Thursday, February 25, 2010

Movie reviews with Conor Nolan

Everybody's Fine is actually a remake of Giuseppe Tornatore's Stanno Tutti Bene and follows a widower who embarks on an impromptu road trip to reconnect with each of his grown children only to discover that their lives are far from picture perfect. At the heart of Everybody's Fine is the theme of family and physical and emotional distances travelled to bring the members back together.

An all star cast (including Robert DeNiro, Kate Beckinsale, Sam Rockwell and Drew Barrymore) feature in this bitter sweet comedy about a widower reconnecting with his grown up children starts really well with DeNiro in sparkling form. But 30 minutes into the movie we are literally swimming in a sea of treacle — this is the worst piece of turgid schmaltz I have had the misfortune to sit through in ages.

Kirk Jones (Waking Ned Devine) directs and what a mess he makes of it — the movie lacks a heart and poor old DeNiro has to cope with a terribly bad script that never deserved to see the light of day never mind a cinema screen.

Needless to say American audiences were none too impressed when the movie was released last year and it suffered consequently at the box office. There are better ways of spending your money — buying a ticket for this rubbish is not one of them.

The only thing that saved me from walking out was Kate Beckinsale's house in the movie — stunning!LEAP YEAR

American comedies set in Ireland starring English and American actors normally make me very nervous terrible accents and awful caricatures of The Emerald Isle are normally par for the course. Think PS I Love You for example. But Leap Year sets the standard in being quite simply the worst comedy set in Ireland I have ever seen I mean this sincerely. When their four year anniversary passes without a marriage proposal, Anna (Amy Adams) decides to take matters into her own hands.

Investing in an Irish tradition that allows women to propose to men on February 29, Anna decides to follow her boyfriend Jeremy (Adam Scott) to Dublin and get down on one knee herself. But airplanes, weather and fate leave Anna stranded on the West of Ireland, and she must enlist the help of handsome and surly Declan (Matthew Goode) to get her to Dublin.

As Anna and Declan bicker on their journey to Dublin, they discover that the road to love can take you to very unexpected places. Goode's Irish accent is woeful, Adam's is truly terrible in yet another bad role and the whole thing portrays Ireland and Irish hospitality in a terribly bad light which I was personally affronted by. So if a pal suggests going to see Leap Year — you know what to say.
Read Full Entry

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Leader - Movie Review

After raising the expectations of the audience top-notch, Shekar Kammula's political flick releases with a bang. The film comes in an avatar that is both commendably realistic as well as exceedingly direct and straightforward.

Leader has a soul, but it also has a frail body. It's a film which will be counted as Kammula's first ever movie where the talented director has taken creative freedom to an extent that is more than what he should actually have.

This film on the ultimate political leadership that a people should be given, is fresh-looking, bold and partly slice-of-life. However, there is a splurge of platitudes and schemes that you would never expect the film to throw up in the latter half.

It begins with a promise, continues to be a rare political caper through the first half, but sadly becomes a simplistic as well as unintelligent one in the lengthier half-two. Thankfully, the way Leader is ended is powerful and does dole out an impression that the greater politician has been born.

Arjun Prasad (Rana) is back in India, from the US, when his Chief Minister-father Sanjeevayya (Suman) is assassinated in a landmine blast. He decides to fulfill the last wish of his father and the only wish of his mother (Suhasini): that he succeed Suman as the Chief Minister of the state. Not surprisingly, the path to the gaddi is full of thorns and inhabited by life-endangering monsters. There is Dhananjay (Subba Raju), a 30-year old politico who wants to be the next CM. Behind him are forces that openly claim the monopoly of power, in full glare of the arc lights of 24/7 news channels. Arjun has got an onerous task to complete before he can finally claim the top post in the state. He evolves a philosophy: buy them all. He is a vast success in the plot he scripts and executes with utmost wile.

But, is it all done? Will Arjun Prasad, with a Doctorate and an experience at running a corporate house, be able to realise the dream of rooting out corruption and abolish the caste system? No prizes for guessing that the ugly system is going to mar him at every step of this aspiring maverick leader.

Watch out for the second half to know if the new Commander-In-Chief finally makes it and shows it to one and all, stunning the country and becoming a messiah of the masses - all by working in the spirit of the Constitution.

Leader is definitely a classy tale of a dynasty politico's rise, told with impeccable honesty by the writer-director. Its biggest strength is the idealistic character of Rana that is consumed by one goal and only that. The way it moves ahead in materialising the mission is inspiring and kudos to Kammula for penning some of the best lines. The scenes involving Kota Srinivasa Rao and Rana, the portrayal of the Mammon-worshipping legislators, the depiction of political sycophancy, corruption and heinousness, the angst of the Dalit - all stand out for their marvellous screenplay.

The glitch is too obvious. It comes too late in the film and stays on for way too long. One may complain about the way the film rambles into a candyfloss flick in the second half, only set in the corridors of power. Here too, a soulful romance between an extra-ordinary policy-maker and an ordinary girl could have been used to pep up proceedings. Disappointingly enough, the most promising Tollywood director fails the film in this aspect. The media, which is portrayed as story-hungry, is not interested about the CM's flirtations. Unbelievable!

The way Arjun grows demoralised in his own eyes and the decision he then makes is outstanding and an essential part of the film's crux. Though you never expected it, it comes along only to raise the stature of the protagonist in our eyes.

Rana is, doubtless, very good. He carries the role with a poise. The diction (somewhere close to Venkatesh's) and baritone are excellent. Expression-wise, he sets his own tone, without following a beaten track. Subba Raju, Kota, Suhasini and Harshwardhan fit their roles. Priya Anand is cute, while Richa is found wanted.

Technically, music (Mickey J Meyer) is a nice package, so also art direction (Thota Tharani) and cinematography (Vijay C Kumaar) which make Leader a rich fare.

All in all, but for a lull of simplism that casts its unhealthy spell on the film and a boring romantic track, Leader is spotless. More, it sounds the bugle for more such cinema.
Read Full Entry

Monday, February 22, 2010

Toh Baat Pakki Movie Review

The story is set in Palanpur, Rajeshwari (Tabu) stays in quite a huge house with her husband and her two children. Very careful with money, talkative and does what she feels and believes is right.

Even if she does something wrong she convinces people around her and herself that it is meant to be for the good of everyone. The setting is old, thinking is small and village like, wives, women are overpowering characters, husbands look henpecked and everything is laidback.

Dressed in salwar kameez with deep necks showing off her color bone and cleavage, Tabu plays a concerned woman who is hell bent on finding a right man for her sister, she bulldozes Sharman Joshi into her house and creates a perfect setting for him and her sister Uvika Chaudhary to fall in love. When the invitation cards are getting ready she bumps into another guy who is financially better off then Sharman, she plots and haves the latter off from her house and quickly arranges for a wedding.

Now when the husband asks Rajeshwari, if in case she finds a better person then the second guy, will she dump him too? Yes is the answer, yeh sab apni behen ki bhale ke liye hai. While Sharman is flummoxed, the sister is speechless arrangements for the wedding are quickly made. So far, that is the first part is interesting with Tabu's non stop prattle but the drama slows down post interval. The focus moves to Sharman Joshi and his umpteen plans to ruin the marriage, the script gets very predictable.

The scenes, the dialogues between Tabu and her neighbours is just another episode of a soap, but watch out for Tabu's expression when someone carries a huge gift to her sister's wedding, it's the same one that she had been gifted and had circulated it to someone else. Very few songs, Tabu dominates and takes away the focus from the story but the interest wanes after sometime when the usual noise at the shaadi takes over.

Not a rivetting film, but you might like it if you are those types who'd enjoy slow, gentle, pleasant movies with no heavy drama baazi.

Sharman Joshi's does fine work but his character is poorly etched in the latter half. The director could have put in more effort in the latter half of the script, result: you want to leave the theatre half an hour before the film ends. Uvika Chaudhary is charming, Tabu shines in the first half and bores in the latter as the film loses steam.
Read Full Entry

Saturday, February 20, 2010

Happy Tears - movie review

In Mitchell Lichtenstein’s “Happy Tears,” Parker Posey and Demi Moore play two sisters, Jayne and Laura, who return to the house they grew up in when their cantankerous father, Joe, played by Rip Torn, goes a bit wobbly in the head.

This is the kind of movie where life lessons are posted every quarter-hour. (I timed it.) The sisters, who grew apart, grow back together; Joe, with his crack-addict girlfriend (Ellen Barkin) in tow, learns the meaning of – well, I’m not sure he learns much of anything. He might as well have the word “rascal” pasted on his forehead.

Lots of tears are shed but, despite the film’s title, not many of them seemed very happy. Grade: C- (Rated R for language, drug use, and some sexual content including brief nudity.)
Read Full Entry

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Up in the Air - Movie Review

Up in the air is so much more than just a film. It is a reflection of the modern day society we live in. It is a realization of how inhumane and cold we’ve become under the pretext of being progressive, practical and professional.

The film aptly uses irony to bring to our notice where the rat race and herd mentality can lead us to. Up in the Air is a film that defines the kind of people we’ve become today... how numb.

We have become towards our surroundings and thus the people surrounding us! It questions our philosophies and relationships in life in the wake of the current economic crunch.

Up in the Air is by far the most relevant film ever made on ‘life’ as we see it today. Filmmaker Jason Reitman gives you a dose of reality by making you analyse your life through the eyes of Ryan Bingham (Clooney), a man on the move who believes in travelling light.

Ryan is a man whom companies hire to fire their people because their bosses have no courage to do it. Ryan fires other people for a living but believes he does it with dignity. When Ryan is not depriving people of their jobs, he becomes a guest speaker and gives motivational speeches on ‘empty backpack’ to corporates.

Reitman impressively uses Ryan’s ‘empty backpack’ as a metaphor which deciphers Ryan’s real life, isolated from people and any kind of attachment to anything. Ryan although has no complaints. He enjoys his high-flying lifestyle until he gets confronted by two women... his fellow flier Alex (Vera Farmiga) and youngster Anna Kendrick. Anna suggests firing people online in order to cut travelling costs of employees like Ryan while Alex’s opinion of Ryan makes him question his philosophy on love and commitment...

Based on the 2001 Walter Kirn novel of the same name, Up in the Air is a poignant tale on people, their beliefs and the choices they make. What makes this film stand out is its superb execution. The filmmaker uses comedy to bring out the most harsh tragedy of life (read, Anna’s beau dumps her through a text message which she finds horrible, but doesn’t realize how bad firing people online could be!).

Unlike most romcoms, the film does not show Ryan as someone forced to live an isolated life. He is not a victim of dire circumstances or traumatised past. He is what he is and he does it by choice and in fact enjoys his lonely life until he falls in love...

Having showcased downsizing in the most satirical way possible, Up in the Air, with its witty one-liners, belongs to a league of its own. The screenplay has the punch and potential to move you and provoke you to self analyze your life without being apologetic in its approach.

It won’t be surprising if George Clooney bags the Oscar for this one. He plays the charming, philandering and detached Ryan with equal ease as he does the man who questions his beliefs in the latter half of the film. He is restrained and lets his eyes speak a thousand words in most of the crucial scenes, making your heart reach out to him. Even at 40 Clooney remains gorgeous. His smirk, flirtatious eyes and sexy baritone leaves the ladies begging for more. Up in the Air is a must watch... real life, real people, real circumstances weren’t captured better on reel screen before.
Read Full Entry

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

VALENTINE'S DAY Movie Reviews

Valentine's Day was released this past weekend and has already grossed the tidy sum of $63.1 million over the four day weekend. The movie stars a slew of stars including Julia Roberts, Jessica Alba, Jessica Biel, Bradley Cooper, Eric Dane and Patrick Dempsey.

It's about the multiple stories intertwining couples and singles in Los Angeles who break-up and make-up based on the pressures and expectations of Valentine's Day. If you are planning to go see the movie, here are a few reviews from around the web to help you make up your mind.

Screen Crave It’s Love Actually, American Style as Garry Marshall assembles a rom-com dream team for his hyperlink take on Valentine’s Day. The film could have given us stories as rich and diverse as a heart-shaped box of chocolates.

Instead, it’s more like a bag of Hershey Kisses – Not much variety, but sweet enough to get the job done.Huffington Post Someday someone will write a film-school doctoral thesis on movie directors who got their start in the TV sitcoms of the 1970s, several of whom spun off from the Happy Days axis: Ron Howard. Penny Marshall. Rob Reiner (OK, he wasn't in Happy Days - but he was once married to Penny Marshall and he was a sitcom star of the 1970s). And, of course, Garry Marshall.Rope of Silicon

There is really nothing positive to say about Valentine's Day, a rom-com featuring a cast of recognizable TV stars with Julia Roberts (she was paid $500,000 a minute), Kathy Bates and Anne Hathaway slumming it to be amongst "stars" from "Alias," "That '70s Show" (x2), "Dark Angel," "7th Heaven" and "Grey's Anatomy" (x2). On top of that we have Twilight star of the moment Taylor Lautner, his headline-making girlfriend Taylor Swift and other names such as Jamie Foxx, Bradley Cooper and Queen Latifah not so much adding any kind of overwhelming talent, but certainly adding to the pool of names New Line can use in the film's marketing in an attempt to make it look like they have an actual product, but it's surface level at bestIn the meantime, you can also check out the trailer from Valentine's Day starring Julia Roberts, Jessica Alba, Jessica Biel, Bradley Cooper, Eric Dane and Patrick Dempsey.
Read Full Entry

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Movie Review - The Wolfman 2010

I managed, over the past few months, to get myself pretty excited for The Wolfman. I liked the trailers and the cast and the posters, and I'm generally starved for intense, atmospheric movies. When the bad reviews started pouring in, I figured I'd be the guy who could see its merits, accept its flaws, and give it a positive review. And here I am, able to see those merits shining through, but a good review is more than I can muster.

The Wolfman is ostensibly a remake of the 1941 Universal Pictures monster movie of (almost) the same title. Aside from the general werewolf premise, the plots of the two movies only share a few key reference points. Joe Johnston's The Wolfman begins with Lawrence Talbot (Benicio Del Toro) returning to his family's estate in Great Britain upon the death of his brother.

After reuniting with his father (Anthony Hopkins), Lawrence agrees to investigate his brother's death at the request of his brother's fiancee, Gwen Conliffe (Emily Blunt). He starts his inquiry at a traveling gypsy caravan, and while he's there, a marauding beast attacks. Lawrence is bitten, and though he survives, he discovers that he has incurred a grim fate.

The rest of the film follows Lawrence as he transforms, ravages, is condemned, escapes, and faces the demons of a haunting past that contributed to his tragedy. I would describe the plot in more detail, but the synopsis would make it sound more complicated than it actually is. This is to the movie's credit; it builds a fairly in-depth web of relationships between its core characters, and it takes a number of sharp turns and twists before it settles into its predictable final scenes.

The film succeeds in some other ways, too. Johnston handles the atmosphere well, rendering one of the most inky, intense Gothic worlds I've seen in a while. In this respect, films like Hellboy could take a lesson from The Wolfman, which uses light and shadow to accentuate ornate sets and landscapes, baroque arrangements that also manage to seem stark and ominous. Of all the film's departures from the original, its atmosphere and tone are probably the best creative decision. Furthermore, the actors are well-chosen. Anthony Hopkins channels Hannibal Lecter, providing a uniquely sinister portrait of fatherhood. Del Toro acts well, too, though he doesn't play quite the timid second-son character that his backstory would suggest. The calculated Gothic-noir demeanor of Hugo Weaving fits the milieu, as well.
Read Full Entry

Monday, February 15, 2010

Shutter Island Review

This is one of those reviews where I feel totally chained by the NO SPOILER rule. After all, it’s almost impossible to talk about Martin Scorsese’s Shutter Island without discussing the film in its entirety. Shutter Island isn’t one of those simple “love it” or “hate it” movie experiences – this is one of those films that makes you go, “Hmmmm…”

Leonardo DiCaprio stars as Federal Marshal Teddy Daniels, a hard-ass cop who gets called out to a remote psychiatric ward off the New England shore (I’ll let you guess the name of the island). It’s a facility where dangerous maniacs are subjected to unique “treatments” by the questionable Dr. Cawley (Ben Kingsley) and his loyal staff of physicians, nurses and corrections officers.

Teddy arrives on Shutter Island (seasick no less) with his new partner Chuck (Mark Ruffalo), determined to get to the bottom of a case involving a female inmate named Rachel Solando, who vanished from her cell without a trace. Rachel is unstable and dangerous.

She was sent to Shutter Island after murdering her three children and arranging them around the dinner table for her husband to find.Teddy and Chuck start asking questions, but they don’t get answers. Nobody on the island seems to want to talk – not the staff, not the patients, and certainly not Dr. Cawley and his cunning partner, Dr. Naehring (the brilliant Max von Sydow). Doctors at the facility are conveniently “on vacation,” when the Marshals arrive to talk with them; important records are being kept confidential, and Teddy and Chuck – two WWII vets who know the face of true evil – soon begin to wonder about the mess they’ve stumbled into.

As the two Marshals dig deeper, Teddy begins to come apart; He starts having crazy dreams soon after Dr. Cawley feeds him some “Aspirin,” and those dreams soon turn into waking hallucinations of his dead wife Dolores (Michelle Williams), who died in an arson fire a few years back. As his mind starts slipping, Teddy realizes that Dr. Cawley and his island may be a trap he has foolishly walked into. Trusting no one but his partner and himself, Teddy sets off to kick down the doors of Shutter Island and discover the truth.

Shutter Island is based on the novel of the same name by author Dennis Lehane, who is best known for his Boston area mystery/dramas, Mystic River and Gone Baby Gone. Unlike those other two books, however, Shutter Island is psychological drama that is far deeper and more complex. The challenge facing screenwriter Laeta Kalogridis was how to take all the psychological components of the story and balance them with the pulp mystery narrative that most viewers are expecting.While the script managed to strike a good balance on paper, I don’t think Scorsese was that fortunate in translating it to the screen. First, let me say that Shutter Island is one of the most visually striking Scorsese films that I’ve seen since Raging Bull. The photography and cinematography are simply gorgeous and the dream/hallucinations sequences (which can be so lame when executed poorly) are some of the most striking I’ve seen in awhile.

However, Shutter Island definitely stumbles in the editing department. The transitions between “the real” and “the surreal” are clunky and often awkward, especially as the mystery unwinds in the second and third acts. The nature of the mystery and the heavy psychological components also affect the pacing; even though the writer and director never lose sight of where they’re going, the film itself will ultimately feel that way to a first-time viewer. It’s a necessary evil though, and I don’t really see how the filmmakers could’ve done it any other way. It’s a hard story to tell on film.

The actors in the film faced the same challenges. DiCaprio, Kingsley and Ruffalo in particular had a tough time of it. The nature of the story required each of the principal actors to turn in a multi-layered performance of a depth they probably weren’t expecting until they actually got on set and started filming. The entire ensemble pulls through pretty well (DiCaprio does some heavy lifting, performance-wise) – although I definitely need to see the film again, knowing how it ends, and watch the performances with a closer eye.There are some great cameos, including an appearance by Ted “Buffalo Bill” Levine as Shutter Island’s violent warden; Jackie Earle Haley as a distraught inmate; and Patricia Clarkson even shows up for a brief moment as a mysterious woman living on the island. And though she only appears in the most surreal moments of the movie, Michelle Williams probably turns in the best performance of all as Teddy’s dead wife, Dolores.

Ultimately Shutter Island is an interesting departure for Scorsese. And while the end result isn’t perfect, the fact that the film was crafted by one of cinema’s greatest directors elevates it far above the hokey B-movie-with-a-twist that it could’ve been. Personally speaking, I’m one of those movie lovers who appreciates a film that makes me want to watch it again as soon as the end credits have rolled – and Shutter Island is definitely that. I’m already looking forward to my second visit.
Read Full Entry

Friday, February 12, 2010

My Name Is Khan Movie Review

My Name Is Khan is about Rizwan Khan who suffers from Asperger syndrome, he doesn't know he is different all through his childhood because of the unconditional love showered on him by his mother.

It's his mother's dream that he settle down in America happily like his sibling and Rizwan embarks on a journey to America. The beauty of the film is that it focuses on various subjects that is deftly interspersed, one a childhood lesson that there are no Hindus, Muslims and Christians in this world, there are only two kinds of people, the good and bad. The lesson has been taught by his mother in a very simple, straight manner that any small child can comprehend. Also that relationships are formed not by blood but by love, finally all muslims are not terrorists.

Rizwan Khan is proud of being a Muslim but he doesn't flaunt it at the same time he does not shy away from following the traditions set by the religion. He marries Mandira Rathod and she lovingly changes the last name of her son's and hers to Khan. After 9/11, life takes a dramatic turn, Muslims in America are viewed and treated with suspicion and the first victim is Mandira's son. She believes her son would have been alive if she wouldn't have married Khan and disowns him. When he wants to know when he can return, she replies only after telling the President of America that he is Khan and he is not a terrorist. The rest of the drama is about how Khan keeps his promise and Mandira gets justice for his son. Kajol excels as a mother, the scene in which she loses her son and then weeps on his body shows her skill for switching emotions with ease.

If we haven't seen a person who suffers from asperger's syndrome behaves, then watch Shah Rukh maintain a steady and stable behaviour throughout the film, as to how he constantly repeats his words, doesn't look straight in the eye and how he shrugs violent, loud behaviour and some colour. The film has everything positive, mother-son relationship, wife-husband, father-son and last but not the least the value of friendship.Rizwan Khan is befriended by an African family, they feed him when he is hungry and he stands by them when they need him the most. The film is not entirely realistic, the director has taken cinematic liberties, it becomes clichéd towards the end and also drags. An entire story has been built around a single point and lest it might not hold the film together, the director makes the hero suffer a disability so that the sympathy remains whatsoever.

There is subtle humour in the film, again it is carried by SRK on his shoulders. Watch Shah Rukh tell Kajol who's busy in a kitchen with an absolute poker face if he can have sex.The film also preaches the tenets of Islam that part of a Muslim's earnings should go to charity and that charity need not go necessary to people who are non-Muslim.

He shows that being a Muslim, he had made efforts to inform FBI that a group of Muslims were plotting an attack and before any American can rush help to hurricane hit area, it is Khan who was imprisoned for suspected terror activity, sets an example by rescuing the victims. All is fine, but Shah Rukh should first make a movie for his fellow Mumbaikars and then preach Americans that all Khans are not terrorists and he is loyal and patriotic as any Indian is and it hurts being labeled. A not over the top film but definitely makes a good watch.
Read Full Entry

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Review - From Paris With Love

Shooting great, fast-moving close quarters action isn’t easy. There is a lot of choreography and planning involved, a lot of tricky cinematography and most importantly, a lot of hard editing later. And in order to make a close quarters action scene that really pops, a director has to have the right composer to score it with energy and the right actors to give the scene weight. That said, no one is shooting close quarters action right now quite like Pierre Morel.

This is perhaps the crux of the success of his first feature, Taken, which dazzled audiences last year with the unrelenting will of its main character (played by Liam Neeson) to kill anyone and everyone in the path between him and his kidnapped daughter.

And it once again comes into play with Morel’s second film, From Paris With Love, which follows a wannabe agent named James Reese (Jonathan Rhys Meyers) who has been biding time working as the assistant to the U.S. Ambassador in Paris. And when he finally gets the call, he’s partnered with an over-the-top, no holds barred badass named Charlie Wax (John Travolta).

Together, they are set upon a mission to take out a drug organization, or terrorists, or something like that. It doesn’t really matter what they’re going after — what matter is what happens along the way.

As I mentioned, Morel has a knack for close quarters action. He also shows us in From Paris with Love that he is also learning how to blow things up in a way that is, for lack of a better word, very cool. He reminds me of a young Michael Bay, back before all of his action was slow and shiney. Remember back to the days of Bad Boys and The Rock, when Bay’s action sequences were in tight, brutal and breathtaking. That’s where Morel is with this piece of work. He puts his audience right in the action, empties more than a few clips, cooks some fools and continues to show off some really stylish, energetic action in the streets of Paris. Heck, there’s even a little Travolta (stunt double) parkour. I call it Travoltakour, because it’s so foreign and new that it needs a name.

Speaking of Travolta. This is his movie, and it is clear from the moment that Charlie Wax is introduced to us that he’s going to be the catalyst for a lot of pain and agony for the timid, by-the-book Reese. Yet, instead of adhering to the classic clichéd back and forth that usually comes along with this kind of relationship, Wax and Reese are given no time to explore their partnership. They are simply there to do things. Charlie Wax, more specifically, exists in the second act of this film to do things. And by do things, I mean kill people. 26 in 24 hours, he explains later, so about one per hour. It is a narrative element that allows this film to follow that same unrelenting pace of Taken, even though the tone of the story is completely different. Where Taken was a tale of anger and vengeance, this story is simply about what Wax is and what Wax isn’t. What he is is completely over-the-top, charismatic, crass and at all times unpredictable (right up to the end). What he isn’t is a the same completely over-the-top, charismatic, crass and at all times unpredictable character you’ve seen before. Thanks to a wild performance from Travolta, one filled with nuance (yes, nuance), Wax is a character who is interesting to the bone. Sure, he shoots a lot of people, but he’s also got a layer of super-spy in there somewhere, ever calculating his next move — this is something that seems lost on his partner, but is never lost on the audience.

The problems with this movie are those you’d expect. It does trade intelligence for action beats, and is riddled with some of the worst dialogue you’ve seen on screen in a while. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if the script by Luc Besson and Adi Hasak was about 30-pages long and read terribly. It’s as if the script had as many holes in it as the bad guys. Some of Jon Rhys Meyers’ dialog is crippling, and it will almost have you believing that he isn’t that good of an actor, despite the fact that we know him to be a very good, very serious actor. But somehow, we’re made to not care about that.

Somehow those problems aren’t enough to drag this movie through the muck. I’m not ashamed to say that it was a blast, thanks to Travolta’s clearly unhinged, but calculated insanity. He’s a fun partner to have on this bullet-riddled, testosterone-infused romp through Paris. And thanks to Pierre Morel’s keen eye for keeping us close to the action, and keeping the action moving at all times, this movie is a quick in and out. It enters, as Wax does, with a flurry of action and ends just the same.
Read Full Entry

Monday, February 1, 2010

North Face - Nordwand - Movie Review

Writer Director Philipp Stölzl took home the 2009 German Film Critics Award for Best Screenplay along with co-writers Christoph Silber, Rupert Henning and Johannes Naber for this riveting adventure thriller. The setting is the deadly north face of the Eiger, still unconquered at the story’s setting in 1936.

Nazi propaganda urges young climbers to take on the nearly vertical ice covered rock massif in the name of the Aryan warrior spirit. Other Aryans watch from telescopes from the deck of the nearby hotel as the naïve gladiators battle the face and end up falling, freezing to death or hanging by their ropes until suffocated within view of the spectators.

Andreas and Toni are young volunteer soldiers in Hitler’s developing mountain strike force. They are supposed to spend their time learning how to fight and kill enemies in mountainous terrain. Instead they spend their time cleaning latrines because they are, well, goof offs. Of course as any good climber knows most of the best are goof offs. How else would they have time for the climbing?

Andreas is played by Florian Lukas (“Good Bye Lenin” 2003) and Toni by Benno Furman. These two climbers are confident they can make the climb; but then those who died before them were confident as well. They are not alone, a competing Austrian duo, better equipped, is right on their heels, spying on them and trying to take advantage of every trick the superior climbers divulge.

Just when the two are about ready to take the risk of their lives, in bursts Luise (Johanna Wokalek) an early love of Toni’s who relights the fire of romance on the frozen slopes of the Eiger. It is all the crack makeup crew can do to make the smashing Wokalek look ordinary. They succeed and she does look ordinary but a simmering screen chemistry boils between her and Benno Furman. It is a chemistry that will take her to the death dealing rock ledge with her lover to dare the worst of fates in a race to save her love.

Considering that most of the actors are wrapped in heavy clothing and frozen into ice cubes it is no wonder that the heavy lifting in this film is handled by cinematographer Kolja Brandt. Brandt pocketed the German Film Critics Award for Best Cinematography for this film and it is well deserved. Although one has to wonder where the cinematography leaves off and the production design of Udo Kramer takes over. The shots are made either on location or in a refrigerated set. The work is piercing in its realism and will keep all viewers with an ounce of adventure in their souls transfixed for the entire film. The tension never lets up from the start of the climb to the end.

The actors portraying the climbers are well coached in their craft and equipped with the best, safest and most realistic climbing gear. The equipment of the day was crude, consisting mostly of ropes, homemade pitons and hiking boots---very different from the fiberglass boots, synthetic ropes and tool steel crampons, ice axes and pitons that make up the modern climbing arsenal. The result is a close up climbing experience that is the best to date in terms of realism. A far cry from the armchair dabbling of Clint Eastwood in “The Eiger Sanction.” You can feel the icy cold numbing your arms and legs as you fight to escape the entrapment of the pitiless rock.

In the end it is Johanna Wokalek emerges as the hero of the film. The two climbers are soon bundled into so many layers of ragged insulation and made up with frostbite colored pancake that they can hardly be recognized. Indeed, many of the falls were probably done with dummies, as they could well have been fatal to even the strongest of humans. In what is reported to be a true story, Toni’s love Luise goes to suicidal lengths climbing out onto the tiny rock ledges to save the trapped duo. She braves impossible weather to urge the two men to hang on until help can arrive in the morning.

The sweeping original music score is by Christian Kolonovits who get a little carried away now and then, approaching Wagnerian heights with the crescendos. But in the end it seems a suitable backdrop for some earth shaking heroism. A must see for climbing fans and suitable viewing for the entire family (teenagers on up).
Read Full Entry