the rabbits represent us, maybe they don't. I leave it up to you (but you're wrong if you think differently than me).

Bottom line, Watership Down is a fun film, short, sweet yet bitter, and worth a watch if you're looking for something... different. It is violent, so I wouldn't advise it for young children. But what do I know? And the book? Read it. I don't care how old you are - read it. It was so fun.

Bonus Review - Hotline Miami

Bonus Review
Hotline Miami
(also known as Alex is in final season and playing video games instead of studying)

It started first after watching Tabu, which was a nice film, though difficult to review. Then I watched a super long documentary on World War II and the Third Reich, which took up all of my March. Then I almost lost part of my finger in a blender - don't ask. I recently watched another film that I will most likely review, but then I got caught up with last-minute semester stuff, as well as some lab work, so I ended up never being home and being absolutely exhausted. And in the midst of this, I picked up Dennaton Games' 2012 Hotline Miami. I'm really bad at making decisions sometimes, heh. But let me explain.

Me and games are... acquaintances. We hang out sometimes, but the games that I've stayed with and completed, I could probably count on one hand. I've played some multiplayer, cooperative games like League of Legends, Dota, and Left 4 Dead 2, but honestly, I never really put my heart into them. And I've come to realise why - I really like games with stories. But the stories better be good. I tried Amnesia: The Dark Descent... Yeah, it was boring. I tried playing it with a friend, and sure, I could turn off all the lights to try and get into the mood, but the plot was not intriguing enough. But Silent Hill 2? I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream? Interesting plots that contributed to the feeling. I liked it. I continued through because I wanted to know more. There are exceptions, but anyway, let's cut a story short. You may have also noticed a common theme from those two games. That's right, sex- I mean, psychologically straining situations for the characters. And that's probably why I went for Hotline Miami. But we'll get to that.

Hotline Miami 2: Wrong Number recently came out, and I got a glimpse of its aesthetics, and I thought, "Wow, this seems legit." I watched one scene from the game - I was hooked. But I'm a bit of an anal person, a perfectionist if you will. I want things done in order, completed one hundred percent. So I decided to pick up the first one, even though I had been introduced to it almost two years ago and was sure it was too hard.

It's not. I mean, it's challenging. But let me explain the gameplay. It's a 2D top-down game where you basically beat/shoot the bejesus out of everyone. You have unlimited tries, and trust me when I say you'll use them. I went through some levels where I hit R on my keyboard five billion times. But that keeps you going because you can always go back to the level later and when you do finally clear the stage, you feel even more rewarded because the R-button repeat is done for this floor. And did I mention it's gory as hell? I like it.

Now, while the gameplay is addictive and challenging enough to keep me going, it's the plot that got me hyped to begin with. I won't go into too much detail, but basically you play this guy called Jacket living in Miami in the 80s (time to call the Cubans). That's not his real name, but you know how people might know you for your hair or gait? This guy is known for his jacket. Yeah... That's all I got. Anyway, he begins receiving these mysterious phone calls that basically lead him to killing a bunch of Russian mafia gang members, but he doesn't know who is sending these calls or why he was chosen (or maybe we just don't know?). But while he is mostly a silent protagonist (Lufia: The Ruins of Lore anyone?), we still get a good look into his psyche. And I like that stuff in my games. And I like the way they go about it - though I will say that Hotline Miami 2 really seemed to take everything up a notch, but still, the first one deserves its place. Plus, Hotline Miami 2 is a sequel after all, so you'll miss out on some plot exposition. Oh, and did I mention that the soundtrack for both games has a neo-eighties groove going on? Yeah. Awesome.

That's all I got for you. I don't play games, so this review is a mess. Still, I wanted to make sure you guys didn't think I completely abandoned you. And I thought it might be good to recommend the one game I've played in the past year - besides Scribblenauts Unlimited. That's another game I recommend, and your children will love it too! If you haven't picked up Hotline Miami and you like games, what are you waiting for? Some Russians need killing! Don't make me call you about it.

Also, did I mention that Jonatan Söderström and Dennis Wedin, the developers of the Hotline Miami games, are awesome? Let's give a round of applause for these guys. Thank you.