[ Saturday, September 21, 2002 ]
The Godfather
I just saw this movie for the first time ever. I probably can't say much about this movie that hasn't already been said. So I'll say this. Because this movie is so embedded in our culture, I knew what would happen in many of the key scenes. The entire wedding scene, the horsehead scene, car blowing-up scene, I knew. I was afraid that the movie would seem watered down. I've heard the words "offer he couldn't refuse" just about a million times. I could predict what characters would be saying. And yet the movie was still absolutely riveting. And it's funny that some movies today are ruined simply by their own trailer.
YY [9:25 PM]
[ Friday, September 13, 2002 ]
Austin Powers in Goldmember
Just like the Bond series, Austin Powers is now a franchise that can spit out movies and still bring in the hype and audiences. And I'm sure Mike Myers know it. The movie was funny and had its share of funny jokes. But yeah it's getting tired and uninspired. The new characters don't have that same appeal, nor do they even have any real catchphrases to remember. Toight? What the hell is that?
But in the same way you have to see a Bond movie because it is a Bond movie, you have to see this Austin Powers. You won't mess yourself laughing, but still enjoy it.
Rating: 7/10
Full Frontal
I probably shouldn't review a movie that I didn't finish. But in a way, that says it all about this movie. I stopped it about an hour into it. Boring! Who are these characters? Why am I watching them? Why am I watching these people yammer on about this and that?
Rating: N/A because I didn't see the entire movie
Waking Life
My friend, who runs a film club and has seen his share of art house films, walked out on this movie. He said it was too pretentious. This movie is really not for everyone, even if you like experimental films. If you like things both trippy and philosophical, then you'll probably enjoy it. If you can listen to intense rambling, then you can probably at least appreciate it. Technically, someone could watch it only for its amazing animation. But it's unlikely that you can do that for the two admittedly slow hours.That said, I enjoyed the hell out of the movie. In essence, the movie is like a documentary with lots of added cinematography and a thin story applied over it. It played out exactly like a dream and oozed with style. It had some mind-blowing animation to go with some mind-blowing ideas. Phillip K. Dick's idea about the illusion of time made me pause and really think. It's a movie best watched very late at night by yourself in the dark.
It's a shame that this movie didn't get hyped and marketed, because I think the animation itself could have drawn in mainstream audiences and then proceeded to blow their minds with its style and ideas.
Rating: 10/10
Following
I'm guessing many of those who watch this movie will have seen Memento first, and worked backwards. Written and directed by Christopher Nolan two years before Memento, it has much in common. The twisting and turning of characters and plotline. The same disorientation and trickery of emotions is involved. It also has similarities in cinematography. And just like Memento, the film questions things like relationships with people and the validity of our assumptions. It's a piece of art, both intense and thrilling to watch.
Rating: 10/10
Insomnia
And to follow the Following, Nolan's next film Insomnia. A remake of a Dutch film. I've read that the film is about the existential nature of the main character, played by Al Pacino. He is supposedly brought down by the realities of life. I saw none of that. To me, it was a "play it by the book" detective suspense thriller with a few twists, and not much more. If I hadn't known it was directed by Christopher Nolan, I wouldn't have realized it myself. I should probably go back and look for more.
Rating (for now): 6/10
YY [9:53 AM]
Star Wars: Episode II--Attack of the Clones
I'm a recently converted Star Wars fan. I used to hate Star Wars movies with a vengeance (without really having watched them actually). I saw Episode 4 and was not impressed. After that, something happened. I watched a bit of Joseph Campbell's stuff about mythology and how he connected Star Wars to ancient archetypes. Then the entire series opened up to me. It suddenly became epic and gave itself meaning. Episodes 4-6 had this magic to them.
Then came Episode 1. It didn't have this magic to it (as many reviewers have noted). But I still thoroughly enjoyed it for being a part of the series. I SHOULD have enjoyed it a lot more because of the emotional investment I had placed in the mythology of Episodes 4-6. But the thing was, for me, the events didn't seem to be too connected to the series. They didn't seem to be a part of the big picture. Not all that much happened in the movie that denoted that it was even really a Star Wars movie.
Now Episode 2. There is a whole lot of connectivity between this and Episode 4-6. You can see things that connect to the entire mythology and storyline of the entire series. The clone wars, the explanation of stormtroopers, the parents of Boba Fett, Luke, and Leia, the heroicism of Yoda, the creation of Darth Vader, the birth of the Emperor. The list goes on and on. Unlike Episode 1, there is so much that connects to Episode 4-6. The emotional investment I placed in the mythology finally has a payoff. Maybe this happens simply because this movie is closer in time to Episode 4-6.
And maybe with Episode 3, the movie that finally connects the trilogies, there will be even more of a payoff. Because I know the next movie will connect the series together and create a sort of closure, I feel satisified with THIS movie's ending. I've had a taste of what's to come and I only want more.
Now if you think this movie stunk because of its hokey acting, cheesy plot, unexplainable changes in character emotions, I really think you've missed the point of the movie and the entire series.
YY [9:03 AM]
[ Thursday, September 12, 2002 ]
Bloodwork
If Clint Eastwood made a TV show, it'd be a half hour of him looking in a mirror and sighing, depressed at his old age. But it would still be damn good. Probably win an Emmy. Bloodwork has nice plot twists, great acting, and a grave seriousness to it. I suppose that's the difference between this movie and the other ones like it. You can feel a conscience to it. I immediately connected to Eastwood's character, even though I shouldn't be able to relate to his situation at all. I want him to catch the killer, which is more than I can say about many of these action thrillers.
Rating: 8.5/10
My Big Fat Greek Wedding
It's a cheesy romantic comedy targeted at couples and foreign people. The jokes are not all that funny and you could write the plot in your head after watching the trailer. But it's lighthearted, filled with harmless ethnic humor, and optimistic. If you're foreign, then you can probably relate in some way. Worth watching.
Rating: 7/10
Road to Perdition
Superb acting and superb cinematography. Has that grave seriousness that I mentioned above. Each scene oozes with sadness. Even the happier portions seem bittersweet in some way. The movie's style is perfectly fit with the conscience and personality of its main character, Michael Sullivan, played by Tom Hanks.
YY [9:02 AM]
[ Wednesday, September 11, 2002 ]
That's a very good point. I'm sure that Spielberg isn't really aiming at any sort of real substantial social change and I'm sure that he shouldn't expect any sort of thing to happen. He probably just wants to create more general awareness while making an entertaining and pretty movie that makes lots of money. I guess that's what Spielberg is all about. That balance of seriousness and mainstreamness. Which, as you say, isn't all that useful in solving any issues. But then again, how much real power do movies have over society anyway?
About the "Kubrick mode" thing. It's a neat idea. I do see what he's saying. But Spielberg has already made films about general misanthropy and a skepticism about the future of human nature. Hell, think about E.T., Jurassic Park, even Schindler's List. Note that E.T. and Jurassic Park were both sci-fi too.
On a side note, despite the funny commercials in the movie, I think the privacy issues that the movie really are concerned about lie a little deeper than "Oh no this website knows who I am." They are more likely concerned about things like computerized cameras that identify you as you walk into a football game (happened at the Super Bowl I believe), or having cameras line every block of the street (which has happened in England somewhere).
YY [8:40 AM]
[ Tuesday, September 10, 2002 ]
Minority Report
In response to Ed's post, I guess the cheesy happy ending is justified by a lot of things. One reason is, yes, this is Hollywood, this is a business, and money is a very important factor.
But the other thing that maybe justifies the ending is the message that Spielberg wanted to convey. According to this CNN interview, Spielberg created the film in part due to his fears of the loss of privacy. The ending maybe ties up every last loose end and creates a sense of satisfaction because that's what Spielberg hopes and maybe predicts what will happen in real life. Dunno, just a thought.
YY [11:26 AM]
[ Saturday, September 07, 2002 ]
Signs
I wonder if Shymalan started with the idea of an alien movie and later added the element of faith in it. Or did he start out making a film about faith and later decide to use the idea of aliens.
I've seen some reviewers disappointed that the movie wasn't really about aliens. Given that the movie seems to be marketed as an alien horror film, I see their point of view. That raises a point about movies, and art in general. Why should we care and have an opinion about "how a film should have been made"? If Shymalan wanted to make a film about aliens, he would have. But he didn't really. He made a film about faith and religion. If you wanted to see a film about aliens and didn't like the movie, then your beef is with marketing, not the movie itself.
That said, the film was made beautifully with great acting, great suspense. I thoroughly enjoyed the film. I could watch the movie as an alien invasion film and completely ignore the aspects of faith tied to it. It still seems to work well that way. Those reviewers are just crabby I guess.
Rating: 9/10
The Way of the Gun
When George Hill directed Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, he was very nervous about mixing comedy with action. He was disappointed that people laughed so much at his movie. He was nervous that the timing would be off and that the drama and comedy would not work together. He didn't have to be nervous because everything worked out perfectly. Maybe The Way of the Gun was an attempt to be the new Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid. Only, with The Way of the Gun, the director should be very very nervous.
Rating: 4/10
Minority Report
I wish a director would make a film that was COMPLETELY riddled with plot holes, paradoxes,inconsistencies, logical fallacies, but was otherwise a completely riveting movie. It would help me to prove the point that movies are art. Minority Report is not a blueprint, documentary, scientific research paper, or a computer manual. It is a movie which you are meant to consume, be affected by, receive its central messages, and enjoy. If you cannot enjoy a movie because of a plot hole, then maybe you better take off your shirt to find that there is a panel on your chest that you can remove to reveal complex electronic wiring and machinery inside.
And this "supposed" plot hole: the paradox of preventing something that never has happened. If you can explain to me how the universe works, including everything about time, space, and consciousness, then you are qualified to say that Minority Report had a plot hole. But before then, how the hell could you possibly know this is a paradox and then use that to say the movie was not enjoyable?
Rating: 9/10
YY [9:32 PM]
