Movie Review - Aladin

Aladin (the film) is no Genius as Amitabh Bachchan's character is, but the movie does transport you to fantasyland, as its genre promises.

Right from Boman Irani's voice-over in the beginning, the film carries you to a place called Khwaish, where Sujoy Ghosh rubs his palms, has his actors in slick get-ups, and sets to match the mood.

Its fantasyland all right when Aladin (Riteish Deshmukh) is bullied by his friends from childhood to rub a lamp in the hope of a genie appearing. ''Aladin, Aladin kahan hai tera genie,'' his friends harass him all through his growing-up years.

However, things change when Jasmine (Jacqueline Fernandez) walks into his class on his birthday. Kasim (Sahil Khan), the big bully organizes a birthday bash to impress Jasmine. He convinces Jasmine that Aladin likes lamps and they buy him one as his birthday gift. Once again, they force him to rub the lamp. He refuses, but on Jasmine's insistence, he does oblige. Out comes Genius the genie (Amitabh Bachchan).

From then on, its all between Genie and Aladin. He has three wishes but he wastes them all on Jasmine! There's also a twist in the tale in the form of Ring Master (Sanjay Dutt) who plays the bad Genie who wants all powers for himself.

Jacqueline waltzes through her part with the grace of a gazelle. She has the looks and the talent to make a mark. Amitabh is in 'high energy' mode giving the formulaic image of a fat man who we have come to identify with a Genie, a novel twist. Whether he is dancing or fighting, he is still 'Ab Tak Bachchan'. The style and the charismatic power are there for all to see. Riteish is slowly but steadily making a mark of his own. Dutt injects the necessary evil ingredient.

Read Full Entry

House Of The Devil Movie Review

he House Of The Devil is as perfect an 80's horror film as we'll ever get in this decade. The only thing missing is the giant clamshell VHS case. The look, style, tone, pacing, even the credits nail the feel of a flick your friends would've rented out for a slumber party, but weren't quite sure what it was about. It's fun for fans of the genre (yes, 80's possession horror is a sub-sect) but ADD-editing style fanatics should move along to the next defanged crappy remake.

The House of the Devil is the classic story of a nubile young coed Samantha, played by Jocelin Donahue and who could be the younger sister of Marion from Raiders of the Lost Ark. Samantha is enrolled at a sleepy college and has roommate problems.

Namely, her roommate is always having raucous sex, distracting from her scholarly duties. Samantha wants out, and has found an apartment that would suit her just fine. The only problem? She doesn't have the money to cover her check.

Samantha takes a long walk to the student center and finds a simple ad that reads "Babysitter Needed". She calls and speaks to Mr. Ulman (Tom Noonan, whose creepy voice you can tell immediately, and will alert you to the fact that something bad will probably go down). After a lengthy series of misunderstandings, Samantha finally makes her way to the house, where she meets Ulman. He is indeed creepy, but Noonan plays it so well, you're not sure if he's sinister or just a normal, albeit strange, individual. However, in case you couldn't glean it from the title, some bad things are about to go down at this house.

There have been a lot of movies lately that try to ape the aesthetics of past movies, but successfully incorporate them into the narrative. Some miss this point (The Good German, Grindhouse) while some are successful (Black Dynamite, this). The key is that they don't let the storytelling get in the way of the story. Ti West, the director, clearly loves his 80's horror films, but I sense that he went into this movie with the intention of making a film that could easily stand alongside these movies, not looking down on them. To this extent, he succeeds! He has crafted a wonderful sense of tension and dread that could also just as easily be paranoia in the mind of a cute young coed who hasn't been inundated with horror films.

(He also does a great job with the period setting details. My favorite being Samantha's walkman that's the size of a novel).

The performances make the film rise above as well. I have not seen Jocelin Donahue before, but she looks like she stepped out of the 80s. She's nice to look at, and she plays the character with the right amount of naivety and desperation that you believe she would put herself in the situations that she does. And Tom Noonan is just fantastic. Everytime he's on screen, you chuckle nervously, never sure what he's going to do next. The supporting actors are quite good as well, including A.J. Bowen, a familiar face to fans of The Signal.

The movie is deliberately slow. The pace is there for a reason. You have to invest in the film to get more out of it, but it sinks in long after viewing, and it is creepy. It's not about cheap scares, it's about subtle layers. If you're tired of the what passes for horror these days, and are looking for a fun, spooky flick with loads of atmosphere, do yourself and check out House Of The Devil.

Read Full Entry

Michael Jackson Movie This Is It Review

The Michael Jackson movie “This Is It” left me disappointed. Don’t get me wrong here, the movie was masterfully put together from rehearsal footage.

Director Kenny Ortega’s compilation of over 250 hours of all the footage is nothing short of genius. The movie runs pretty seamlessly, trying to give the viewer a “real feeling” of what this tour would have been if Michael hadn’t suffered his untimely death. All of Michael’s multi platinum songs are there.

We see Michael trying to make sure the shows were up to “his” standards and how he always would be polite and loving, even when giving criticism.

“This Is It” delivered on its promise to show us the “inner” workings of a Michael Jackson concert and it showed us why the “King Of Pop” was one of the greatest showmen of our time.

In “This Is It”, the “King Of Pop” moves more like a man of 20 than his actual age of 50. In some of the scenes, the singer moves at a slower pace and is quick to point out that he is just “holding himself in”, which is understandable because it is a “rehearsal” after all.

The “This Is It” tour would have been one of the greatest shows of all time. The movie is a fitting tribute for the beloved Michael Jackson and is sure to be talked about and watched for a long time to come. Fans will swoon over it and all of Michael’s critics will trash it.

This movie was made for the fans and they will enjoy it tremendously. It is very entertaining and gives you almost everything a “live” concert would have. So, you may be asking why I am disappointed? “This Is It” left me disappointed because I realized what a great show a Michael Jackson concert must have been and I am disappointed I never got to see any of the “King Of Pop’s” concerts in person.

Read Full Entry

London Dreams

Cast: Ajay Devgan, Salman Khan, Asin
Music: Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy
Director: Vipul A. Shah

Two childhood friends had little in common, except the connection their families had with music.

While Arjun’s (Ajay Devgn) life was consumed by a passionate drive to get on stage and realize his grandfather’s unfulfilled dream, Mannu (Salman Khan) had little interest in his father’s music instruments and was content with remaining a child at heart; bold, loud and boisterous, and enjoying the good things in life.

Never had they expected music to solidify their friendship and then test it with catastrophic results…

Arjun, an abandoned child, ran away from an uncle who was his only family in an unfamiliar land. He roamed the streets of London struggling to pursue his sole dream of foraying into the world of music and showmanship.

He forged a band with Zoheb (Rannvijay Singh) and Wasim (Aditya Roy Kapoor), two brothers who’d duped their relatives in Pakistan to travel to London in pursuit of their musical aspirations, and Priya (Asin), a beautiful and young music enthusiast.

Far away in Punjab (India), Mannu took to playing in local wedding bands to make ends meet. Shortly after bringing Mannu to London to make him a part of his band, Arjun realized that he had blundered by creating the biggest threat and obstacle to his ambition.

Manu, incredibly gifted, became an instant opiate of the masses with his unique and irreverent style of performing. What took Arjun years to achieve, Mannu did overnight.

Arjun felt betrayed by the God to whom he’d surrendered everything in exchange for eminence in music. His (Arjun’s) pangs of jealousy and insecurity became worse when Mannu won over his secret love, Priya.

Battling his inner demons and consumed by rage, Arjun devised a sinister plan to destroy his best friend and adversary.

Over a three-city tour spanning Paris, Rome and Amsterdam, Arjun sent a naïve Mannu on a downward hurtling rollercoaster ride of sex and drugs before a grand finale at the historic Wembley Arena, where Arjun hoped to regain and enjoy his moment of glory.

But as a rude shock awaited Arjun, it also turned into a humbling and introspective experience that taught him the real meaning of acceptance.

From Vipul Shah, the maker of supreme blockbusters as Namastey London and Waqt, London Dreams, lavishly mounted and embellished, is an intense and powerful drama about passion, ambition, envy and realization, with a distinct musical backdrop. With a stellar cast, it promises to be one of the most compelling motion picture experiences of 2009.

Read Full Entry

Antichrist - Movie Review

In a March 2009 interview with iconic uber-indie writer/director Lars von Trier (“Dogville,” “Dancer in the Dark,” “Breaking the Waves”) the devil-beset film maker described the circumstances surrounding the writing of this screenplay.

He described himself as suffering from depression, everything seeming unimportant and trivial and his being incapable of work.

In this condition he wrote the script for “Antichrist.” If you think you have seen heavy films you ain’t seen nuttin’ until you see this. Regarding the Not Rated rating, this film is not rated for several very good reasons. Any one of the most disturbing five or six scenes alone would garner a solid “X” from the less than understanding MPAA (The MPAA discussion of the film on IMDB is longer than this film review. Squeamish viewers might want to take the time to read the discussion even though it contains some spoilers).

The film consists almost entirely of two characters. Married couple “He” played by twice Oscar nominated Willem Dafoe (“Platoon” and “Shadow of the Vampire”) and “She” played by Charlotte Gainsbourg. Gainsbourg, a two time French Cesar winner pocketed the coveted Best Actress award at the 2009 Cannes FF for her scintillating performance in this film. She does everything but set the piano on fire in this powerful story of grief and loss.

The film starts with the death of the couple’s infant child who dies while they are making passionate love. This event causes intense guilt feelings in the couple. “He” is a psychological counselor who tries to talk his wife out of her near-coma obsession over their child’s death but she slips further and further into an abyss that eventually becomes homicidal.

The two retreat to their once-favorite idyll in the pristine forests of the mountains where they plan to rest and get their life together. At this point the film takes on the feeling of the horror classic “The Shining” where struggling writer Jack Nicholson goes bonkers at the isolated Colorado retreat. The screenplay could be considered both pornography and a horror story although the latter part of the film is solidly in the horror genre. He is trying to escape while saving the life and sanity of his partner while she is in an uncontrollable deadly rage apparently bent on killing them both.

As in von Trier’s’ earlier films this one has a marvelous stripped down look and feel consistent with the guidelines of the “Dogme 95” convention. The visual expression is as pristine as the mountain streams. There are no sets, no artificial lighting, and no costumes. Director of photography Anthony Dod Mantle rejoins von Trier after their past efforts in the blockbuster “Manderlay” and “Dogville” (“Manderlay” also featuring Willem Dafoe). Mantle has done much of his previous work with Thomas Vinterburg in creating the brooding, overcast feelings of impending doom in “Last King of Scotland” and “Dear Wendy” and this film is creepier than either of those (beating out Idi Amin in the creepiness category is not easy…). There is something about the flat light and rainfall of the mountain idyll (named “Eden” with a full measure of irony) that amplifies the entrapped horror the two characters are feeling. Death is the only relief they have but it continually eludes them.

The movie makes enthralling diversions in and out of surrealism as well as the over-riding horror and carnal themes. The symbols of the "the 3 Beggars" (a deer who represents grief, a fox who represents pain and a crow who represents despair) are recurrent with the crow/raven finally exposing He in his hiding place where He is discovered by his insanely wrathful wife. Another fascinating symbol is the acorns that fall against the roof of the cabin in a natural tattoo that eventually expands into a crescendo of maddening noise as the two protagonists come closer to the realization that their options are almost exhausted.

This film will not go down in history as one of Lars von Trier’s greatest but it is still worth watching if you are a fan of his or of Dafoe’s or Gainsbourg’s. Her performance is one of the most intense ever filmed and would be every bit as powerful without the worst scenes of bloody violence and without the most explicit scenes of sexual activity. Many will end up considering Nicole Kidman’s performance in “Dogville” to be more expressive even though it is considerably less outrageous.

Read Full Entry

Movie Review - 'Amelia' circles but is sadly off-course

Considering the risks Amelia Earhart took, losing her life in the call of aviation, Hilary Swank and director Mira Nair don't put much on the line in their film biography "Amelia."

Swank and Nair play it safe to the point of benumbing this woman's life, leaving Earhart as remote and muted as she is in the black-and-white photos and news footage of the aviator included at the film's end.

"Amelia" is a biopic on autopilot. We get the facts of Earhart's pioneering achievements, her marriage to her promoter (Richard Gere), her fling with a fellow pilot (Ewan McGregor). And we get pretty pictures of airplanes in flight.

But this dowdy movie rarely embodies Earhart's passions, whether for flying or for the men in her life.

Much of the fault lies in the screenplay by Ron Bass and Anna Hamilton Phelan, a script remarkably based on not one, but two Earhart biographies.

In stumbling, choppy fashion, the movie intercuts between Earhart's doomed last flight around the world in 1937 and the achievements leading up to it over the previous decade – her Atlantic and Pacific crossings, her mentoring of female fliers, her efforts to establish regional passenger shuttle service.

Lovely aerial images, lush landscapes and rich sets and costumes are the film's lone strengths. In almost every other regard, "Amelia" veers off course.

All the other components for an engaging chronicle are there. A grand life that ends in tragedy and epic mystery. Period drama that offers the chance to craft glorious images and play puppetmaster for fascinating characters. A filmmaker in Nair ("Monsoon Wedding," "Mississippi Masala") who has a keen feel for bold women and zestful lives.

A sturdy supporting cast includes Christopher Eccleston, as the navigator who disappeared with Earhart on her final flight over the Pacific, and Cherry Jones, who briefly enlivens the film as Eleanor Roosevelt on a night flight with Earhart.

"Amelia" flirts with potentially interesting aspects of Earhart's story. Sadly, these moments are tossed in to no purpose, like stuffy airport layovers in really interesting destinations you wish you had the time to go out and explore.

Read Full Entry

All The Best

Starring Sanjay Dutt, Ajay Devgn, Fardeen Khan, Bipasha Basu, Mugdha Godse
Directed by Rohit Shetty
Rating: ** ½

“I’m doing action for thirty years. Comedy I’ve recently taken to, ” says Sanjay Dutt in the ‘won’-and-only explosion of dhishum-dhishum.

You got it, brother. In his first really decent and meaty role since Munnabhai Dutt gets into the satirical groove effortlessly and fluently playing a visiting Bade Bhaiyya from abroad whom his kid- brother Fardeen Khan (tolerably befuddled) must fool into believing he’s married and decent.

The guys in Rohit Shetty’s comedies are anything but decent. Rascals and rogues of the first order Devgan and Khan, are splendidly supported by a sparkling cast of comic actors ranging from Asrani to Johnny Lever to the wonderful Ashwini Kalsekar (remember how cheesy and charming she was in Rohit Shetty’s Gol Maal Returns?) to Sanjay Mishra (as a zonked out wannabe householder who says ‘Just chill’ as though his tongue had just been through a sugarcane – juice machine).

The screenplay (Robin Bhatt) juices the material for all it’s worth.

The constant flow of cheesy-breezy dialogues is littered with high-school humour but blessedly no vulgarity. This is one comedy you could take your mom to see without once walloping a wince into the wanton soup.

The burlesque is fast –paced though surprisingly restrained and has room galore for PJs.

The one-liners are so silly and graffiti-like in their basic humour, you can’t but titter at the trivia wrapped in gloss that makes welcome room for Pritam’s pacy music without getting in the way of the one-liners.

So ok. This one doesn’t leave you …er Blue in the face. The comedy is purely situational and the style purely ‘ Rohit Shetty’. That means a bit of slapstick, a bit of that rapidly-moving tongue in the cheek, and a lot of Ajay Devgn.

And if you add Sanjay Dutt to the bubby buncy comic brew…man, you’ve got show that’s on the road from the word, go.

This time the setting, if you must know, is Goa. Shetty doesn’t use the touristic spot as a character. You suspect he places his colony of characters in the Goan location so they could all be camera-framed into a streamlined stampede.

There are only 3 female characters in the show, the resy are all guys playing con men, goons, gangsters, wheeledealers, warriors and worriers all of whom display an exemplary comic strength.

Sanjay Dutt gets it right after a long time. He has a lot of fun doing his part and he lets us share his enjoyment.

Ajay Devgn’s comic timing has gotten rapidly dead-on under Shetty’s tutelage. He gives Dutt tit for tat, and then some more.

Not all the material is uniformly amusing. Towards the finishing line you do begin to wonder how much longer it would take this wonky wacky world of wispy and reparable wickeness to set itself right.

Read Full Entry

Blue

Starring Sanjay Dutt, Akshay Kumar, Zayed Khan, Lara Dutta, Katrina Kaif
Directed by Tony D’Souza
Rating: ** ½

First things first. The villain of the show is not Akshay Kumar. It’s the screenplay. What was the writer thinking when he wrote this underwater escapade with well-toned bodies posing against the breathtaking Bahamian backdrops?

The treasure-hunt could be straight out of Enid Blyton’s Famous Five…The quintet here are from an altogether different age group from what Blyton had intended.

Samjay Dutt and Akshay Kumar are friends. We are made to believe they are in the fishery business, though we don’t ever see them doing a day’s work. All they do is soak their lips in the bubblies and their toes in the pristine-blue waters.

Oh yes, they also get into the boxing ring. But their pugnacious proclivities never get beyond the first chapter of Enid Bylton’s ‘ Famous 4 Get Frisky’. If Enid never wrote it, then here it is. The screenplay writer doing the needful. The two grownup boys who relentlessly talk about undersea treasure.

This is Dhoom going thousands of feet under.

We get very little insight into what motivates these overgrown boys to think green –backs in their blue environment.Fast cars and furious wheels just don’t make for a meaningful existence. But who’s going to tell these people they are interesting only to themselves?

Interestingly the only rounded and remotely cohesive character is that played by Zayed Khan. We first see him as a brat in Bangkok racing mo’bikes and wooing the puckish and punky Katrina Kaif with bedroomy looks. Zayed penchant for the two wheels give us two very lengthy and very stylish chase sequences which are among the best we’ve ever seen in Hindi cinema.

But do skidding wheels and somersaulting cars constitute a substantial film? Often in the midst of the breath-taking stunts you look for a relevance beyond the cosmetic confection that Blue so insouciantly throws in your face.

The characters’ single-minded obsession with self-preservation in the most superficial sense, keeps us guessing about the true reason for their existence.By the time they find the treasure we still don’t have a clue as to what motivates them to skim the surface of existenc.

Director Anthony D’Souza is completely in control of the character’s outside world. The underwater sequences are truly a plunge that Hindi cinema has never taken. The camera follows the characters underwater with a masterly aplomb.

It’s the world above sea level that leaves us hankering for oxygen. The world that these characters inhabit is utterly devoid of a third dimension. A multiplicity of cameras are used to capture their rapidly-moving world. But that essential peep into the characters’ hearts and minds eludes the keen camera lenses.

Blame the writing. Lara Dutta looks wow in a bikini. But the cast could do with a serious crash course in how to have a whale of a time without getting in the way of the sharks.

Sanjay Dutt should have kost 20 kgs before getting into underwater gear. Oh yes that’s Kylie Minogue doing jiggwiggy to A R Rahman’s music. Does anyone really care ? These are scuba-diving hedonists busy having a ball. We really don’t want to intrude on their very private world of cars, cruiser boats and water sports.

At the end Akshay Kumar speeds into the ocean on his mo’bike. We don’t blame him for forgetting the difference between earth and water. Blue blurs the line between water and land somewhere in the first two reels.

And then it’s just a plotless journey into the heart of the ocean.

Read Full Entry

Adann Movie Reviews New

“Couples Retreat” (Comedy/Romance: 1 hour, 53 minutes); Starring: Vince Vaughn, Malin Akerman, Jason Bateman, Kristen Bell, Faizon Love, Jon Favreau, Kristin Davis, and Jean Reno; Director: Peter Billingsley; Rated: PG-13 (Sexual innuendo, crude and sexual humor, mild language and brief violence)

Movie Review: As a single person, complaining couples are not the entertainment one would like to see. Such a situation is the case with “Couples Retreat,” a comedy written by stars Jon Favreau and Vince Vaughn, who is also a producer.

This tolerable comedy becomes a somewhat agreeable romance as the relationships of four couples are revealed while on a couples retreat on an exotic island. The couples complain, argue and find themselves in very precarious situations — a yoga scene goes on far too long, ruining the scene’s jokes. Actor Billingsley directs, his second time helming a production. He allows his cast to run amok, a condition of directing your boss (Vaughn).

Even more, the story is forced. The characters all do the “right thing,” even when it appears their actions are too easily resolvable. An example is Jennifer (Tasha Smith, in a very petite role), the estranged wife of Shane (the token black guy role played by Faizon), telling her husband that it took sleeping with multiple men and partying some everywhere to realize he was the best thing for her. Immediately, he takes her back, seemingly with no reservations.

The wives are smart, beautiful and genuine. The men are goofy husbands. The wives should drop their zeroes and get with heroes. As to why the women seem more serious than their male counterparts, the answer is not because the plot demands such. Women are typically less funny in comedies due to sexist prejudices of men in moviedom. Movie producers, who value the almighty box-office dollar, think of women as the less funny of the sexes as dictated by ticket sales. Therefore, the comedic lines belong to the men in this film, while the women are given the grounded, less humorous lines, making them appear much smarter than their men.

Comedies rarely make total sense, but they contain laughs. Despite some flubbed lines and over-the-top characters, “Retreat” has its moments. Some scenes are good, smart humor, and other moments are tragically funny because the scenes are goofily under par. Either way, it provides a few laughs.

Read Full Entry

ONG BAK 2 Movie Review

A little while back, I was invited to an advance screening of Ong Bak 2 and, being a fan of Ong Bak, I was very excited to see Tony Jaa do his thing again.

Ong Bak 2 is marketed as a prequel to Ong Bak although it really has nothing to do with it. The story revolves around Tien (Tony Jaa) who, as a teen, saw his parents being slain by a political rival. Through some adventures, he ends up in this gang of thieves who teach him the different martial arts that will serve him to prepare for his ultimate revenge.

Needless to say, my expectations were modestly high. The plot had a lot of things going for it but unfortunately, my expectations were not met. Let me tell you why by breaking out the good and bad parts of this movie:

The Good Parts of Ong Bak 2

The fight scenes are certainly dope. In Ong Bak 2,Tony Jaa goes beyond the classic Muy Thai moves and explores different disciplines and fighting techniques. The whole movie is essentially a set up to fight scenes where we see Tony do some crazy stuff. In this movie, you will have the answers to the following questions:
Can Tony Jaa fight a crocodile?
- Can Tony Jaa fight with weapons?
- Can Tony Jaa fight a gazillion enemies at the same time?
- Can Tony Jaa fight a gazillion enemies at the same time AND use an elephant to do so?

The answer is yes across the board.

During these fight scenes, there is some really cool camera work and editiing that only enhance them. So overall, great scenes.

Now the question is: What else was good in this movie? Well, the answer is not much else.

The Bad Parts of Ong Bak 2

The bad parts of the movie can be summed up in two words: Everything Else.

The story was so badly put together that my 5 year old niece could have done a better job of writing it. There were major plot holes that just were too glaring to ignore and yet they found a way to ignore them. The feeble attempt of introducing some sort of love story was so exceptionally bad that it was better if they didn't try.

The acting was painfully awful. Even the subtitles could not hide how bad the characters were portrayed. Tony Jaa was the worst of them all. The character he portrays spends almost the first 25 mn of the movie saying exactly NOTHING. Jeez.

Now, the end was the worst part. There was none. It litterally ended on a freaking cliffhanger. When the light came on, people were expecting more. One guy was like: "Is that really it?"

Basically, aside from the fight scenes, this is one of the worst movies I have seen all year. I suggest you do the following: Save your money, wait for this to come out on DVD, rent it and fast forward throughout the movie until you see the fight scenes. That will be a much more pleasant experience than sitting through the entire movie.

Read Full Entry

Fantastic Mr Fox Movie Review

This is much more of a Wes Anderson film than the Roald Dahl classic on which it's based. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it could cause problems with fans of the book. The central themes are still there, but this is essentially a quirky dysfunctional family romp.

Mr Fox (voiced by Clooney) has a pretty fantastic life as a newspaper columnist living in his den with his wife (Streep), surly teen son Ash (Schwartzman) and visiting nephew Kristofferson (Anderson). After Fox convinces his wife to move aboveground to a tree, he becomes tempted to go back to his bird-stealing ways.

And with his possum pal Kylie (Wolodarsky), he goes on a spree that enrages the local farmers, led by the furious Bean (Gambon), who vows revenge. But this puts the entire local animal population in danger. By focussing on the offbeat family and extended animal community, Anderson shifts the story into his usual exploration of internal angst and interpersonal carnage.

While Dahl's central tale about creatures outwitting humans is still there, this is much more a story about a man rediscovering who he really is, namely a wild animal. Fortunately this is explored with wit and energy, some hysterical dialog, terrific characters and absolutely gorgeous animation.

Visually, the film looks timeless, as the old-style stop-motion is deliberately jerky and goofy. This makes it that much more tactile. And the animators brilliantly bring the characters to life, complete with strong emotion and sharp personalities, energetically conveyed by the great vocal cast. And Anderson directs the action with his usual brand of straight-on camerawork, yellow-orange colour scheme and amusing little touches.

At the centre is the idea that a fox can't really be happy without a chicken in his teeth. Obviously, this idea resonates on a deeper level, but the film's essentially a snappy, lightweight comedy. Why Anderson decided to make the animals American even though the humans and the above-ground setting are firmly in Dahl's Britain is anyone's guess. So if the message is a little simplistic, at least the film shows astounding visual innovation. And it's a thoroughly engaging place to spend 90 minutes.

Read Full Entry

Black Dynamite Movie Review

"Watch out, Shaft! Black Dynamite's in town!" is what I would write if I did was not raised to honor and respect the private dick that's a sex machine to all the chicks.

(And had a lack of respect for myself). Regardless, Black Dynamite proves itself a worthy successor to the blaxploitation classic, and wouldn't be out of place on a double bill, although, Dolemite is the more obvious comparison film. Black Dynamite is also the hardest I've laughed during a movie all year. In the good ways, too!

Black Dynamite is both a cheeky parody and a loving homage to the blaxploitation films of yesteryear. From the poor production design, to the mistakes left in.

From gratuitous nudity to the big names used in just one scene, it all adds up to a movie that's in on the joke, but doesn't think it's better than what it's making fun of. It might not be able to sustain the joke the whole way through, but it's thoroughly entertaining enough in it's own right, and nowhere near as arch as it could be.

Michael Jai White plays Black Dynamite, a pimp and a hustler, who is skilled in kung fu and kicking ass. He has a blackbelt in TCB. (Takin Care of Business, for those who are out of the loop). He's also accompanied by an awesome musical sting that lets you know Dynamite is about to do (or just did) something cool. When we begin the adventure, Black Dynamite's brother is killed. Since he promised their mother on her deathbed that he would protect his brother, Black Dynamite goes on a rampage.

Along his journey of kicking ass and taking names, Black Dynamite encounters a social worker, who informs him of the increasing smack problem that's overtaking the local orphanage. Infuriated, Black Dynamite sets out to clean up the streets, and fight smack in the orphanage! This leads to a fantastic scene full of actors you love in ridiculous outfits, with hilarious results.

The plot isn't really what's important. Hell, about 2/3 into the movie they sort of run out of things to do. (Although they make up for it with a spectacularly gonzo final battle that involves two former presidents AND nunchucks!) What matters is the affection for the characters, and the genre that the filmmakers put in. Sure, it's easy to make fun of Shaft and Dolemite, but do you have any idea how difficult it is to create an entirely new hero of the same genre, and not have be a pale imitation?

Credit goes to co-writer/director Scott Sanders, and to Black Dynamite himself, Michael Jai White. White has this remarkable ability to play it straight while winking at the camera. On top of that, he really can kick as much ass as his on screen persona, and he takes great pride in showing you his kung fu skill. (Between this, and Blood and Bone, I'm starting to question why he doesn't have a career as big as Van Damme at the very least. the man knows his kung fu is better than yours).

Love should also be shone upon the music selection for the film, which contains a whole lot of badass funk, in addition to hilarious musical interludes with lyrics that literally point out what's happening before your very eyes. It's kind of ridiculous, but there are many previous films in this genre that pulled off the same thing, while being absolutely serious about it.

Have I mentioned how damn funny the whole thing is? There's one scene that's a slice of pure comic gold. It involves Black Dynamite and his crew at a diner, figuring out the plot of the film. How they come to their realizations (and payoff a joke from a half hour earlier) is achieved with such wit and brilliance, that the joke became sublime, and I was crying with laughter. Pure Comic Gold.

I feel I'm leaving so much out, but this film is a treat to discover. Whereas Black Dynamite could have been a one-off-should-be-an-SNL-sketch, or a retread of Undercover Brother, instead we get a treat that loves blaxploitation films and the fans, and wants to make room for one more hero on that mantle. "DY-NO-MITE!"

Read Full Entry

Capsule reviews - `Wild Things' and others

Capsule reviews of films opening this week: "New York, I Love You" The title is "New York, I Love You," and it's a collection of shorts intended as one big love letter to the city and all the romance it has to offer. The result is a curiously bland hodgepodge not terribly evocative of such a famous place, and not all that inspiring in the connections it depicts.

Following 2007's "Paris Je T'Aime," this is the second in a planned series of "Cities of Love" films. Each features a group of eclectic directors and well-known actors coming together to concoct brief clips. Inherently with such a structure, you're going to have hits and misses. Not all the segments are going to work for every viewer.

But whereas "Paris Je T'Aime" had a healthy number of hits, "New York, I Love You" is the unfortunate opposite. The challenge presented to filmmakers was intriguing, too: Each of them had two days to shoot, then a week to edit. Each short had to take place in an identifiable New York neighborhood. And each had to involve some kind of love encounter.

Except for Shekhar Kapur's entry, with its dreamy, ethereal light, nearly everything in "New York, I Love You" has a dark, gritty sameness that feels smothering. Aside from references to Central Park and the Dakota building and restaurants like Balthazar and Pastis, "New York, I Love You" could take place in any bustling, densely populated metropolis. Mira Nair, Brett Ratner, Joshua Marston and Natalie Portman are among the directors; James Caan, Orlando Bloom, Julie Christie and Robin Wright Penn are among the actors. R for language and sexual content. 103 min. Two stars out of four.

"Where the Wild Things Are" The book is just 339 words long, but in turning it into a feature-length movie, director Spike Jonze has expanded the story with a breathtaking visual scheme and stirring emotional impact. What keeps the film from reaching complete excellence is the thinness of the script, which Jonze co-wrote with Dave Eggers.

The beloved and award-winning children's book, which Maurice Sendak wrote and illustrated 45 years ago, still holds up beautifully today because it shows keen insight into the conflicted nature of children the delight and the frustration that can often coexist simultaneously. With its warm lighting and detailed production design, "Where the Wild Things Are" remains lovingly faithful to the look and spirit of the book but functions assuredly as its own entity.

Jonze also gets the feelings of fear and insecurity that the wild things of "Wild Things" represent, and he's taken the bold step of showing the creatures not through animation but rather by using actual people in giant, furry costumes.

The monsters were voiced by an all-star cast and enhanced through digital effects to make the facial features seem more lifelike. And because talented character actors like James Gandolfini, Forest Whitaker, Catherine O'Hara and Paul Dano had the benefit of voicing their roles on the same stage at the same time rather than recording their parts independently of each other, which is standard practice their interplay feels more organic.

At their center is Max, played by 12-year-old Max Records, a lonely, misunderstood kid who runs off to the magical land where the wild things are and becomes their king. PG for mild thematic elements, some adventure action and brief language. 101 min. Three stars out of four.

Read Full Entry

Movie Review - An Education

It’s 1961 and attractive, bright 16-year-old schoolgirl, Jenny (Carey Mulligan) is poised on the brink of womanhood, dreaming of a rarefied, Gauloise-scented existence.

As she sings along to Juliette Greco in her Twickenham bedroom. Stifled by the tedium of adolescent routine, Jenny can’t wait for adult life to begin. Meanwhile, she’s a diligent student, excelling in every subject except the Latin that her father is convinced will land her the place she dreams of at Oxford University.

One rainy day, her suburban life is upended by the arrival of an unsuitable suitor, 30- ish David (Peter Sarsgaard). Urbane and witty, David instantly unseats Jenny’s stammering schoolboy admirer, Graham (Matthew Beard).

To her frank amazement,he even manages to charm her conservative parents Jack (Alfred Molina) and Marjorie (Cara Seymour), and effortlessly overcomes any instinctive objections to their daughter’s older, Jewish suitor.

Very quickly, David introduces Jenny to a glittering new world of classical concerts and late-night suppers with his attractive friend and business partner, Danny (Dominic Cooper) and Danny’s girlfriend, the beautiful but vacuous Helen (Rosamund Pike). David replaces Jenny’s traditional education with his own version, picking her up from school in his Bristol roadster and whisking her off to art auctions and smoky clubs.

Under the pretext of an introduction to C.S. Lewis, David arranges to take Jenny on a weekend jaunt to Oxford with Danny and Helen. Later, using an ingenious mixture of flattery and fibbery, he persuades her parents to allow him to take their only daughter to Paris for her 17th birthday. David suggests that his “Aunt Helen” will once again act as a chaperone. Jack and Marjorie do not know that Jenny has chosen the date and place to lose her virginity.

Paris is all that Jenny imagined it would be, sex with David somewhat less so. On her return to Twickenham, Jenny’s school friends are thrilled with her newfound sophistication but her headmistress (Emma Thompson) is scandalised and her English teacher Miss Stubbs (Olivia Williams) is deeply disappointed that her prize pupil seems determined to throw away her evident gifts and certain chance of higher education. Just as the family’s long-held dream of getting their brilliant daughter into Oxford seems within reach, Jenny is tempted by another kind of life. Will David be the making of Jenny or her undoing?

Read Full Entry

Reviews of Jude Law in 'Hamlet': Something Rotten ... or Not

Anyone playing 'Hamlet' is likely to dominate the production, but when a movie star like Jude Law, who comes complete with a tabloid history, takes on the role, he's likely to be all that anyone talks about.

In the Broadway production imported from London's Donmar Warehouse theater company, Law's unmelancholy Dane drew mixed reviews, with some critics praising his forceful interpretation, and others accusing him of playing to the cheap seats. -- By Tom Conroy

Ben Brantley, The New York Times: "People who ask for a little introspection from the man whose name is a byword for that activity may find it perplexing that this Hamlet never seems to look inward, which means that he never grows up -- or grows, period. When Mr. Law's hyperkinetic Dane announces early that 'I have that within which passeth show,' it is a promise that will not be fulfilled.

Elysa Gardner, USA Today: "His Hamlet is no brooding philosopher/prince; he's an angry young man, a bundle of nerves forever threatening to explode. But Law also captures the more tender feelings and contradictions that make this tortured hero at once elusive and essentially human -- particularly in his soliloquies, which are both muscular and exquisitely lyrical."

Linda Winer, Newsday: "Jude Law has a dashing, high-energy confidence ... The fine actor -- whose love life has been unfairly headlined over his craft -- commands virtually every scene in this downtown-black, modern-dress production ... On the other hand, if you're looking for an ambivalent Hamlet, one who struggles with existential decisions or makes you question his sanity, well, this is likely to feel more like a movie-star vehicle than a provocative interpretation of great conflicted tragedy."

Joe Dziemianowicz, The New York Daily News: "Can a movie star on the stage transcend his film performances and even rise above the gossip pages? The answer is yes when it comes to Jude Law, who's giving a spine-tingling and richly layered performance in a new version of 'Hamlet' that makes you forget about his past roles and bad-boy melodramas."

Elisabeth Vincentelli, The New York Post: "Let's cut to the chase: Jude Law doesn't embarrass himself as Hamlet. Far from it. His take on the sweet prince of Denmark leans toward the 'tortured but forceful' school, as opposed to the 'wishy-washy romantic' one, and he pulls it off with panache."

Frank Scheck, The Hollywood Reporter: "The British actor delivers a stirring, beautifully spoken performance that is as intelligent as it is dynamic. Infusing his turn with highly expressive body language that often garners significant but not obtrusive laughs, he is, quite rightly, the main center of attention."

Peter Marks, The Washington Post: "The approach he's been encouraged to pursue in this modern-dress production...is to assemble his Hamlet as one would a puzzle, out of a million isolated acting pieces ... The portrayal is consistently so literal, it's as if he's working out a character for a culture with only a tangential knowledge of English ... If the verse includes an allusion to heaven, you can bet Law will point to the sky. If Hamlet makes a reference to a jungle animal, sure as shootin' Law turns into one."

Charles McNulty, The Los Angeles Times: "Jude Law may not be the most emotionally piercing or philosophically profound Hamlet, but he brings an admirable balance to this most challenging of Shakespearean roles."

John Simon, Bloomberg News: "Law's interpretation, in accord with director Michael Grandage's intent, is aimed at neophyte audiences lured to the play not only by the star but with the added promise of a thriller liberally sprinkled with yocks. This predicates frantic nonstop action as flashy, frequently jocular and unsubtle as possible."

Read Full Entry

Movie Review - `Good Hair' Laughs Instead Of Cries

What's so funny about so many black women wanting "white" hair? Plenty, it turns out, in Chris Rock's surprisingly insightful documentary, "Good Hair."

The well-known history of black people straightening their natural curls is more tragedy than comedy, rooted.

In the bygone belief that all things European were better than anything African. But Rock sheds new light on this old story through a poignant mix of interviews, investigation and his trademark satire.

More than a dozen famous and beautiful black women sit for Rock's camera, ranging from the sage Maya Angelou to video vixen Melyssa Ford to an interior designer with a skin disease that has left her proudly bald. Their testimony illuminates today's reality: Black women who straighten their hair are not ashamed of their heritage _ like women the world over, they just want to work with what they have.

Men don't escape Rock's scrutiny, either, as the notoriously permed Rev. Al Sharpton and Ice-T are called to account. Sharpton recalls his mentor James Brown buying him his first 'do before they met with President Ronald Reagan, and Ice-T describes going to high school with his hair in curlers _ the bigger the better. Other men sport a variety of eye-catching styles, such as the "shag" _ picture a puffy mullet.

There are many scenes in beauty and barber shops across the country, where the various meanings, rules and ramifications of black hairstyles are discussed. But the best revelations come when Rock examines the sodium hydroxide relaxer that turns nappy heads silky, and the origins of the shorn human hair that is "weaved" into shorter tresses to create the illusion of length and fullness.

Rock watches sodium hydroxide eat through chicken flesh and dissolve an aluminum soda can. In India, he visits a Hindu temple where women ceremonially shave their heads and a shady character who describes snipping the hair off sleeping women. In Los Angeles, Rock watches an Indian businessman with a suitcase full of bone-straight locks bargain with a black hairstylist who brags about reselling movie stars' weaves to average Janes.

The film's narrative is driven by the Bronner Bros. Hair Show, where top stylists create Las Vegas-style productions to compete for a $20,000 prize. The outlandish contest, which features little actual hairstyling, is a perfect metaphor for the inherent absurdity of a billion dollar industry built on metal-eating chemicals, stolen ponytails and thousand dollar-plus weaves.

This is exactly why Rock is the perfect "Good Hair" host. His ad-libbed quips and silly-serious questions put interview subjects and viewers at ease with this sometimes painful reality, keeping them laughing instead of crying. And when Rock ventures into a hair store trying to sell some kinky "black hair" to the Asian owner, his comedy cuts to the root of the issue in a way Ken Burns never could.

"Everyone want straight hair," the owner says. "It look more natural." "Good Hair," an HBO Films release, is rated PG-13 for sex and drug references and brief partial nudity. Running time: 95 minutes. Three stars out of four.

Read Full Entry

Smash Cut Movie Review

When I first heard that Lee Demarbe, director of Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter, was teaming up with one of my cult film acting heroes, David Hess, and.

Porn star Sasha Grey, I was as intrigued as any man could be over the gathering of such an odd cast. Hess, now older, is immortalized in the exploitation hall of fame for psychotic performances of.

The 1970s and 1980s in films such as the original The Last House on the Left, Hitch-Hike and The House on the Edge of the Park.

Grey, well we know what she does for a living. But that’s not to knock the actresses and her attempt to transition to film. Smash Cut is officially her first film, not The Girlfriend Experience, even though it was released first.

And to complete the round-up, Demarbe really hasn’t made a relevant film since his 2001 Jesus kicks ass film that made some cult status impact.

Titles such as The Dead Sleep Easy and Vampiro: Angel, Devil, Hero have taken up Demarbe’s time since then.

But alas we get to Smash Cut, Demarbe’s schlocky b-movie about a crazed director named Able Whitman (Hess) who after receiving terrible reviews on his latest films goes on a mad killing spree of those around him. When one of the victim’s sisters, April Carson (Grey), hires an infamous private detective named Isaac Beaumonde (Jesse Buck), Whitman finds himself trying to cover up the tracks.

Now your immediate reaction to Smash Cut really depends on your personal view of the genre. If you like the legendary filmmaker Herschell Gordon Lewis this crazed-out, schlocky and at times darkly humorous film might strike a few chords with you. On the other hand, if you prefer good acting, a developed storyline and anything that resembles high production values, well, let’s just say you’ll find this to be a stinker.

Without a veteran name like David Hess’ this film would find no audience. I know he’s the only reason I watched it, and others would probably admit to the same thing. While older, Hess can still play the maniacal performance well. The problem here is that he doesn’t have a talented genius like Wes Craven or a madman as crazy as Ruggero Deodato around him to help create a truly psychotic film that leaves a wallop of an impression on its viewers.

Instead, Demarbe’s dedication is to filmmaker Lewis, whose line of films includes a whole array of titles very similar in content to this one. Wooden acting, cheap plot devices and lots of silly deaths and special effects that wouldn’t fool most people. And yet, Smash Cut tends to entertain on certain levels. It has the feel of the old films it dedicated itself to. Most of what Demarbe’s doing has to be taken with your tongue in cheek.

Smash Cut really isn’t anything to become passionate over. Fans of Hess should appreciate his performance, even if it won’t be remembered as one of his bests ever. This film isn’t good, it’s hardly even average, but whatever it is, it surely isn’t terrible. Demarbe’s passion for the genre shows, he just can’t pull it all together like some others are able to.

Read Full Entry

'Whip It' Movie Reviews

It's hard to imagine petite Ellen Page as a rock 'em, sock 'em roller derby queen, but the "Juno" Oscar nominee proves convincing as a Texas teen who becomes a terror on wheels in 'Whip It.' The movie, based loosely on the novel "Derby Girl" by real-life derby vet Shauna Cross (who also wrote the screenplay), marks the directing debut of Drew Barrymore, who plays a supporting role. In the film.

Who knows whether the movie, which opens today, will run rings around its box-office competitors, but it is earning generally positive reviews. Page plays a 17-year-old named Bliss who escapes from the stifling world of teen beauty pageants and finds a home in the unconventional but girl-power-affirming arena of professional roller derby.

Dubbed "Babe Ruthless," Bliss skates to glory alongside such teammates as Maggie Mayhem (Kristen Wiig) and the accident-prone Smashley Simpson (Barrymore). The movie gets a thumbs-up for accuracy from at least one real-life derby pro, and now that critics have taken it for a spin, "Whip It" also is earning praise for its action, its comedy, its uplift, its teen-friendliness, and its strong women before and behind the camera. Read a sampling of reviews from top critics below. -- By Gary Susman

Roger Ebert: "While it may not reflect the kind of female empowerment Gloria Steinem had in mind, it has guts, charm, and a black-and-blue sweetness."

Washington Post: "Arriving on the nastier heels of the horror comedy "Jennifer's Body," "Whip It" plays like that movie's more wholesome twin, delivering the same jolt of anarchic guerrilla-girl empowerment, only with a far less threatening disposition."

Los Angeles Times: "For the most part, the 34-year-old Barrymore, with much of her life spent in front of the camera and more than a few impressive producing credits already in the bank, proves steady on her feet, able to handle curves and straightaways with equal grace."

Salon: "It's elusive and noodly, as if Barrymore... could never quite be sure which direction she wanted to head in. It's a beginning roller-skater's movie, with arms and legs going every which way. But 'Whip It' has such a sweet spirit that it's easy enough to let its flaws sail by."

San Francisco Chronicle: "Barrymore and Shauna Cross (who adapted her own novel) work the formulas for underdog sports flicks and black-sheep teen comedies with great skill but no great innovation, relying on the usual tropes and plot turns. Yet the movie's tough-chick vim and spunky humor keep things rolling along with a fun, bruising energy. And it's sweet. For all the hip checks and bloody noses, it doesn't have a mean bone in its body."

Philadelphia Inquirer: "More intimately than most in Hollywood, Barrymore knows how few female types there are on screen. Beyond the good girl and the bad girl (movie versions of the madonna and the whore), there are square pegs. Barrymore puts faces and gives backstories to these nonconformists trying to define themselves before others define them."

Austin Chronicle: "These girls just want to have fun, even though their pleasure involves getting banged up and bruised to the roar of hot metal thunder beneath their feet. As the central character, Bliss Cavendar, Page demonstrates that her breakout performance in 'Juno' was no fluke and that she has what it takes to carry a film."

Entertainment Weekly: "[Page's Babe Ruthless] is heck on wheels, or so we are asked to believe: The rink footage is pretty un-whippy."

USA Today: "Sports films centering on girls and women are worth cheering on. But Whip It lacks the charm and energy of a Bend It Like Beckham. Strangely, Barrymore's tribute to girl power lacks exuberance."

New York Daily News: "Too many films geared toward young women casually undercut them in ways that are alternately lazy and cruel. You won't find any of that here - just a giddy blast of girl power that races confidently around the track while hip-checking Hollywood's worst tendencies."

Read Full Entry

Movie reviews by Tay Yek Keak

THE two significant movies this week are throwbacks to things past.Lee Ang's Taking Woodstock goes back to 1969 to the famous "three days of love and peace" of the Woodstock music festival.Surrogates, directed by Jonathan Mostow (Terminator 3, U-571), transforms Bruce Willis into such a younger, unlined version - the man even has hair - that he looks like his own wax figure.

Both films, though, get stuck in something along the way and don't really take off. The bigger culprit is the unsatisfying, underachieving Taking Woodstock, which can't get out of the muddle of its own excess.That would be okay if you could actually see the legendary acts of the show - Hendrix, Joplin, The Who, et al.

But not a single one of the electrifying frontline is featured because the bloated excess the movie is concerned with is the less-cool backline - the frazzled organisers of the burgeoning- out-of-control gig.Somebody, you know, has to lend a rolling field for thousands and thousands of hippies to converge.

Man, I haven't seen a flick about so many people gathering since The Ten Commandments. The commandment in Lee Ang's Brokeback Mountian bible is that always in the midst of something big, there must be a reinstatement of the human condition, which is often something even bigger.

So while all hell is about to break loose, his main character, Elliot Tibber (TV comedian Demetri Martin), the shy, gay and indomitable spirit of the occasion, sniffs his own whiff of liberation. His cranky Jewish parents (Imelda Staunton is a standout as his irascible, money-minded mum) own a rundown motel in rural New York, which becomes the chaotic ad-hoc HQ for the big fest.

"You guys can do anything you want over here," Elliot, an old soul in the new Age of Aquarius, declares, handing the place over to the invaders - a bunch of phony capitalist-hippies - staging the event. The film, based on the real Elliot's memoirs, captures succinctly the unreal, unwashed madness of the moment as hordes of stoners, nudies, kooks, and freeloaders turn up.

It's like a making-of documentary about a little freak which grows into a monster. Here, the interestingly hectic build-up is the movie's own worst enemy. Almost like a tripped-up trip, the film gets done in by its own bad case of counterculture.

With his canvas painted and excitement poised, Lee's fragmented story goes spectacularly downhill, receding literally into the mud of boring numbness - it rained at the fest - which it cannot extricate itself from. More at home with just two people, Lee is no Robert Altman when it comes to dealing with multitudinous throngs.

"Go see what the centre of the universe looks like," somebody tells Elliot as he treads on the damaged, rampaged soil. Well, it's certainly not this movie. In the sci-fi Surrogates, Bruce Willis isn't taking Woodstock - he's basically taking stock.

He's a CGI-ed version of himself as a surrogate in a world full of make-believe people.In the near future, most of us miserable real folk will be lying down zonked out in our homes and plugged in to younger, prettier models of ourselves who'll live virtual, wonderful lives for us.

It's like Michael Jackson's dream world, but with robots instead of plastic surgery.Unfortunately, humans keep getting murdered in the show and FBI agent Willis investigates the dark deeds, which inevitably involve the top chain of the shady surrogacy business.

There is a commentary here about our addiction to youth, obsession with perfection, surrender to convention and the sad notion that most of us are unhappy with our lives.The story, based on a graphic- novel series, has grand pretensions, but remains a postage- stamp of an idea best suited to an episode of Twilight Zone.

You just get the feeling that you have seen this deal before.The great kick is seeing Willis as his own Ken doll for about half of the movie, complete with ridiculous hair.Oh, don't you worry about him.The real one can always go out and get a wig.

Read Full Entry

Movie Review - Blind Date

“Blind date” is a heartbreaking story of all-enveloping tenderness and caring. At the end of the film the viewing audience knows what it is like to love something more than you thought possible and to continue living after that thing is lost. The film is a remake of Theo Van Gogh’s award winning 1996 Dutch film by the same name. When he was killed in 2004 by a religious fanatic the idea to remake three of his films with American stars was born. This is the second of those films with “Interview” with Steve Buscemi being the first. As Buscemi was also the lead who also directed the first film, Tucci directed this one.

For those of you who cherish every performance by multiple Emmy Award winner Stanley Tucci or Golden Globe nominated Patricia Clarkson this is a must-see film. As in the iconic “My Dinner with Andre” (Wallace Shawn and Andre Gregory---1981) and the legendary “Sleuth” (Laurence Olivier and Michael Caine—1972) this is a screenplay stripped down to the bare essentials: an ongoing conversation between two persons. Tucci and Clarkson share the entire film from start to finish with only a very few brief interjections from the waiter (giant Dutch film star Thijs Römer, “the Brad Pitt of Holland”).

The conversations take place in various rooms of the pub where the two have agreed to meet. In the first scene they meet as two persons who made their connection through an online matchmaking service. The know each other in some ways but in other ways they are strangers. The conversation starts off tense and guarded but then eases up to some extent as time goes on. After this there are subsequent conversations but they all start off the same way and always seem to end by falling short of some mark. The mission is slowly revealed to the audience as the dialog progresses. As the objective of the meetings is revealed the distance from the goal increases in spite of the best intentions of the characters.

Don and Janna are in love. They are seriously in love but there is a monumental trauma that has come between them. They are meeting as strangers to establish the reconnection they had at a time earlier in their lives. Each meeting is the same and it is different as each of them tries on different personas to get a new angle on the heartbreak or perhaps adopt a new psyche that will be better able to handle the situation then the real person inside.

The blunt simplicity of the dialog, sets, costumes and performances makes this film a hard hitter. It is a disturbing story and the antithesis of the perfect first date film. Although completely appropriate for adults in relationships, the story will be much too heavy for most teenagers.

The cinematography by Thomas Kist is outstanding, approaching the Dogme films in its realism and lean and mean velocity. Producers Bruce Weiss and Gijs Van de Westelaken determined that the original “three camera” approach should be strictly adhered to. This meant three cameras ran at all times, one over the shoulder of each player and one taking the master shot. This enhances the stripped down power of each scene as the viewer is so drawn into the composition that the photographer almost disappears.

As the scenes change the viewer is drawn into increasingly funnier and more absurd scenarios the characters use to escape the trap they are in. As the scene gets more ridiculous the audience finds comic relief but the knife of the impending fate of the two protagonists only drives in deeper and twists harder. With each twist and turn through the mass of their torn emotions they only drop deeper into the quicksand of their bottomless despair.

Read Full Entry