Change Your Image
bersarhin
Reviews
Stellet Licht (2007)
Powerful and Beautiful: Reygadas triumphs again.
With Stellet Licht, Mexican director Carlos Reygadas follows a different path from his previous films. Reygadas tells a very simple and age-old story: the choice of a man between two women. However, it's his unique vision of life what makes this film stand out from the hundreds of films made with this subject matter.
A contained and wonderful Cornelio Wall delivers a range of feelings, resting almost entirely in his expressive eyes. His excellent performance fits perfectly with the quiet and slow pace of the film. The rest of the cast is also great, with really natural performances throughout the film.
The cinematography and editing are also gorgeous, developing an unique pace and look to the film that would have bored in any other film. While the pace of the film is extremely slow, the audience gets used to it, preventing boredom from affecting the viewers, as it normally occurs with other slowly-paced films.
The film happens in the secluded Menonite settlement of the beautiful state of Chihuahua, introducing us to a world completely different from ours, but the universal feeling of the story makes us realize that, regardless of the differences between different groups of people, we are all similar.
Cantando por un sueño (2006)
The death of Mexican television
This show aired on Mexico's most important network is a spin-off of "Bailando por un Sueño" where various couples competed dancing to have a wish granted. "Bailando por un Sueño" was an instant success and actually a good reality show for various reasons like interesting contestants and a good panel of judges. After the success of this show the network aired "Cantando por un Sueño" which is the same show but instead of dancing, the contestants sing. The show was absolutely terrible. No matter how poorly the contestants sung, it was down to the fame of the contestant who got eliminated. The panel of judges was terribly chosen and it was way too melodramatic.
Munich (2005)
Small glimpses of genius fade under this average film
Steven Spielberg's Munich has been compared inaccurately with Schindler's List. I find a resemblance not with this masterpiece, but with one of the less remembered films of Spielberg: Amistad.
Why does Munich remind me of Amistad if Munich is the story of the revenge the Israeli government took after the Munich assassinations and Amistad is the story of a group of African slaves unjustly taken to America and their trial? Simply, because in both Spielberg shows how excellent and terrible he is.
Amistad has one of the best moments in Cinema History I've ever seen. Of course, I'm talking about the slaves' story told crudely as it is. Spielberg is terrific at these dramatic, overwhelming scenes. Still, the rest of Amistad is boring, pretentious and looks extremely false on screen. This is exactly the same problem Munich has.
There are two great scenes in Munich: The attack on Beirut and the different scenes of what happened at Munich. Spielberg creates memorable, crude scenes that don't let us even move. But the rest of Munich feels fake and pretentious. The dialogs sound extremely fake and overall most scenes are boring and confusing. Why? Because Spielberg is not at the small stuff: Give him tough, dramatic scenes, not two people speaking. Oh, and PLEASE...DON'T LET HIM DO ANOTHER LOVE SCENE. Munich's two love scenes are two of the worst I've ever seen.
Now, about the acting: Eric Bana can't act. His performance is ridiculous and predictable. Daniel Craig delivers a good performance but ultimately his character is shadowed by everything else on screen. Mainly because his character is poorly written. There were two fascinating performances on-screen in Munich, and neither of them got over 3 minutes of screen-time. I'm talking about Omar Metwally as Ali, an Arab terrorist and Lynn Cohen as Golda Meir, Israel's prime minister. Metwally's performance is subtle yet harsh, just what the whole movie tried to be.
I've already written about the screenplay and how it has fake dialogs. But, I haven't mentioned the screenplay's greatest fault that was accentuated by Spielberg's poor directing in most scenes: Contrary to popular belief, I thought the characters' feelings of guilt, regret and fear weren't showed correctly on screen. All you see is Avner (Eric Bana) ripping his bed and destroying his phone, but his feelings aren't shown correctly on screen.
So, in conclusion, Munich has genius scenes that are shadowed by the rest of the film.
** out of ****
Match Point (2005)
Allen's Match Point
I had never watched Annie Hall. I had bought several Woody Allen movies including Annie Hall some time ago, and Annie Hall was the only one still wrapped in plastic. I finally opened it and was marveled at the universe inside the characters' minds Allen had created. It also made me see Small Time Crooks and Hollywood Ending (which I had originally liked) were a piece of ****. I saw the real Woody and the "new" Woody.
Woody Allen had one more chance at showing why he is considered one of the best directors in the history of cinema. It could go either way. It was Woody Allen's Match Point.
"There are moments in a tennis match where the ball hits the top of the net, and for a split second, remains in mid-air. With a little luck, the ball goes over, and you win. Or maybe it doesn't, and you lose." This phrase with which the movie starts presents what Match Point was in the career of Allen. Allen's ball could go either way. He could either lose or win. And he won.
Match Point is my favourite movie of the year after Me and you and everyone we know and Brokeback Mountain. It has solid performances from the whole cast and especially good performances from Johansson and Rhys-Meyers. Match Point is the kind of movie which you spend hours thinking about. You think about the motifs behind every character's acts. You think about the use of certain scenes. You think about the beauty of the screenplay.
The screenplay was very strange for me. If you cut the movie into different scenes you'll definitely say: "I've seen this a thousand times before". Every scene in Match Point is a cliché. To quote some examples: The Ghost Scene and the Introduction of Nola. But that's why it's so original: Because no one had ever thought of doing the least original screenplay.
Now, if you check the trivia in IMDb of any of Allen's films you'll find many Director Trademarks. You won't with this movie. For example, there's not a single writer in this film. If I had seen this movie without knowing it was Allen's I would have thought it was another director's (for example Mike Nichols), and it's not because it's a drama. Woody's other dramas, such as Interiors, have his special touch. But this movie has none of his mannerisms. It is a new Woody. A Woody who has finally learned after a decade of failures (excluding a few such as Melinda and Melinda) that it was time to change or die. He won that match point.
The Hours (2002)
The journey through life and death
Why do I love this film? Is it just the breath-taking performances? Is it the flawless screenplay? Is it the simple but exquisite production design? Or is it a special "it" factor that apparently not only happens with performers?
The Hours is a magnificent work of art by a man who had already given us a magical film (Billy Elliot): Stephen Daldry. But since one is a tale of hope, The Hours actually gives you a sense of emptiness and sadness, but at the same time, many thoughts that circle "Life and Death".
The Hours shows us that these two (Life and Death) aren't too different, they're just part of a cycle and the lives and deaths of others reign our own. All three stories showed dependence on other people.
Clarissa Vaughan's (Meryl Streep in one of her best performances yet) life circles around Richard Brown, (Ed Harris in what I think is his best performance ever. Short but powerful.) a gay writer dying of AIDS. Richard is her heartbreak, but also her heartbeat. She says it herself: Richard is the only person that makes her feel anything, that makes her feel human. And Richard understand that, and that's why he decides to kill himself. He feels Clarissa needs to learn to feel again without her. he's teaching her of life through death.
Laura Brown (Julianne Moore, as fantastic as usual) is definitely not alive. She was living a life that was not hers and therefore decided death would just be a simple step for her to take. How wrong she was. In the end, there was a tiny glimpse of life lying deep inside her that made her see the life she was living was definitely not hers, but there were other ways out. Once again, Richard Brown (but as a child, played professionally by 8 year old Jack Rovello in one of the best performances by a young actor I've ever seen) is the reason of "life" for a character. Laura tries to feel love for her son but doesn't achieve it. His son is what makes her realize she needs to escape. Many people consider Laura a lesbian, but this is not true. Her kiss with Kitty is her expression to show her inner desperation. Laura can't be judged for leaving her family, and this is what Clarissa learns at the end of the film, because Clarissa had also felt this desperation, of leaving everything to pursue her heartbeat (in Clarissa's case Richard, and in Laura's case escaping from Richard).
And finally comes the character that joins all this stories together: Virginia Woolf (Nicole Kidman in my favourite female performance of all time). We all know the life or Virginia Woolf. We can just tell that her life was based upon death just by reading any of her books. For example in her book Jacob's room, she presents the main character as obsessed with a skull. She also says the line that describes the whole movie: "He will die, in order for the rest of us to appreciate life." All of her lines are perfectly written to fit with the rest of the movie. She also presents a perfect symbolism. Did you notice that Woolf's heartbeat and heartbreak is Richmond? I believe this is why Richard is Richard. (This probably is more clear on the book that I haven't dared to read yet). Virginia, as the other two women, wants to escape from her life (or in Virginia's case, the town her husband dragged her to) and shows a prohibited kiss (as the other two) to show her desperation.
Writing this was extremely difficult since I have too much to say about this film and my mind just gets cramped with ideas. This is the movie that has made me think the most in my life, therefore it's my favourite film. This is the film that finally made me realize I want to dedicate the rest of my life to cinema.
Van Helsing (2004)
The Worst Movie I've Ever Seen
I still have no idea of why I went to see this movie. The screenplay was hideous, the visual effects were dumb, but what I hated the most were the accents! "Van Helsing, yourrrrrrrr rrrrrreputationnnnn prrrrrresides yyyyyou". Those guys (especially Kate Beckinsale) need acting lessons quickly.
The plot was pointless. It didn't make sense at all! I still don't get why they found (Yes, they found them, not the other way around) the vampires somewhere else after they escaped from them and...is it me or the vampires were having a party? Van Helsing should be burnt, it is so bad that not even the music (which I actually liked) made it get a rank of 2/10 from me. If you are planning to see this movie...DON'T!!! I swear even Bandidas is better...
Memoirs of a Geisha (2005)
Great production design...interesting adaption
Well, I will start with the production design. 10/10!!!! This movie won 3 Oscars: The one for Best Costume Design was obvious. The costumes of this film are impressive. They are beautiful. It also won Best Art Direction. I didn't agree with that one. Yes, the sets were beautiful but I personally liked the ARt Direction of King Kong and Good Night, and Good Luck better. Then, Best Cinematography. I found this picture to have an AMAZING cinematography, the problem is that Brockeback Mountain was not just AMAZING in its cinematography, but Perfect. Still, this film has a great production design. It is captivating, almost mesmerizing. The costumes, music, sound, art direction, make-up and cinematography are incredible.
I have not read the book, that way I can study the storyline better without complaining that half of the book is gone. Perhaps the book was altered a lot on its way to become a motion picture, but this movie (unlike many other films based in books) has a correct narrative. Even if half of it is invented, it isn't just small bits of the book but a correct storyline with a beginning, a middle and a conclusion. To quote some pictures that do not have a correct storyline and are just bits of the book:
- Harry Potter Series Movies 1, 2 and 4. - Bridget Jones's Diary 1 and 2. - Charlie's Angles: Full Throttle (I know it's not based in a book but it's the perfect example of a movie with no storyline or argument and is just bits and pieces).
Temporada de patos (2004)
Not another teen movie...
Temporada de Patos is my favorite Mexican film. I am Mexican and personally don't like my country's films. 70% of Mexican films involve violence, kidnapping, murders or sex. Temporada de Patos is one of the first actual Mexican films that tells a story without needing to present blood-baths or sex scenes.
Temporada de Patos or Duck Season can be considered a Teen Movie, the difference is that it is an INTELLIGENT teen movie. Yes, it shows the sexual awakening of Moko and Flama, but in a classy, intelligent way not as American teen movies (eg. American Pie).
The screenplay of Temporada de Patos was one of the best of 2004, but not only the screenplay. The directing is superb, just as the B&W cinematography. We can't say it had an impressive production design since the only set is a middle-class apartment and there were no visual effects (luckily...:P). The performances by Diego Catano (Moko), Enrique Arreola (Ulises, the pizza guy) and Danny Perea (Rita), one of the most beautiful Latin actresses there are now, are outstanding. Daniel Miranda's performance as Flama isn't excellent, but it's good. It's incredible how Eimbcke was able to include so many subjects that concern us teenagers in 1 1/2 hours: Sexuality, drugs, parents, etc.
SIMPLY OUTSTANDING!
The Aviator (2004)
Overrated...though that doesn't mean it's bad
I personally clapped when Million Dollar Baby (a masterpiece) defeated the favorite (this movie) at the 77th Oscars. First of all, Scorsese's film is extremely long. After the first two hours you start to become bored and tired and lose interest in the movie. The film tries to cover too many aspects of the life of Howard Hughes.
Definitely the best thing about The Aviator are the performances. DiCaprio has been equally loved and hated with this performance. Yes, he overacts in 70% of the film, but he is playing Howard Hughes, an overacting man himself. Alda also gives us a magnificent and sober performance as the Sentaor that tries to "defeat" Hughes. But definitely Cate Blanchett as Katharine Hepburn steals the movie. She is simply MAGNIFICENT in her role as one of the greatest actress ever.
Something else that truly saves the movie is the whole production design. It is simply perfect. The cinematography and art direction are very good.
Now, on to the disapproving bit. The screenplay makes us enter Hughes's mind so deeply that not even in the three hours of film you are able to exit it throughly and close the doors that the film opens. This doesn't have anything to do with the "open ending" the film has which is not entirely accurate.
This film reminds me of "A Beautiful Mind", not only because it is a biopic of an schizophrenic genius but because they are both highly overrated. This doesn't mean any of the two films are bad, just that they didn't fulfill the expectations both critics and audience had.