Recommended Films Watched In 2014

Alex's Recommended Viewings of Films Watched in 2014

I said I was out for 2014, right? Well, I thought it'd be interesting to look back on 2014 and mention some films I watched and highly recommend. I watched a lot more films than I reviewed, so don't be surprised if I bring up a film I didn't write about here. No particular order. They aren't necessarily from 2014 since I barely watched any films that came out this year, but hey, who cares if it's from 2014 or 1914 if it's good? Let's go!

A Clockwork Orange (1971)
I'll admit, when I first watched A Clockwork Orange many years back, I didn't like it. But it did intrigue me. After reading about the meticulousness of Stanley Kubrick and even reading about A Clockwork Orange itself, I knew the film deserved a second viewing. This time around, I totally got and loved every moment of it. Honestly, I recommend this one with proper reading on Kubrick's ideas behind the film. Without it, I find you're missing out in the film. The Ludovico technique? Did it really work? I'll leave it up to you guys.

Monsieur Lazhar (2011)
This one was really moving. I watched it on the plane on my way back home from Japan, and I was sad that I hadn't watched it earlier. Highly recommended. Also check out C'est pas moi, je le jure! if you really enjoy Monsieur Lazhar.

La cage aux folles (1978)
I don't usually watch comedies, but I was convinced to watch this one. It was totally worth it. It's different in its approach, and while it doesn't necessarily have you laughing out loud, it's pretty legit. Watch the original.

Jeanne Dielman, 23, quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles (1975)
Guys? Guys. Seriously, this one is weird and I actually can't recommend it to everyone. But, if you're looking for a challenging, different, long, and pretentious film, this one is in. It goes through three days of a woman's life and how she's affected by the truths her son knows. This one is not for the casual watcher. And warning - it's over three hours. Legit if not crazy.

Koyaanisqatsi (1982)
Another one of these weird films, but I really liked it. You'll be chanting "koyaanisqatsi" for days on end to piss people off. It's not about plot, but rather about images. I was told it was a stoner film, but I still hold it dear to my heart.

Paths of Glory (1957)
Another Stanley Kubrick film, but it deserves it. The shots. The story. The beauty. I watched it while I waited in Haneda airport in Tokyo and I was blown away. Not a casual viewing, but still great.

Il sorpasso (1962)
That ending, though. That ending.

Tokyo Drifter (1966)
Suzuki Seijun is a name for the books. That's both a good and bad thing. Tokyo Drifter is hilarious and colourful, but also quite pretty. Check out Branded to Kill (1967) if you end up liking Tokyo Drifter. Slightly different, but still pretty good!

Y tu mamá tambien (2001)
A film with two super horny teenagers, a lonely woman, and social commentary up the ass. I can't say I'd highly recommend it, but it's worth a watch nonetheless.

Harold and Maude (1971)
Any praise I gave this film deserves it wholeheartedly. It's a really cute film. At first, I wasn't sure about it, but as soon as the fourth wall was broken with I Think I See the Light by Cat Stevens playing in the back, I was won over. Worth a shot!

I racconti di Canterbury (1972)
Watch this film. I dare you. It's a Pier Paolo Pasolini film, the same guy who did Salo. Does that make the dare more real now?

Plein soleil (1960)
Do I need to justify myself again?

Get Carter (1971)
The third film from 1971 to be on this list! Must have been a good year! Definitely recommending this one. Alfie (1966) is also an interesting watch. Go Michael Caine!

Con Air (1997)
Only would you ever hear Nicolas Cage say, "Put the bunny down," in an action film and do it with grace. Love it even after multiple viewings!

Pan's Labyrinth (2006)
Deserves all the praise it has gotten. I wasn't crazy about the CGI, but it was still a captivating story. Definitely check it out if you haven't already!

I suppose there are more, but I think this is a pretty lengthy list. Should keep you busy for 2015 ;) All the best for 2015!

Review XCVI - Enter the Void

Review XCVI
Enter the Void (2009)

Well, I guess this will be my final farewell to 2014 on this blog. I work tomorrow, and then I'll hopefully head off for some festivities in town. So what film have I decided to say goodbye with? Gaspard Noé's Enter the Void. I heard about Gaspard Noé a while back after finding this list of "fucked-up pretentious films". I brought up this director with my ex, but he wisely put his films on a shelf in a basement locked away from human touch. But, well, I got curious. Plus, how bad could it be? ... Right?

Oscar (Nathaniel Brown) lives in Tokyo with his sister, Linda (Paz de la Huerta), and is enjoying a hit of N,N-Dimethyltryptamine, also known as DMT. He's awaken by a call from Victor (Olly Alexander), who asks that he bring some pills to "The Void". Alex (Cyril Roy) ends up tagging along, but things quickly turn for the worst, with Oscar being shot. Now he'll finally be able to experience the ultimate trip.

My first regret when I started this film was that it was over two hours and a half. A film better be damn good if it's that long. And guess what? It wasn't. Okay, so, first impressions. As I said, I mistakenly didn't pay attention to the length of the film. And this is was advertised as a messed-up film. I was already doomed. The film starts with a huge, neon sign reading "enter". I thought that was pretty cool. You soon realise that the film is captured through Oscar's eyes. We are Oscar. All right, that's innovative... A bit nauseating, but Oscar'll die and then we'll get normal shots, right? We'll get to that. So the film is through his eyes. I mean, it's unique, I'll give it that. But you'll notice something as soon as Oscar opens his mouth - Nathaniel Brown can't act for shit. Neither can Paz de la Huerta, but at least she has some life in her voice. Nathaniel Brown sounds like a fifteen-year-old filming a movie in his backyard for school - which is something I totally did and my acting totally compares to this guy. Okay, so I got some cool sign and innovative camera work, but I don't care for the acting. Now we get a psychedelic trip, which loses my attention quickly. But thankfully Oscar gets waken up rather quickly. Then we meet Alex - yep, this guy's acting is just as atrocious. And he has a huge hard-on for Linda. Never have I seen a brother so chill in listening to his drug dealer talk about how he wants to nail his sister. The two discuss what it's like to die according to some Buddhist book - I don't know. Foreshadowing has never been so strong.

Skipping ahead, we meet Victor, and, oh shit, Oscar's been set-up! Alex totally called it! And now he's been shot! Well, all right, no more first-person perspective. ... So now we're replacing this with a bird's eye view? And it's blurry? And swishing around like a drunk? Never have I been so aggravated while watching a film. Or sick. And the rest of the film is basically this view. But what about the plot? What do we get to see now? Well, Linda's a stripper and proceeds to bone her boss before she finds out her brother is dead. The irony! Oh, man, that was good, wasn't it? Guys, I could continue, but seriously, the plot is predictable as hell. We find out that Oscar and Linda's parents died in a car accident and promised they would never be separated. They discuss how their parents would "one day bring them to Tokyo", hence why the two are in Tokyo in the first place. Everything is explained with the use of crazy zoom-ins, epileptic-inducing flashes, and annoying, annoying shots. Can you tell I disliked the film? The ideas of the camera work were interesting - and we do get a break from the bird's eye view when we get some shots from behind Oscar's shoulder - but it gets old really, really fast. Had this been a short film, I would have thought it was cool what they were doing. But for a feature-length film, forget it. It gets annoying fast. If the plot and characters were any good, it would be forgivable. If the acting was fine, I could maybe forgive it. But the plot was shit and self-explanatory, I hated the characters, and the acting was probably the worst I've seen in a good while. I find it difficult to pinpoint good acting at times, but here, the acting is just garbage. And you know what? Gaspard Noé doesn't speak English, and his scenes are improvised. So he had to have someone tell him the dialogue was coherent while he filmed. This explains the really shitty dialogue, the really predictable dialogue from subpar actors and actresses. It could also explain the really shitty acting. And guess what? Because this is a messed-up film, we get some really pointless sex scenes. Here's a spoiler for you, but at the end, Linda has sex with Alex after she gets an abortion from her boss (did I mention I hate every character in this film?). She proceeds to say, "Cum inside me." Next we get some digitally-animated penis in a vagina. I know porn videos do this sometimes (granted, it's real, not animated), but... why. WHY. And then Oscar is reborn. This connection between mother, sister, and lover is shown throughout the whole film. Let's Freudian it up some more, guys! Honestly, the last ten minutes are probably just of people having sex. I can't remember because I was reading comics at the same time because I couldn't wait for the film to end. Honestly, these weird films and their sex scenes. Please, guys, stop.

This film was too long for nothing. The acting was shit, the characters were shit, and the plot was uninteresting. Any good thing the film had going for it was defenestrated within a short period of time. The crazy, tripped out ending of 2001: A Space Odyssey had a point to it. This film was just crazy for the sake of being crazy. And you know what? It wasn't even that crazy. Everything was spelled out to the viewer. So I'm not satisfied in any regard. Avoid Enter the Void. I'm sure this won't be the last we hear of Gaspard Noé.

Review XCV - Purple Noon

Review XCV
Plein soleil (1960)

This review will be a bit different. Instead of the usual written format, I thought I'd post some pictures of why this film should be watched. Warning - your heart may explode.

This alone should tell you you're in for a ride.

Alain Delon's character, Tom Ripley (with a France French accent), inspecting a watch. All right, I can handle this.

After delivering O'Brian to the studio, everyone has their eyes on Delon, as expected.

The portrait of this man is just... Sigh.

The mirror play in this scene... Alain Delon in this scene.

See? What did I tell you about the mirror play and Alain Delon? Shit, man.

Tom Ripley can't steer this ship, but I'm sure he's good on other ones, if you get my innuendo, hehe.

This scene with Marge as they discuss him leaving is particularly titillating. But yeah, Philippe Greenleaf (Maurice Ronet) is a pretty big romantic too!

Honestly, I was very impressed with the mirror play in this film. Here is a great example!

Now that Greenleaf is dead, Ripley will prey on his love, Marge. Check the look in his eyes.

The portrait! The portrait!

Italy really is beautiful. The film captures it well!

Speaking of things this film captures well...

Here is another example of the preying. Note the eyes again.

Because those fish were on camera a long time. They look very happy!

It's blurry, but this portrait. Oh my goodness. That smile. That face.

Handling three heads in one shot. And Delon's face.

The mirror play of this scene. The Alain Delon of this scene.

The way Delon- I mean, Ripley grabs a woman.

THE PORTRAIT. THE PORTRAIT. ABORT. ABORT.

Marie Laforêt has beautiful eyes. Great portrait. But seriously, how can she be calm when she's looking at THIS:

I'm out. The sensuality is too much. Ripley has Marge.

And how the film ends. A beautiful view and Delon handcuffed away.

The end.

But seriously, the film was interesting. It's adapted from The Talented Mr. Ripley written by Patricia Highsmith (I never read it, unfortunately, and never saw the 1999 film). It was interesting and the shots were beautiful (see above). René Clément did a good job! I didn't like the ending, and neither did Patricia Highsmith apparently. However, she did praise Alain Delon's performance. I can't agree more. In Le samouraï, Le cercle rouge, Un flic, and even L'eclisse, you don't really see Alain Delon act. This was the first time I saw him actually going about on screen, and I enjoyed it. Granted, I did watch this film for eye candy alone, but hey, I got a good film out of it too. So heterosexual men and homosexual women, don't push this film away - it really is great. And for the rest of you, see above.

Review XCIV - No

Review XCIV
No (2012)

Hello folks! I reach out to everyone in a better mood than last time after having a nice Christmas dinner - though it really doesn't feel like the holidays, for whatever reason. Either way, I'm back and I'm here to review a film that I couldn't find back in 2012 when I was trying to review all the foreign films nominated. I also met someone from the country in question in the film and, well, what can I say? I'm a stalker in a sense, so I figured, hey, let's check it out! The film is, of course, Pablo Larrain's No starring Gael García Bernal, Alfredo Castro, Antonia Zegers, and Néstor Cantillana. But first, let's talk history briefly. I read about Pinochet's regime on wikipedia, so take it as you will.

President Allende was elected in 1970. He was a Marxist and, from what I read, Allende had issues governing, leading to an inflation of 300 percent. The United States also played a role in discrediting Allende given his left-wing status. In 1973, there was a coup d'état, and Chile ended up having Augusto Pinochet as their leader. While the United States was initially thrilled with having a more right-winged leader, it would result in a dictatorship that would last until 1990.

Pinochet was not any better in handling Chile's problems. Poverty rose to, I believe it was 33% or 36%, and millions who resisted the regime went unaccounted for. After international pressure, a referendum, or plebiscite, was planned for 1988 in which it would be determined whether or not Pinochet would rule the country for another eight years. A month prior to the election, the "si" campaign and "no" campaign were each given fifteen minutes of air time to help citizens choose which option was best for them. No depicts the people who filmed and put together the "no" campaign.

The movie was organic in its feel. It made you feel like you were standing there, and I liked that. After watching the film, a common complaint was that the events leading up to the plebiscite were simplified, and while I'm sure this is true, I like the ideas behind the film. A film doesn't capture every aspect of history - it just takes one part and puts it in the spotlight. While I'm sure the campaign was not the only thing that led people to vote no, it simplifies it for someone who only knew the name Pinochet prior to the film. I was able to casually follow along, and it interested me enough to read up on the regime. But anyway, about the actual film. I think the acting was pretty good with Gael García Bernal doing a great job as René Saavedra. Antonia Zegers' character seemed a bit... pointless to me - in fact, the whole romance did - but she did a good job. I find I don't really have much to say since I just took the film as telling me a part of history, but it was an interesting watch. Like I said, it makes the story accessible to outside viewers, though trust me when I say the whole story is even more interesting. But it captures a little bit at the end and how the people in the "no" campaign really believed that Chile was going to see happiness in the future. I can't really speak about its current status, but from I've read, it has definitely improved since Pinochet's time. But again, I don't really know much about Chile, so I can only put my hands in the air with this one and say, hey, check it out if you want to get a little piece of Latin American history.

By the way, that song the women sing at one point? The No me gusta, no/ No lo quiero, no? Catchy as hell.

Review XCIII - Naked

Review XCIII
Naked (1993)

Hey everyone! It's been a while, hasn't it? I can't say I've been that busy, but I haven't had time to sit down and watch films in a while. Plus a bunch of personal issues rose while doing examinations, so everything went crazy. Now it's almost Christmas and I haven't watched a single Christmas film! It's okay - instead I offer you a film that, well, is nothing like Christmas. Ladies and gentlemen, here's my review of Mike Leigh's Naked starring David Thewlis, Lesley Sharp, Katrin Cartlidge, and Greg Cruttwell.

Johnny (Thewlis) is a cynical (and probably depressed) Mancunian man who is on the run after raping a woman. He heads to his ex-girlfriend's house, Louise (Sharp), where she rooms with Sophie (Cartlidge), a lonely woman, and Sandra (Claire Skinner), a nurse who is overseas with her boyfriend. However, his mannerisms and thoughts do not get him a particularly warm welcome, except from Sophie, and he finds himself exploring a degraded city and meeting its degenerates, at least according to him. All the while the tenants' landlord, Sebastian Hawks (Cruttwell), is coming to visit.

I watched this film in three parts with quite a distance between each viewing, so my review will be lacking a bit given that I had a bit of difficulty in trying to catch everything when I had forgotten some parts at the beginning. Nonetheless, I will try for you guys. I can tell you that, overall, this film is one depressing piece. I'm not really sure I get the "black comedy" Wikipedia is selling it as since I didn't find it particularly funny. In fact, there was no part in the film that made me laugh out loud - and I can have a pretty morbid sense of humour at times. But anyway, back to the film. I'm not from England and I've never even been to England, so I think part of the film's meaning is lost on me. Apparently Mike Leigh (the director) was aiming for a realistic piece of cinema, depicting the decaying culture and people of England that emerged following the sixties and what it was in the nineties. Again, I can't really comment since I was not present in this time.

David Thewlis' character is a ruthless protagonist, a drifter who wants human connection, but rejects it the moment he gets it. He rants to Lesley Sharp's character, Louise, about how happy she must be having left Manchester in order to work some trivial job. Did she abandon Johnny by leaving Manchester? Did she try to leave her past behind? Is she simply following the norm of pursuing something bigger and better by moving to the capital? I don't know much about the history of England and I'm feeling too lazy to look into it, but it would make sense to me that these questions are all part of the film's plot. Johnny, on the other hand, is a drifter - he has never settled. Could it be that he can't find a home anymore, or that he never had one? Has Manchester, London, and all of England simply become a wasteland? It would fit into his apocalypse theory. The world will continue, but humans cannot. We have reached the point where our culture has faltered and is abasing fast. Nonetheless, Johnny tries to find some sort of companionship along the road - settling on a man who is looking for some girl named Maggie, only for the two to meet and fight (romance is dead? Relationships are down the drain?). He also meets a security guard who is convinced he will be reincarnated in the future. This guy... Hmm... Could it represent the ignorant people who accept their situation and believe that a higher power is looking out for them? That the future is certain and they have time to fix up their problems? I'm not too sure. Then Johnny meets a girl who works at a diner. After asking if he can stay the night, tears stream down her face, and asks if Johnny ever had a dog. The conversation continues with the woman asking Johnny questions, until he asks her what is the matter. She storms out of the room and proceeds to tell him to get out. Perhaps Johnny hit too close to home with her, tried to get to know her too well. Again, the death of relationships and getting to know people. I mean, it certainly is a central theme in the film. Any type of relationship displayed on screen is perverse. Greg Cruttwell's character is... wow. That man is wicked (and not in a good way). Sophie falls in love with Johnny, but he tells her to get lost. Louise and Sophie end up comforting each other when Sebastian takes control of the house, but prior to that, Louise can only bad mouth Sophie. And, in the end, Sophie runs off when Louise and Johnny share an intimate moment on the floor of their bathroom (oh god, no! Not in the way you're thinking! Johnny was just throwing up! ... Please, get away emetophilics.). Relationships in this film just do not exist on a normal, healthy level. And this could be a criticism of today's mentality about relationships - I'm not one hundred percent sure. All I can say is, with Johnny's last encounter with a man who puts up posters, we get a huge poster advertising Megadeth's latest album at the time, Countdown to Extinction (headlining with Pantera!). Again, this idea of extinction, human beings dying. It probably isn't real extinction, but the extinction of a culture, of a people that had a meaning.

I could go on, but seriously, this film is just one depressing scene after another. People wear black and white, navy blue and grey. London itself is a grey place to be. It's not a happy film, showing how everything has gone down the drain. I didn't think the film was bad, but it wasn't all that spectacular. I thought Sebastian's character was a bit... random. I mean, I liked that scene where Louise comes in and he appears, but you only get a shot of his penis (in his underwear) right at her face. That's creativity right there. And the nurse character, Sandra? She also seemed a bit randomly placed. This film is interesting it what it tries to get across, but I wouldn't highly recommend it. It's an interesting psychological piece, but let's all watch something a little less grey for Christmas, okay? Maybe some Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 5: The Toy Maker! Am I right? ... Okay, I'll be quiet now.

R.I.P. Piratebay.

Review XCII - Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)

Review XCII
Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance (2014)

I read about Alejandro González Iñárritu's latest flick Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) a little while back while searching for films I could potentially go see in the theatre. I kind of forgot about it until I happened to come across it again and realised it was playing in theatres. And then I was talking to someone and they told me the film, as well as the main actor, Michael Keaton, were getting a lot of praise. So there I set out on a Thursday evening (two weeks ago) to go watch the film instead of doing homework or studying.

Riggan (Keaton) is famous for being the star of three films about a superhero named Birdman. Now, years later, he's trying to leave his superhero persona behind and has decided to write the theatre adaptation of a novel. However, he'll have to deal with just-got-out-of-rehab daughter Sam (Emma Stone), friend-turned-attorney Jake (Zach Galifianakis), new Broadway star Lesley (Naomi Watts), newly-pregnant Laura (Andrea Riseborough), and crazy actor Mike (Edward Norton) before he can tackle Broadway and his inner demon.

Well, what can I say? The film was good! I won't go too much into the film since this review is long overdue, but I'll mention some key points that I liked about the film. One, the shot. That's right the shot. This film was one long shot. It never cut out - it just kept rolling. It made you feel uneasy at times because seriously, you never get a break. But it's also innovative and it really worked out well. Next, the acting! The acting was good. It flowed well, and yes, Michael Keaton was good. I was totally not expecting such a good performance. But it was worthy. As was everyone else. Thirdly, the message. I thought the message, while not executed to my liking all the time, was legit. I mean, it's not new, with 2014's Frank sharing a similar theme, but I liked Birdman a lot better than I did Frank, so it obviously did it well. Is art really about numbers now? Do we really need to always push all boundaries? Or can the artist just enjoy his art for the sake of his art? That scene where Michael Keaton talks to himself as Birdman was very hard-hitting, though I found it funny when I saw a brief mention of the film and that's the scene they chose to showcase. So there you go. The film kind of had this magic realism thing going on - which, as a prime example, would be how Gabriel García Márquez's Cien años de soledad book is written (highly recommended read, by the way!) - which I could see would throw people off. But honestly, it's executed well. Give it a chance. Kind of spoiler, but it's explained nearing the end of the film! Oh, yes, and the credits and titlescreen? I loved the way it was executed. Very clean!

I won't go ahead and say the film was flawless. I was a bit saddened at times that the message was so thrown at your face, but that's just me. I'm sure there are small details in the film that could be analysed, but the main message was not as hidden at times as I would have liked it to be. But really, I wasn't expecting 2001: A Space Odyssey cryptic, which is a good thing, because without having analysis upon analysis of that film, I would never have uncovered most of the enigma of that film. But still, sometimes I like major themes being left unexplained at times. ... Let me just drop this now.

Alejandro González Iñárritu's Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) was a nice little piece of cinema that I was glad I got to watch in theatres. I can't say I'd recommend it for everyone, but if you're looking for something to explain all these superhero films coming out, then check it out. You won't be disappointed.

Also, the drums were a pretty freakin' cool idea. Cheers!

Review XCI - 女虐: Naked Blood

Review XCI
女虐: Naked Blood (1996)

What's a Halloween without a Japanese horror film? While looking up Meatball Machine (totally loved it when I watched it years back, though it was cheesy and weird) to get suggestions, I came across Satō Hisayasu's Naked Blood. The description seemed interesting enough, but what really hooked me was the "It's absolutely disturbing, but it was touching." What, touching? Guys, I'm down! I'm watching it! This is the last film I'm reviewing!

Eiji (Abe Sadao) is trying to fulfill his destiny of being a great scientist, as proclaimed by his father. He develops a serum that is able to turn pain into pleasure, and he's sure this will happen change the world for the better. However, he has to test the serum, which he calls "My Son", to see how effective it is on people. His mother, who is testing a new contraceptive on three women (seems like a small experimental group, but anyway), comes to his help, sneaking the serum into the contraceptive liquid. Now he's ready to see how great his creation really... isn't.

I was disappointed with this one. I mean, I guess I should have expected it to be absolutely awful given the horrible rating on IMDb, but I like gory nonsense sometimes. And this one was supposed to be gory, but honestly, it wasn't that bad. That's not say I didn't cringe. Let me discuss the three women in the experiment... The first is a woman who loves to eat (Hayashi Yumika; she's out to find the perfect, the best meal. The second woman is obsessed with her body image (Kirihara Mika), preferring to "starve and die" than get fat. The final one is an insomniac (Aika Misa) who hasn't slept since she got her period (which her doctor claims is a result of the "shock of menstruation". ... Okay). I don't want to give anything away, but at the same time, would you really watch this film? Probably not. Therefore, beware, spoilers! *breathes* Alright, we here? The woman with the self-esteem issues ends up mutilating herself in order to clear out every pore, every imperfection. It was... lame. It didn't look that cool, and we missed most of the gore for that one. It was more her just piercing her ear, cuts away to other scenes, and back to her sitting on the floor completely full of cuts and sharp objections piercing out of her skin. So scratch woman number two. How about the first woman? Okay, this is more like it. First the woman is at home cutting up some squid for some sushi (or something of the sort) when she cuts herself. Her cry is one of a sensual nature, and she starts sucking on her finger desperately. The serum doesn't make blood tasty, it only makes pain pleasurable, but whatever. The next time we see the woman, she's dipping the lovely battered squid into oil. But her hand is also covered in batter. Hmm... Fried hand, anyone? I think the hand was left undercooked, but the sound effects of her eating her fingers was pretty cool, I will admit. Now, the final scene with her in it. This one is infamous for being gruesome. She starts by first eating her labia (yum, yum), which looks super hard for some reason; then, she proceeds to eat her left nipple (the crunch sound seemed off to me - pretty sure it wouldn't be crunchy like her hand). Finally, she chops down on her eye after pulling it out with a fork. While I cringed, it was more the idea that got me feeling a little squeamish. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the optic nerve and tissue surrounding the optic nerve is not that rigid. It would have been cooler if it was stringy and she's pulling it out. All those connecting ganglion cells and all. But seriously, this is the most gruesome scene, and it wasn't that bad.

Wait, so what about the final woman? Well, she ends up becoming a serial murderer because the pain of killing others ends up becoming great pleasure. The idea was cool, but it was half-assed, and this little love thing with Eiji was... weird. It was forced on to the movie just so he could impregnate the insomniac at the end, only to be killed. That whole woman was... off. She had this idea that she could become one with a cactus in her room, and she'd use it to empty her heart and go into a "dream-like" state. While her one dream gives us the idea of her wanting to kill, I didn't get the cactus thing. I mean, maybe she's supposed to be the cactus, deadly to the touch or something, and it would make sense since, once she has sex with Eiji - or is about to have sex with him, can't remember - the plant flowers. Flowers are the sexual organs of a plant, and, well, she's about to undergo coitus. But that's lame. And this whole being at one with the cactus... It's shoved in your face. And no one would be like that, unless she really is crazy because of the insomnia. And, especially, Eiji goes along with this. Does he not know this woman is crazy? *sigh* It was just a bit too weird for me without being weird enough for me to think it was cool. And then that bit at the end? Well, two parts. First, the son makes out with his mother before saying goodbye. Is he really embodying his father in this scene? BUT WHY. WHY THE INCEST. It was pointless, and it was never hinted before. And I don't care for it! Then, right at the end, the woman is left with her intestines exposed, and her husband, who was dead or disappeared or whatever, says they can finally be together forever and proceeds to climb into her stomach, closing it up with his hands. Then in a few scenes later, she fades away, just like her husband. Obviously there's this play with eternity in the film. Eiji is called so for "eternity boy". Then the father says he wants to be with his wife forever. But see, the wife doesn't support this idea, hence why she's developing a contraceptive. "Contraceptives will save the world," is what she claims to the girls before they get the injections. And throughout the film, the son claims that his mother didn't support his father's idea. The idea might be of this eternal life by having children, passing along your genes. But in the end, the son ends up failing by indirectly killing two of the women through his serum. And, in the end, he dies himself. Is the director trying to say that pain is necessary for life? Is it being looked at in a religious way - I mean, there's vanity, gluttony, and then the killing... And using a drug to go against the pain of life. But this is a Christian view of things, and most Japanese are shintoists. I don't know enough about the belief system to put a meaning into the film, but honestly, screw it. It isn't even necessary. This film was boring and I didn't get quite the gore I wanted out of it. I didn't think it was that touching, even if it tries to put more meaning into the film than other horror gore films (I guess).

Skip this one this Halloween and check out Meatball Machine instead. At least that one had humour to go along with the gore...

Piratebay torrent (hardcoded english subtitles - 对不起!)

Review XC - The Thing

Review XC
The Thing (1982)

I've mentioned this before, but I love to repeat myself. When I first watched John Carpenter's The Thing, I didn't like it. I was expecting something horrifying, something phenomenal, but instead I got nothing (oooh, what a good one!). But then, you know, I gained some knowledge of the awesome of John Carpenter and Kurt Russell, and I knew I had missed out. Obviously I had been holding a grudge against the game and horror films in general and had forgotten the most important thing about watching horror films - just have fun (though most of 'em still suck). Anyway, I sat down to The Thing, prepared to be disappointed again, but knowing I probably wouldn't be.

Those Norwegians are crazy! The film starts with a helicopter chase of a huskey across a tundra of Antartica. The huskey makes it to an American research outpost before one Norwegian researcher accidentally explodes via a grenade and the other is shot by one of the American researchers. Obviously something is up, so three of the Americans, including R.J. MacReady, the awesome (cough) pilot, head to the Norwegian base to find out what exactly is going on. But what they find ends up being more of a mystery... until their own base gets infected by... the thing.

So, how was my second viewing? Totally loved it. I must have just been in a real pissy mood when I watched the film the first time. Or maybe experience made me realise how many worse horror films there are out there... Either way, I liked it. How did I find the effects? They were cool. I mean, they seemed a bit cheesy at times, but honestly, I won't hate on it. I like cheese, I really do, assuming it's done well. And in The Thing, it is. The film is not only about the effects - it's really about the psychological strain every character is under. Is Clark (Richard Masur) infected? Is Windows (Thomas G. Waites)? Is Blair (Wilford Brimley)? And what about MacReady? Is he really okay? I loved that. It's a cat-and-mouse game throughout the film where even the viewer is trying to figure out who's infected and who isn't. It makes it so much more fun! Plus, remember the idiots of Alien? Well, we have idiots here, but it's not as bad. I'll be spoiling stuff every so often here, but not enough to ruin the film. Nonetheless, you've been warned from here on out. In Alien, everyone just seemed vapid and useless. In The Thing, we do have intelligent characters who know the dangers of what's going on once the thing ends up killing Bennings (Peter Maloney). I mean, sure, it might seem a bit stupid to just go bring back this misformed alien whatever from the Norwegian camp, but at least it seemed dead, unlike in Alien where the crew would gladly go over to a huge egg - clearly alive, I might add - and stick their face in it. And then we have bad-ass MacReady who, as our protagonist, is ready to dispose of someone who is infected and is ready to take control of the situation. Like I said, there are stupid moments, but I forgive them because overall, the film presents an acceptably interesting and smart crew.

I basically summed up the film, didn't I? What else is there to say? Well, I thought I'd discuss the film a bit more in depth because I watched a video about it and it made me want to share the secrets of this film with everyone! I thank my boyfriend who other analyses, too. It's one interpretation, but it makes sense to me. Anyway, the spoilers worsen now, so beware.

The film turns around this solipsistic idea with Kurt Russell's character being the "I". It's true that it's impossible to know if your mother, father, friends, teachers, bosses, workers really exist or if they're just a figment of your imagination. But given that you think, you can at least confirm your existence. This film transforms this idea, this paranoia into something more real. Throughout the film, we don't know who is infected and who isn't, and neither does Kurt Russell. He struggles to keep everyone in check, keep an eye on them, but prior to the knowledge of the infection, anyone could have gotten infected by the dog. So he's stuck with only trusting himself, knowing that he, himself, is not infected ("Now I'm gonna show you what I already know."). Thus he's stuck trying to keep track of everyone else, almost like... chess pieces? Wait, wasn't there a scene with that? Indeed there was. At the beginning of the film - and actually how we meet MacReady - we see MacReady playing against a Chess Wizard machine. He sips his whiskey, sure he has won. "*ding ding* Checkmate." The machine ends up winning, or so we think. In reality, Kurt Russell proceeds to pour his whiskey on the rocks into the machine, destroying it, and claiming it is a "cheating bitch". Let us compare this to the film, shall we? And this can really help us unravel the end. Throughout the film, Kurt Russell is moving these people around, trying to control them. While he does get accused of being an alien by Nauls (T.K. Carter), he comes out alive, stronger than ever to destroy this creature. He manages to find a way to see if someone has the thing by testing their blood (I can be slightly hemophobic, I must say. Cutting with knives and syringes - ugh. Yet here I find surgeries fascinating. Anyway.). This seems like a turning point in the film - the thing can no longer deceive the members, am I right? It can be exposed. And everyone has the flamethrowers ("Mac wants the flamethrowers!" "Mac wants the what?"), so we should be fine, right? Well, people are still idiots, and people still separate, and Blair is probably infected, but he's far away so no one is watching over him. As a result, while MacReady finally thinks he has the thing in his grasp, it soon slithers out, destroying the generators and awaiting its freezing before a search team comes and finds it once again. MacReady tries to stop it by blowing up the bunker, and he does, but then the film ends with Childs (Keith David) meeting up with MacReady. MacReady asks what happened to him, only to get a response of "I thought I saw Blair and went out looking for him." Granted, MacReady was an idiot for leaving Childs alone, but this begs the question - is Childs infected or not? Well, let's look back at that Chess Wizard scene. Remember how the machine wins, but in a way, still loses the war because MacReady just destroys it anyway? What does MacReady give Childs? Why, his whiskey. Childs gladly takes it, not concerned that MacReady may be infected. While MacReady proclaims their fight would be futile since it's about to reach 100 degrees below (is this Celsius or Fahrenheit? I have no idea), there is still a slight possibility they could survive... assuming they both were wary. But Childs gladly takes that whiskey and drinks. MacReady gives a little laugh. We know the two both have flamethrowers, and given the Chess Wizard scene, we can assume that MacReady kills Childs, thus killing the lifeform. It sounds happy, and I like it that way. MacReady the bad ass, hehe.

BUT WAIT, THERE'S MORE. I'm serious! I won't go on too much more, but I'll share one other thing that keeps you looking throughout the film. When I watched the final scene, something felt off when Childs came on screen. I didn't know what, but it just seemed... off. Now, if we look at Childs throughout the film, he always sports a navy coat. And I do mean throughout. Whenever he's outside, he wears that jacket. And in fact, attire remains consistent throughout the film. Except - you guessed it - when the thing attacks. MacReady mentions that the thing tears through clothing. There's no doubt he mentions this for a reason. The thing knows this is an issue and, thus, when it attacks the shadowy figure at the beginning, it does this late at night when the person is wearing their undergarments. Hence why Nauls finds long johns in the garbage. But sometimes it could only attack during the day, and therefore, we can kind of note when someone has been infected and someone has not. But I'll let you observe the film for that, though I'll explain the Childs scene to get you all excited. So yes, throughout the movie, and even right before the blackout, we see Childs is wearing a dark blue coat. But at the end, he's wearing a significantly light coat. Coincidence or did the thing attack him and needed a coat? Not to mention, at some point near the end, we get a panover of the hallway, the basement door, and the coat room where the door is open. Could this provide an explanation as to how Blair got to Childs? Well, I leave it up to you. But seriously, this whole thing got me creaming over the film. Alien had some thing about man rape, but I like that this film wanted you to think. Production for The Thing was delayed a year because of budget cuts, so John Carpenter had time to think about this film. And it totally made it that much more awesome.

So yes, this Halloween season, check out John Carpenter's The Thing, either a first-time watcher or a veteran watcher. I never saw the remake, but I have a feeling it's just lame. The original isn't the scariest, but it's damn well cool. Oh, and did I mention it also stars Kurt Russell?

Piratebay torrent

Review LXXXIX - Alien

Review LXXXIX
Alien (1979)

As like everyone, my horror film interest spiked in my teenage years. Probably one of the first horror films I watched was Halloween, which I hated. After that, I made it my mission to watch as many classic slasher-horror films as possible to see if the other classics were as bad as Halloween. I stopped after Friday the 13th, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre, and A Nightmare on Elm Street. While I really enjoyed A Nightmare on Elm Street, screw every other film. They were annoying, badly written, and just out to jump scare me. I don't completely condemn jump scares, but really, if that's all I get, along with characters I hate, I have nothing. After watching some sequel to Hellraiser (watch the original - Clive Baker totally had it!), I realised I liked the gore aspect more than anything, which brought me to zombie movies. I moved away from anything not zombie, catching Silent Hill and other generic shit every so often and, consequently, completely regretting it. This led to me feeling wary every time someone brought up Ridley Scott's Alien. "But Alex, you must see the scene from the alien pops out of the guy's stomach!" I saw the bit in Spaceballs - good enough for me. Until, of course, I was dragged into watching it. I erred and ummed, but when my boyfriend said he liked Aliens, the flippin' sequel to Alien, I had to check it out. I was reluctant, but maybe I was really missing out on a goldmine...

The year is 2XXX, and a space crew (consisting of Captain Dallas (Tom Skerritt), Executive Officer Kane (John Hurt), Chief Engineer Parker (Yaphet Kotto), Engineering Technician Brett (Harry Dean Stanton), Navigator/Helmsman Lambert (Veronica Cartwright), Science Officer Ash (Ian Holm), and Warrant Officer Ripley (Sigourney Weaver)) is on their way home, frozen in stasis until they reach a reasonable distance from home. But they're woken up early. What could be the cause? A distress signal from - could it be - an alien? The crew sets off to find out more about this alien form. However, the signal turns out to be a warning, and soon Kane is infected and the crew is faced with a bigger problem than originally anticipated.

This movie, this movie... Okay, it was not as bad as Texas Chain Saw Massacre if only because the effects were cool and legit. But the plot. Oh god, the plot. Okay, okay, let me back up. Let's compliment it first. Alien, as mentioned, had some pretty cool effects. I mean, I wouldn't go and say it was the best I've seen, but given it was 1979, it was able to come across as not super cheesy even with the whole "in space" bit. I give it that. The shredded condoms, the sheep's stomach, the intestines used to make everything were worth it because it looked cool. The alien egg? Pretty nifty! The facehugger alien? I liked it. The chestburster? Hello phallusism! It went downhill. I didn't mind it, but I guess I found it looked cheesy at this point. When the thing ran across the table, I died. Oh man, I died. It was hilarious. But really, the whole exploding bit was cool. I liked it. I felt bad for John Hurt, but at the same time, didn't at all because he was a complet- no, not yet. Let's not rant yet. The final alien was also legit. It looked cool. Granted, the small, extendable mouth was a tad on the funny side when you see it extract out, but the idea was cool. The creativity and the ingenuity of making each stage of the alien was grand. I liked it. It was new, it was cool. The film totally deserved the academy award it got for effects. And the little relation to the Aztec space jockey, nice, nice. I can see all the interesting ideas that exist for the alien species. I've been told about it, and I've even read up on it myself (Weyland-Yutani, you're hilarious). I really can see all the effort put into this, and I think it paid off. I really do. I could totally watch this film again...

... But the movie made me rage. Everyone, and I do mean every human being, was an idiot. A complete IDIOT. Want me to break it down completely? I doubt you want to hear me complain for so long. But I'll give you little bits. NUMBER ONE. They get this mysterious signal coming from a nearby planet. "'Kay, must be a distress signal, lezz go." They send Dallas, Kane, and Lambert down. No problem. Except when Ripley finally asks Ash if she can check out the signal. Oh, look, binary! It's actually decipherable (albeit freakin' tedious), especially since Ripley is a master at the bare-bones of hardware. So what does Ripley find out? "Hey, this is actually a warning." Now, fine, I understand a certain excitement at finally finding an alien species. But SERIOUSLY. You LEFT the SHIP before even DECIPHERING the SIGNAL, ESPECIALLY since it takes Ripley FIVE minutes to figure it out. Screw it. This can be explained - spoilers a bit - given Ash's motives of deceiving the crew later on for reasons I won't explain. But I don't give a shit. There are how many kids besides Ash? Six. None of them questioned the fact that they didn't know why they were being sent out. Wait, no, the plot wields it! Okay, fine. Whatever.

Next issue. Kane, Dallas, and Lambert head off to check out this alien signal. They come across the Aztec space jockey (oh, pretty face and lights) and explore. Hmm... seems a bit unsafe, but what can you do? I mean, if anything were to happen, it's okay, they could totally fly awa- oh, wait, they can't. When they landed, their ship exploded or something. Anyway, it's being fixed by Brett and Parker. Well, it's fine. They'll be okay (ignore the warning signal bit here). They travel around until Kane sees an opening, a tunnel, leading downward. "Hey, guys, a tunnel! See yaz!" He heads down. Fine. They gotta explore. I mean, they come in, guns flashing. If they were to meet an innocent species - first contact, first impressions ("I don't believe in first impressions"), I might add - and blew their heads off, well, that might be kinda bad. Protocol seems... odd. But whatever. Anyway, Kane heads down. Apparently hot as a tropical forest. Then he spots eggs. Now, imagine you're in the Amazon. You spot eggs about the size of your torso. Would you, one, take your distance and/or run away, two, try and contact an expert of the forest or use the super computer just five minutes away to assess the situation, or three, go up to it, shine light on it, see it MOVING, and stick your face in the hole that opens up? If you choose three, congratulations! You have been chosen to work on the spaceship Nostromo! It's just... who would do this except a completely ignorant person? No one. Because seriously, you have a gun, but the gun is gone all of a sudden, and when you stick your face in the hole, your gun is of no use to you. And guess what happens to Kane? WELL, SHIT, HE GETS ATTACKED. What a FREAKIN' surprise. I could keep ranting, but you get the point. You get the point that, at every turn, at every corner, at every moment they could do something cautiously, carefully, they don't. "Quarantine those suckers!" Don't. "Stick together!" They immediately separate. Granted, some things can be explained given Ash's motives, as I mentioned, but sometimes, they were stupid. Sometimes you can say that, though one guy was maybe against something, there were still six other people to think rationally. But whatever. Just whatever.

My next issue is, well, a personal one. Probably most wouldn't care, but seriously, the growth rate of the alien? Ri-dic-ulous. The facehugger to chestburster? Fine. It was fast as shit, but fine. But chestburster to full on alien form? What? The thing shed some skin. It didn't shed enough. To get that big, the crew should have found a room full of old skin. That thing grew from phallus size to larger than a human in five minutes or less. An exaggeration, but seriously, I didn't like that part. It went too quickly. It should have been longer. My boyfriend argued, "No, it scares the audience because it shows that you never know what stage the alien will be at." That is true, but the human form was the largest. We got small, small, final form. Show it transform. Don't just show it as a final form. It was too meh. I was like, "Damn, the amount of energy that creature used up to get that huge." It's science fiction, but as I said, this was more personal. I was not accepting of this. I didn't like it. Point final.

Alien had some nice shots, the effects were legit, and the creativity behind it was cool. But the plot was stupid. Everyone was stupid. I can't say I'm that upset or surprised, but seriously, while I like Ripley Scott's idea of "manbirth" and showing rape on the man's side, if the plot had been given as much thought as the effects, it could have been awesome. I can see why people still watch it to this day - versus Friday the 13th which was horrendous - but seriously, that plot. I'm out.

Piratebay torrent

Review LXXXVIII - Easy Rider

Review LXXXVIII
Easy Rider (1969)

I haven't reviewed a film in so long, but I swear, it's because I've been awfully busy with exams. This review will be short, but hopefully it will get me back on track. I would also really like to watch some horror films for Halloween, but we'll see how that goes. Anyway, I've been meaning to watch Dennis Hopper's Easy Rider for a long time given its status and fame. Then my boyfriend found out Jack Nicholson was in the film, and, well, Peter Fonda go back after a misunderstanding with the film Duel and Dennis Weaver (don't ask), so finally we decided on watching this film. But let's actually talk about the movie, right?

The film begins with two men on motorcycles smuggling cocaine from Mexico to Los Angeles, and thus acquiring a huge sum of cash. Our protagonists are Wyatt (Peter Fonda), who is nicknamed Captain America, and Billy (Dennis Hopper). After getting so much money, the two head on a journey to New Orleans to celebrate Mardi Gras, a celebration prior to Ash Wednesday, where you indulge in fatty, rich foods before the fast begins. But the journey proves more despondent than the two ever imagined.

Easy Rider is a counterculture film and apparently spawned the "New Hollywood", influenced by French New Wave. You can definitely see a connection with the jarring cuts between scenes at times. But I wouldn't go ahead and say it's as jarring as À bout de souffle. Anyway, as I was saying, the movie is a counterculture movie with lots of drug use... As I established in my review of Kids, I was never into drinking heavily or experimenting with drugs in my high school days, and I'm still not into it. Thus, on the surface, I was already not relating to the film. But the more underlying message of a destroyed American dream, I could get more, even though I am not American. The religious symbolism throughout the film is what made me stay, and you really get a bitter end. The film is more than just a reminiscence of rejecting your culture - it really is showing how the government, how the people, have let us down. I mean, I won't go around and say it's a favourite of mine - personally, I thought the film was just okay - but it was still trying something new for the time, and the shots aiming to show a sort of hallucinogenic feel was pretty cool, especially nearing the end. It was genuine and totally sixties, man. But again, while the content was meaningful, I can't say it was anything spectacular. Not to say you shouldn't give it a shot - maybe I just wasn't in the right frame of mind - but again, nothing spectacular. Plus, Jack Nicholson is not even there that long!

While it definitely helped to establish a different style in Hollywood with a dark message, Easy Rider was not as great as I thought it would be. Nonetheless, give it a try. It's still an interesting watch, even if I wasn't super hyped watching it.

Piratebay torrent

Review LXXXVII - L'eclisse

Review LXXXVII
L'Eclisse (1962)

Guys, Alain Delon is, or was, a sexy man. After watching Le samouraï, my boyfriend and I made sure to check out all the Jean-Pierre Melville and Alain Delon films. The two together were like peas in a pod, just like the wonderful John Carpenter and Kurt Russell films released in the eighties. However, it was Alain Delon's lovely eyes that caught the viewer's attention, so when I found out about Michelangelo Antonioni's L'eclisse, starring yours truly and the beautiful Monica Vitti in a love story, well, I pounced.

Vittoria (Vitti) breaks off with her lover one sunny day and, after visiting her mother at the stock market, meets up with a young, handsome man, Piero (Delon). However, their relationship may be more strenuous than either anticipated.

This film was... long and drawn out. I was very disappointed. The opening scene, while brilliantly shot, was so long. We meet Alain Delon's character at the stock market, but I think we finally saw Vittoria and Piero engage in something maybe two-thirds of the way into the film. The film is over two hours. So yeah, I didn't get any Alain Delon booty or nothin'. Sourly disappointed. However, if you don't go into L'eclisse expecting a very focused plot, you'll enjoy the beautiful shots. I've never seen another Michelangelo Antonioni film, so it is possible his films are primarily artistically appealing shots with a lot of meaning and not so much for the regular folk. However, I did read that he didn't particularly like the ending he chose, which I found was quite out of place. Either way, had I gone into the film without expecting a relatively normal romance, I might not have been as disappointed. But seriously, the woman would show affection, then walk away. I don't even know how Alain Delon kept going.

L'eclisse is a look into my relationships, or that is my guess. We see a lack of complete devotion to the other, and in the end, sorry for spoilers, the two never meet up again even though they both offer promises of seeing each other soon. Apparently this is the final film of a triology specifically about modern age getting in the way of life. The stock market gets in the way of Vittoria and her mother, and maybe Vittoria goes for Piero because of his position in the stock market, revealing that their doomed affair. It does this well, but damn man, the film can still feel extraordinarily long sometimes. Yes, yes, beautiful shots, but sometimes I'm not Koyaanisqatsi patient, especially when I expected Alain Delon, sniffle.

The film takes a relatively good perspective on contemporary living and its downfalls, though it can be long. Also, this film doesn't have a lot of Alain Delon in it, so don't go in expecting him. Otherwise, you'll be very sad indeed.

Piratebay torrent

Review LXXXVI - Come and See

Review LXXXVI
Come and See (Иди и смотри) (1985)

I mentioned this film in my last review and, surprisingly, I actually watched it. Come and See, known in Russian as Иди и смотри and in Belarusian as Ідзі і глядзi, directed by Elem Klimov, is notorious for being absolutely heartwrenching and melancholic. In fact, this was the director's last film as he felt he had done all he could artistically after that film. The film stars Aleksei Kravchenko as our protagonist.

The movie begins with an old man yelling at two children to stop digging for rifles in Nazi-occupied Byelorussian SSR. One of the boys, Florya Gaishun (Kravchenko), manages to find an abandoned rifle, allowing him to join the resistance - Soviet partisan forces. He is excited and all ready to leave, even as he is dragged out of his house against his mother's wishes. Soon, however, Florya will be shown the realities of World War II and his innocence and naiveté will be lost forever.

So what did I think about Come and See? Well, one, I'll say that, for a Russian film, it was not too lengthy and slow. If you've ever seen a Russian film or read a Russian book, you know what I'm talking about. This film is not bordering four hours, and sometimes I felt scenes were unnecessarily long, but the film wasn't unbearable. However, it terms of content, well, that's a different story. Come and See's characters were not really likeable, but damn, did that ending just destroy you. I mean, as I always say, it's hard for me to relate and I have been desensitised to such viewings, but the final portraits are hard-hitting. The content itself is depressing and scary. However, I'd have to say that the film as a whole can be hard to digest because of the long shots where nothing really happens. Apparently the artillery is also not realistic (tracer rounds shot five hundred times at one point), but I have no knowledge of that, so I can't really talk about it. But again, you have that hard-hitting ending. And I will admit, the portraits throughout are grand. You get pictures of people's faces and they're well shot. But I can't say this film really met every standard I thought it would have. It's depressing, yes, but I couldn't care for the characters at all. In this way, it really lost a lot of the closeness I expected from it. You see a child forced to grow up and faced with such psychological torture, but if you don't care for the child, you lose a lot out of the film.

I find you would watch this film more for the ending and to say that yes, you did watch Come and See, but as an overall film, it is not that stupendous, minus the brilliant portraits. Now I'm off to enjoy the rest of my last day off for summer 2014. Take care, guys.

Piratebay torrent

Review LXXXV - The Raid 2

Review LXXXV
The Raid 2 (2014)

"Hey, do you know The Raid 2?" my boyfriend asked.
I replied, "What, you don't ask me about The Raid, but you ask me about The Raid 2? I don't even know the first one, how would I know the second one? ... Is it American?"
"No, it's Indonesian."
"Are you kidding me..."

And so began my introduction in the apparently well-known Indonesian film The Raid 2: Berandal, directed by Gareth Evans and starring Iko Uwais as a continuing protagonist in the series. The first film, according to my boyfriend, is not all that special and was just bad, but the sequel, aha, the action is well choreographed. The plot is still bad, but the action was optimal. I was all ready to sit down and watch a depressing war film, something like Come and See, for example. But no, I had to go and watch The Raid 2. Sigh.

The film begins with a man named Bejo killing our protagonist's brother. This causes Rama (Uwais) - the protagonist - to join an undercover cop force that seeks undercover, corrupted officials in order to catch Bejo. Rama ends up joining an Indonesian gang, the Bangun gang, after protecting the leader's son in prison. With this new connection, Rama may be able to avenge his brother's life and protect his family.

The Raid 2 has an amazing score on IMDb, and honestly, the martial arts sequences are great. My boyfriend explained it best: you never get lost while watching the action scenes. In many action films, the sequences are not handled well and, consequently, you don't really know what the hell is going on. Here, every action scene is handled superbly. You catch every move, every punch, every hit. You follow everything, and trust me when I say you want to. The action scenes are great. They're grand fun, that's for sure. You can really see the effort Gareth Evans and the development team went through to make sure the scenes looked genuine and accurate. All I can is silat, Indonesian martial arts, is pretty brilliant.

Now, the movie is great fun, and part of the reason is because the characters are a mixture of Korean and Bollywood; basically, they're just over-the-top and freakin' ridiculous. Bejo is just so stock evil, it's hilarious. My boyfriend and I had great fun making fun of him throughout the film. Then Rama disappears for so long that even people in the film are asking what happened to him. I'm glad I watched the movie with someone because it made it all the more fun to make fun of everything. Not to mention you might start raging when you know that everything would go a lot smoother if only people actually used their weapons, especially their guns. While the director made sure the fighting scenes were creative and fun, he paid the script writers minimum wage. But really, what did I expect from this movie?

I'd recommend The Raid 2 if you're looking for a ridiculously crazy, yet very entertaining martial arts movie. Watch it with friends. Have a great laugh. Now let me go watch something depressing, please.

Piratebay torrent

Review LXXXIV - Get Carter

Review LXXXIV
Get Carter (1971)

To be honest, and rather embarrassingly, I wasn't fully aware of Michael Caine's roles until rather recently. I mean, I had heard that, when he was younger, he'd played gangster kind of characters, but I never looked into it. When my boyfriend started praising the hell out of Mike Hodges' Get Carter, I was opened to the world of Michael Caine, and British cinema in fact. Get Carter is considered to be high up there on British movie lists from what I read. Here I was left stupefied, feeling like quite a dolt for having cast aside this actor for so long... We watched Alfie together first (worth a watch - I wasn't super crazy about it, but the opening shot was brilliant, and the subject matter was comedic but quite dark. The breaking of the fourth wall was also really well done!), and, finally, I got around to watching Get Carter.

John Carter (Caine), a notorious gangster, finds out his brother has died in a car accident in his hometown. However, Carter is sure foul play is involved and decides to return to Newcastle to seek out his brother's killer.

I'll start with cinematography. It was nothing short of absolute brilliance at times. The opening shot is enough to capture anyone. The zoom in to a room where Carter stands, centered, smoking. It only gets better. The film was very good at close-ups, zoom-outs, using mirrors. It also made the viewer strain at times to view the characters with stuff getting in the way. This is not a bad thing - instead, it made you try to look past the unfocused objects and pay attention to the speaker. This is something a film should never be afraid to do - that is, put stuff close up! It also used unfocused objects to pinpoint characters... Guys, really, it was just great.

The characters were interesting. I mean, I'm not really into gangster films, but again, I consider this one another exception to the rule. Michael Caine chose this film because he wanted to realistically portray gangsters. Thus, we don't get this over-the-top, gore everywhere, crazy film. No, John Carter kills when he knows it to be right, being quick and efficient. Plus it's a justice film of sorts, so I'm not just watching Carter go around and be a gangster. No, it's Carter the gangster trying to piece together why his brother was murdered and getting justice. Thus we get a revenge flick involving a gangster who, frankly, doesn't give a damn about killing. And Michael Caine definitely delivers. He took that role and made it his own. I felt him as the gangster, as the womanizer. When he has phone sex with one of the women, I totally believed it. I wouldn't call Michael Caine the most attractive man if you just look at him, but in the film - and Alfie for that matter - he takes such an assertive position, you fall for him just because he is so manly. As a woman, I feel the right to freely admit this, but I'm sure my boyfriend would agree. I love that! So often we just see the ideal sex symbol of the time stuck into the role and you just accept women go with him because he's handsome. Here we witness the power of acting, guys. Here we see ourselves really believing that Michael Caine is the role he plays. I'll definitely be looking into his older films like The Italian Job and The Ipcress File. I'm sure they're worth all the praise they get.

Now, the plot itself. As I said, I'm not super into gangster films usually, and I think if this film wouldn't have had the superb acting and shots, I'd probably dismiss it. But because of that, I totally support it. Still, I liked the ending - it was nothing over-the-top, just simple and frank, which was this film overall. It was also more creative than just "kill 'em 'cause he's a bad guy". No, we really learn with Carter what happened, and, given the conclusion, we can see why Carter is so angry. However, I shan't speak of the end any longer with fear that I spoil it. The plot is well put together, enough to keep your interest, and not too complicated to follow. I watched it while I was knitting and I was able to follow along just fine. This is an added bonus if you're just looking for something simple to watch. You get something unique and full of emotion, yet it isn't too intense!

All I can say is that, given its more creative plot, its great characters (or even just protagonist) and accompanying acting, and, last but not least, superb shots, the film is a worthwhile flick. It's not the most action packed, but it is not slow. However, if you don't like gangster films at all, I can't say this one will change your mind. But with the wonderfully strong John Carter, can you really say no?

Piratebay torrent

... What? You want to know about the remake? All you need to know is that you should never bring it up in good company. We'll just pretend it never happened...

Review LXXXIII - Monsieur Lazhar

Review LXXXIII
Monsieur Lazhar (2011)

On the way back from Japan, I managed to squeeze in some films on the plane ride. There is a joke in that statement because it was not squeezing but rather desperately attempting to waste as much time as I possibly could on the plane. Anyway, when I saw that Philippe Falardeau's Monsieur Lazhar was one of the options, I knew which film I was watching next. This film stars Mohamed Fellag, Sophie Nélisse, and Émilien Néron.

Simon (Néron), a young student, discovers that his teacher has hung herself in the classroom. With the class shaken completely, outside help is called. One of these helpers ends up being the class's new teacher, Monsieur Bashir Lazhar (Fellag). Monsieur Lazhar has recently immigrated to Canada from Algeria, so while the school attempts to overcome the grieving period of having lost one of their faculty members, Lazhar attempts to adapt into a new culture and overcome his horrible past.

The film is interesting, very human. The opening scene is seeing two children witness their teacher's hanging in their classroom. This delivers the initial shock of seeing someone's death. The rest of the film really deals with the grieving process. In fact, the whole film is a grieving process. First, with the students. Their teacher has committed suicide, and one of the students, the first to witness her, especially lashes out. We get one side of how people can react to a suicide. The second student, Alice (Nélisse), grieves, but we see she tries to keep her head about her. The interaction between the two of them is interesting, a clash of grieving processes. We see how, even though they are the only two who actually saw her, their approaches to dealing with their teacher's death brings them apart. It's a realistic view of how adults would deal with a suicide, at least in my opinion. At the same time we deal with the grieving process, we have a distant character come in, that is, Bashir Lazhar. He is an immigrant who is dealing with grief on his own part. I've never experienced being an immigrant and feeling alien to a new culture, but from what I've heard, it seems like a rather accurate portrayal. Not to mention the hardship Lazhar went through in his home country - but I shan't ruin that part for anyone. With the clash of this man and the suicide of a teacher, we get a really interesting mix. I thought it was grand, personally. Like I said, the film was human. It began with sadness, continued with trying to get over the melancholy, and, finally, with a sort of justice, a sort of letting go. The same thing was seen in Falardeau's other film, C'est pas moi, je le jure (It's Not Me, I Swear!)!, though I found Monsieur Lazhar a little better put together. It seemed cleaner, more focused. I... can't really say anything other than it was so human. It also had its little bits of comic relief, just as his other film.

The characters were great. Falardeau has a way of taking children and portraying them as adults, yet still as children. He puts them into these adult situations and sees how they play it out. He does a good job, I find. It makes it interesting instead of just having an adult dealing with an adult situation. And again, he tackles two ways of handling suicide in this film. Pretty legit. Plus adding in the bit of an immigrant seeking refuge status. Guys, I loved the film. I recommend it. I really liked C'est pas moi, je le jure, but I could see people not really getting what they were watching. Here, Falardeau does what he does in his previous film, but does it better. He takes it and really shows what he wants to show. Or, at least, I find.

The film is grand. It's sad, but still hopeful. I'm sure the play it is based on is just as great. Thank you!

Piratebay torrent