Change Your Image
panchodh_12
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Recent Check-Ins
Reviews
The Truman Show (1998)
Life is a Creation
From the moment we are old enough to grab a marker with our small fingers, we toy with the idea of creating our own world within this one. Artists are simply the lucky ones who manage to grow up while retaining the possibility of making a living out of the creative act. But the idea of playing God is inherent to all of us, so much that the idea that we are simply part of a bigger creation is deeply ingrained within our cultural genoma.
The Truman Show takes this to the ultimate end: the possibility of creating an entire world from scratch, the possibility of playing with someone's life and control it in every single extent. It is noteworthy how such an experiments ends up looking an awful lot like George Orwell's 1984. In the end, God might not be much more than just a (benevolent?) totalitarian dictator.
The resemblance to Plato's allegory of the Cave is quite clear. And as such, it is not hard to figure out what will happen once Truman begins to notice that his everyday life is simply shadows cast on the wall of the cave. No matter how much the Creator tries to distract him, the idea is already incepted in his brain: he will try to leave the cave.
But the notion that the outer world, outside the cave, is our own world, is somewhat disturbing. One tends to think of Plato's allegory of the cave as a quest for the Utopian, but if the world outside the cave is our own, dirty and imperfect world, wouldn't it make more sense to remain in the cave? Confronting ourselves with the real world will render all quest for the Ideal futile. No wonder the existentialist had such a hard time once they denied the existence of God. The only thing left to do, then, is to turn the allegory of the cave upside down: if the outer world is so imperfect, we might look for perfection within our own, personal caves (which is what Creators do).
The Truman Show is a very engaging movie, that tricks us with its looks of yet another Jim Carrey blockbuster, only to have us trapped into a thought-provoking experience that will keep us awake at night. It is a turning point in Carrey's career, in which he proves that laughs is not the only thing he can provoke in the viewers. It is a movie full of hope, that encourages all of us to leave our own, personal caves.
Mulholland Dr. (2001)
A movie to be re-watched
This is a mesmerizing movie, and a narrative masterpiece. But also, let's face it, it is a failed TV-pilot. This duality is central to Mulholland Drive, and it is present throughout the movie. It is hard to tell where the genius begins and the failure ends, which is probably what makes it so fascinating. Why does a certain subplot seem so lame? Why is a certain character behaving in such a cliché way? Are they symbolizing a super-stylized version of reality constructed by a failed actress' subconscious or are we just watching the takes of a failed, bad TV project? Of course, then came the interpretations. And some of them make a lot of sense. I think the whole "It is all Diane's dream" does make sense to a certain extent, yet at the same time it is, at least, very fascinating that the most surreal, irrational scenes (the last half an hour) are the ones which are supposed to be taking place in the "real" word.
Though, at the end of the day, the take-home message of this film is, what is the real world? Mulholland Drive tackles the issue that has pervaded art since antiquity, of how to mimic the real world so to convince the audience, how to play God with a bunch of props and actors. The words spoken at the Club Silencio resonate in the viewer after the closing credits: there is no orchestra, it's just a recording. Our senses think they are in front of something real, but it is no more than an artifact.
This is indeed, a classic of our time. And as such, it is a must-watch. But don't expect to understand it at the first time. Because, in the end, there's not much to be understood. As a public, we demand rationality, clarity and coherent plot lines from film-makers; and Lynch's answer to that demand is a surrealistic reminder that movies, just like real life, are not always what we want them to be.
Smultronstället (1957)
An existential road movie through life
This movie takes the audience through life, it makes us reflect on ourselves, it forces to reconsider our path. We see Isak, an old doctor who, on his way of receiving a honorary award, is confronted with his entire life, and the way that life changed him. He realizes that he aid his selfishness with loneliness, and that time took away his joy to live. The characters of Isak's mother, on one side, and Marianne and Evald on the other, remind us that this drama is recurrent in every human life, like a self-repeating prophecy that haunts all generations: Is it worth living? Should we even bother bringing new creatures to this meaningless world? How can we avoid falling into the trap of loneliness eventually?
On their trip to Lund, Isak and Marianne pick up two very different groups of people. First, there's Sara, Viktor and Anders; young, happy, and cheerful. They are still innocent and worried about the existence of God and the beauty of art. Then, they pick up a bitter married couple that are constantly arguing with each other. These passengers mirror Isak's stages in life, from his cheerful youth to an already cynical marriage, the path that Marianne and Evald also seem to be taking. It is meaningful, then, that Marianne forces the married couple to leave the car. In the end, what prevails is the desire to live happily.
Though, like all Bergman's movies, the plot moves a bit too slowly for modern audiences' taste, this should not overshadow the depth of this movie, so rarely found in today's cinema. Wild Strawberries is an insightful movie that brings us all to the bottom of human existence.
The Elephant Man (1980)
We the Victorians
This movie touches upon many issues discussed in Academia by Michel Foucault, and I highly doubt it was coincidental. The Elephant Man is a character that could only come from the Victorian era and the rich duality that comes with it. The double personality of John Merrich, who goes from a gentle and refined man in the day to a poor beast that can only scream in the night, reflects the tension and evolutions of the power relations of that time. The oppressed goes from being a silent subject suffering from a brutal circus to being part of a much more subtle, scientific and bourgeois circus. Power structures are sharpened, but this comes together with an improvement of the objective welfare of the subject, who is now eternally grateful for this new form of control.
David Lynch is a very clever guy, and he manages to really convey the feeling of the time, with the use of sounds, black and white, and dialogs. You feel the sadness of the Elephant Man, you share it. What does it say of us that we are so interested in these Victorian characters, that we can relate so much to somebody like the Elephant Man?
Little Miss Sunshine (2006)
Life is a beauty pageant
I watched this movie on a plane. I don't know what the person next to me might have thought of me, because I was laughing, then crying, then hysterically laugh again, then cry like a baby, to finally laugh to tears till the credits.
There are some movies that just get you. I don't know if it was the pseudo-indie cinematography, the light colours, the very earthly and relatable characters, the Sufjan Stevens soundtrack, the funny dialogues or everything put together; but I really felt the story close to my heart. Narrativvely speaking, it is a spring story: it goes from the utterly depressing life of an American family, to the immense happiness that can only come from having grown up as a character after a road trip. And it really manages to depict in a fair number of characters a distinct change into someone better, which gives us all hope that nothing is lost, and that in the end it will be alright.
Oh, and the actress of Olivia, the little girl, completely steals the show.
The Prestige (2006)
A lecture on narrative
The movie begins by letting the public know that in a magic trick there are three acts:
-The premise, where we are shown an ordinary object, like a canary.
-The change, where something extraordinary happens to this object. The canary disappears. But you don't clap yet, because you know that something else must happen, you are waiting for it.
-Finally, in the prestige, the magician brings the ordinary object back. And that's when you clap. You think you are trying to figure out how he did it, but actually, you don't really want it. Because deep down you know that the old canary is smashed under the table.
This is a narrative masterpiece, and we are being told what is going to happen straight from the beginning. Nolan takes an ordinary story of two magicians' rivalry; gives it an extraordinary plot twist, and while you are trying to figure out what is the trick behind it, he brings back the ordinary to the movie.
But, just like in a magician's show, he needs to build up the tension. In a normal show, a magician begins with the simple stuff, something rather interesting yet nothing unique. Throughout the show, things get more amazing, until you get to the second to last trick, which you think it tops it all. But then it comes the last trick, the truly jaw dropping one; and you realize that the previous trick was simply the second best.
A highly recommendable movie to pretty much anyone.
The Revenant (2015)
Not your average Oscars movie
The Revenant is, for the most of it, DiCaprio crawling and moaning. Of course, that gets tiring at some point. The movie could, easily, be half an hour shorter, and that would perhaps make it more enjoyable. But also The Revenant is a very ambitious movie. On the technical side, it is flawless, and it uses the natural scenarios, the lights and the sound perfectly. It is even more impressive when you know that it was only shot with natural light! At some points it seems like the plot (which isn't precisely noteworthy) is just an excuse for Iñárritu to shoot a wildlife documentary, because the landscapes are truly breathtaking, and they take a considerable amount of screen time.
What is most memorable from this film is, I think, the camera techniques. From extensively long shots depicting intense battle scenes, to clever, smooth transitions between scenes, the use of the camera has become something of Iñárritu's trademark. What I found most interesting was the ways in which he breaks the fourth wall at different points of the movie; from DiCaprio's final closeup to the staining of the camera with the actor's breath/blood. Acting-wise, Hardy's performance is definitely Oscar-worthy, unlike, in my opinion, DiCaprio's (not that he is a bad actor; I just wouldn't give an Oscar to a performance that is mostly, as I said before, moaning and crawling).
With its length, lack of dialogue, and somewhat experimental directing, this is not the most usual Hollywood's awards season blockbuster. One would expect the Academy to prefer more discreet dramas in the lines of The King's Speech or Million Dollar Baby, but, who knows, maybe I'm mistaken.
Det sjunde inseglet (1957)
A rare specimen
Too bad they don't make movies like this anymore. Ingmar Bergman profits immensely from medieval iconography, traditions, events and beliefs to draft a wonderful example of existential cinema. It's a pity that Death as a character is so underused nowadays; there's so much strength in the image of the Grim Reaper talking with its victims, trying to decipher the meaning of all of this.
The Black Plague provides an excellent scenario for the exposition of the very contemporary questions about the existence of God, the meaning of life, the fear of death. This seemingly apocalyptic event must have really seemed like the End of times, and the horrific images of infected people whipping themselves, of supposedly witches being burnt as scapegoats, do an amazing job in telling without the meaninglessness of life, the darkness that wraps us all once we know we'll eventually die. Unless we have faith, of course. But, as Antonius Block says: "Faith is a torment. It is like loving someone who is out there in the darkness but never appears, no matter how loudly you call."
This movie is full of memorable quotes. It's one of those movies where the dialogues have no interest in seeming realistic, but rather, like in a theatre play, aim to show the language skills of the scriptwriter. I shall keep many of this movie's lines with myself, "I shall try to remember them. I shall carry this memory carefully in my hands as if it were a bowl brimful of fresh milk. It will be a sign to me, and a great sufficiency."
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)
What the hell did I just watch?
I'm very confused right now. I definitely did not get what this movie is about. It certainly isn't just another space adventure movie. I'm not sure it would classify as sci-fi either. I see it more as a trip inside Kubrick's mind, perhaps? In any case, it is not necessarily the plot what matters more in this movie.
This movie is definitely a visual masterpiece. It is truly amazing that Kubrick managed to pull out so many visual effects and tricks in 1968, and the spaceship scenes have nothing to envy to those of the latest space blockbuster. Many, many times they seemed a bit too slooow, but I'm guessing Kubrick did it on purpose to give a sense of the immensity of the cosmos. In any case, it is beautiful to see spaceships dancing a waltz, but shortening some scenes wouldn't have hurt. And then there's the prologue with the monkeys, which is a whole different story. Not only it takes twenty minutes to tell something it could have been told in much less, but it is also immensely puzzling. It definitely is there for a reason, I'm sure about it, but right now I can't seem to grasp its meaning. After finishing this review, I'll see what Internet has to say about it.
And then there's the ending. Oh wow. I give this movie 8 stars, but the 8th star goes entirely to the final part: just before it I was thinking this movie deserved 7 stars. The landing on Jupiter is a wonderful example of the psychedelia of the 60s taken to a big screen. That sequence alone probably takes around ten minutes, but it is so enjoyable you don't even notice them. Then the very final scene is the most intriguing piece of cinema I remember right now. What does it mean? In what way is it related to the rest of the movie? I'm guessing Kubrick wanted the public to live the theatre with this questions unanswered. Thankfully, post-2001 viewers have the blessing of Internet, which I now turn to in the hope it clears up my doubts.
M - Eine Stadt sucht einen Mörder (1931)
A delightful museum piece
Not so long ago I watched another German classic by Fritz Lang - Metropolis. M was released only XXX years after it. Yet, in such little time, a radical development happened, which altered filmmaking completely. Actors could now talk. The silent film era was over. And oh lord, did Fritz Lang surely know how to use voiced cinema.
This movie is a gem. For enjoying it, present-day viewers need to keep in mind that the public that was watching M was not used to watching in cinemas long dialogs like in the theatre. And probably Lang took many resources from theatre, but since them they have become cinema's heritage. There's so many tropes, so many pathos formulae and plot tricks that were used in this movie for the first time. It would be practically impossible nowadays to make a crime movie without borrowing, consciously or unconsciously, elements from M. From the public paranoia and the work of the police to the public persecution and personalization of the killer, everything in this movie has been reused over and over.
Of course, the genre has evolved since then, and for being the first Suspense movie ever, it is probably among the most suspenseless movies I've ever watched. But that's not M's fault, it's just that contemporary cinema has made a much more demanding viewer than the one this movie is intended to. So much is that, that the movie can now even be seen as a parody of suspense movies; a comedy. There are scenes that are truly hilarious; some of it because they are meant to be funny, and others just because they are not something you would expect from a suspense movie nowadays (such as the crime organization meeting to discuss the issue of the murderer, probably among the most surrealist aspects of the movie). And the angry, expressive, theatrical German goes a long way in helping to make this movie funny.
There are some thing that are quite unique, and that I miss in modern cinema. Where did all those theatrical dialogs go? Where are the contemporary movies with breathtaking final monologues, where the actor gives his best as if speaking to the theatre audience? From time to time, filmmakers should revise classics; drop the tropes that have since then become too overused, and be re-inspired by wonderful, rich movies such as M.
Metropolis (1927)
Holy cow, is this really nine decades old?
Long live modern cinema. No matter how revolutionary the avant-garde movement was for art as a whole, the modernists' true medium, was definitely, the last, seventh art. Metropolis captures perfectly the zeitgeist of its moment: the Weimar's republic contradictions and overlapping between Marxist ideas, Christian references and a futuristic faith in the machines. The way these interplay is astonishing, because the final result is as relevant to today's reality as it was to that of the inter-war period. We still have segregated cities; we still have enslaved proletarians in East Asia building iPhones for a few; violent revolution is still not the answer. And I find very curious how the movie, despite its socialist claims, depicts the workers as an irrational crowd, easily manipulated by pretty much anyone with a tiny bit of agency. And the relation Man-Machine is never completely resolved: are they evil? are they a tool for exploitation? are they the basis of our survival?
What also makes me marvel is that this movie is from the time before the stock market crash; before Hitler. The camera techniques, the special effects (!), the massive amount of extras, have nothing to envy those of today's blockbuster. The plot situations that rise up in this movie, have become way too recognizable tropes over the course of the century. The evil double, the fight on the rooftop, the water rising scene, the artificial hand, the wrongdoer who later sacrifices himself, the damsel in distress... Hollywood seems to have run out of ideas these past ninety years. And yet Metropolis has bits that resemble nothing I ever saw, and completely blew my mind; above all the dancing scene at the end of the Intermezzo, which is probably among the best movie scenes in history, full stop.
Metropolis is, therefore, a virtuous combination, between a movie that fully captures the zeitgeist of the avant-garde time, while at the same time being a timeless piece that is relevant to today's world and can be enjoyed by today's audience as much as the audience it was intended too. Few movies deserve as much to be on the podium of greatest movies of all time.
Taxi Driver (1976)
Disturbingly amazing
No wonder why this movie is such a classic. The performances of De Niro, Cybill Shepherd, Harvey Keitel and Jodie Foster are all stunning. But definitely most of the merit goes to Scorsese. The way the movie is shot, its cinematography, its colours, its music, its aura, they all drag the viewer deep into the Travis' world, to the point you fully understand his disturbing actions. The way the movie slowly builds up to the climax is perfect. The plot line is never too slow as to bore the audience, yet the way the anti-hero's psyche evolves at a glaciar pace, from the point he gets the job as a taxi driver to the final climax, is truly remarkable. And it's disturbing how current the theme is, with so many mass shooting happening in the US. It really points to a side of modern civilization we need to look at much more, how so many people are completely alone with their minds in the huge metropolis, not really understanding why their world is so messed up.
Django Unchained (2012)
Mainstream Tarantino
Tarantino is a great director, no doubt about that. Every movie he makes its a truly pleasure to watch, in every detail, from the music, to the camera shots, the dialogs, the acting, everything. Django Unchained is no exception. It is fun, enjoyable, and though long, it never gets boring.
What I did miss, however, was some of the more intricate plot lines of other Tarantino movies such as Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, or Inglorious Bastards. Tarantino does seem to enjoy making Westerns, judging by the fact he is now doing another one. And the genre definitely allows for the spectacular bloodshed he so enjoys filming. But the story of Django misses the dramatic unraveling of events that is so enjoyable about Tarantino, it is quite straightforward and the good and bad guys are very easy to identify, and sometimes the plot line gets very predictable (even though Tarantino has the talent to make even a predictable storyline to be enjoyable to watch; the devil is in the details)
When the movie had just come out, there was a lot of fuss about the use of the n-word. Even for me, that I am not American, it gets pretty disturbing and uncomfortable. I don't have anything to say about the race issues with this movie that has not been said before, but I can totally understand how people got mad about it. Race and slavery are such sensitive issues, that a white person must be very careful to not make it a racist movie, even if the intentions are completely the opposite, as it is clear here. There is virtually no white American who is a white guy in this movie, and it is clear that Tarantino himself is not a racist. But once again, the devil is in the details.
All of this criticism should not make it seem like it is a bad movie. At all. It is definitely something you don't see everyday in Cinemas. Tarantino is definitely one of the best American directors alive, and chances are that whatever other movie you find on cable one night, will probably be worse than Django Unchained.
Nuovo Cinema Paradiso (1988)
One of *those* movies
I can't really think of many other movies that fit the same category as Cinema Paradiso. Right now I can only think of "It's a wonderful life" and "Amelie". But they are movies with a special spark. Movies that after the first few scenes you know that, regardless the development of the plot, you're now become completely involved with the story and the characters. You are *in* the story. It is often said that great movies are the ones that manage to convince the public that what they are seeing is reality, that the spell they cast is so well-carved that you don't notice that on the other side of the screen there's actors who leave their characters after the director shouts "stop", and people who work on the make-up, lightning, script. Great movies are those in which you forget that what you are watching a movie.
Now, movies like Cinema Paradiso,, take it to a whole other level. It is not only that they make you believe you are watching reality, but that it's a reality deeply close to your heart. Two hours ago I'd never heard of Salvatore, Alfredo and Elena. But now they already seem like old-friends, people that know the purest of me, people that I don't want to believe that actually never existed, and were simply actors repeating the lines written by a guy. I actually want to believe they are somewhere in this real world. Movies like Cinema Paradiso completely blur the line between that side of the screen and us.
It is therefore completely senseless that I spoke about the direction, the magnific editing, the outstanding performances and the touching music. Because that would mean to accept that Salvatore and Alfredo never existed, and I refuse to do that. At some point, Alfredo says that life is much worse than in the movies. But right now, after having just finished Cinema Paradiso, I want to believe it is not. I want to believe I am right now in that world where magic can happen, a world where, somewhere in Rome, Salvatore is kissing Elena.
I don't usually cry in the movies. There have been some movies that do make me cry, though. Holocaust movies like La vita è bella are especially good at that. But most of the movies that make me cry are because they are particularly sad. Few movies have made me cry of happiness the way Cinema Paradiso did.
The Pianist (2002)
Never again
Soundtrack for this review: El pianista del gueto de Varsovia by Jorge Drexler
It is hard to review this movie. It is not easy to evaluate this movie in terms of its acting, its quality, its directing, with an armchair attitude that ignores the crudeness and harshness of real life. It is hard to say phrases like "Roman Polanski, perhaps due to its own experience, captures perfectly the feeling of everyday life of Polish Jews during the Second World War, its sadness and despair but also the tiny moments of hope", however true that might be.
It is very hard to rate this just as a movie, and not as a reminder for the human race of what are we capable of. I'm often reluctant to watch Holocaust movies because I know beforehand that they will have very hard to digest moments, and they are almost an act of masochism, two hours of intense suffering. But they are necessary, they are real stories that urge to be told, and need to be heard so that they don't happen again.
In a world where islamophobic parties are winning votes in Europe, where Americans proudly wave a flag that is the symbol of slavery in front of their president, these movies are indispensable. We cannot allow ourselves to fall into the collective madness that Germany fell into between 1933 and 1945. We should have learnt by now that technology has allowed the State to mobilize way too many resources, and the extermination of an entire group of people is only a button away. Not to mention the fact that these things still happen in more remote corners of the world, where they don't destabilize global geopolitics.
So it would be too frivolous from my side to evaluate Polanski's direction or Brody's acting, as if this was fiction. The feeling I have after having watched The Pianist is not the one of a film critic that passively observes reality from behind his desk, but an active one, the imperative of making sure that nothing like this ever happens again.
Back to the Future (1985)
Authentically entertaining
You should not watch Back to the Future looking for serious, intriguing thought experiments regarding time travel. You should watch it for what it is: a Hollywood blockbuster that seeks to make money through people's entertainment. And the profit-seeking motive is quite clear from the beginning: you see brand placement EVERYWHERE.
Back to the Future, then, has all the ingredients for a Hollywood blockbuster: funny characters, unlikely plot denouements that you see coming way before it happens, very cliché characters such as the town bully, the timid nerd that becomes a hero, the damsel in distress. Also, as a 1985 blockbuster, it includes racism and sexism that would probably not be tolerated nowadays, such as the main actor shouting "the Libyans!" as a synonym of "the bad guys!", or the main character literally planning to abuse of a girl, which happens to be his mother.
That being said, the movie does achieve it main goal: it is truly entertaining. I'm not the kind of person who laughs out loud when watching comedies, but in this case I couldn't avoid it. There are truly remarkable situations, especially with Marty's mother. The doctor's character is also particularly well-made, and the actor's performance is notable. In general, the creators did a good job in showing all the different funny situations that would arise from bringing an 80s kid to 1955, such as him playing rock'n roll in front of an awed audience, or Marty saying that a TV program that is just being aired is a classic that he watched in a rerun.
So once you understand you shouldn't have high hopes for this movie, and that you should only look for having a good time, this movie will be very satisfactory. There are more artistic movies, better written plots, better directed ones, even funnier ones. But very often, these movies don't remain in the collective imaginary in the way this did it. The way this movie is part of today's pop culture should not be understated.
Modern Times (1936)
A classic never dies
Though some of it might be lost in time. Today's public probably won't find it as funny as the 1930s public (I can totally imagine them laughing at Chaplin's faces), but some jokes are pretty universal and they genuinely make you laugh out loud. The gibberish singing of the tramp will probably never get old, it's quite sublime.
There's also some very cool cinematic tools such as the classic gear scene, which was probably pretty innovative, or the final scene with the tramp and the girl walking towards the camera. That one gave me goosebumps. And the music is quite awesome too. Definitely a must-see to anyone who is interested in the history of cinema.
Saving Private Ryan (1998)
The Ultimate WWII Blockbuster
This is such a Spielberg movie, such a Hollywood blockbuster, such a WWII drama, I can't even. All the cheesy dialogues, the sentimental scenes, the horror of the war, the pathetic American nationalism with the movie beginning and finishing with a take of the American flag, the old war Veteran speaking to the grave, all the possible war tropes (the nice guy who is afraid of killing, the highly moral doctor, the macho Vin Diesel, the Jew fighting against Germans, the rebel who doesn't follow the Captain's orders, and of course the heroic, brave Captain)... I've seen these a million times, though probably never as well put-together as in Saving Private Ryan. So I guess you could say that it is, among its kind, the best; even if I'm not a fan of that kind.
The opening scene is a whole different story, though. The Normandy landing is quite masterly filmed, and it probably ranks among the best opening scenes ever (can't really think of any other opening scene as memorable). It's cruel, bloody, and impressive.
The ending, on the other hand, really put me down. Everything was so cliché, and what's up with the Allied troops ending thanks to the last-minute, never-mentioned help of the Air force? Script writers, take note: NEVER let the plot be solved by an element that you never mentioned to the public. Nothing creaks the illusion of reality as much.
Vertigo (1958)
Unforgettable
This movie is amazing. I wouldn't dare to blatantly say it is Hitchcock's masterpiece only because Psycho is pretty good to, but it definitely competes for the prize. There's very few movies that made me shout and stay on the edge of my chair for so much time as this one, the whole atmosphere, starting from the opening credits, is creepy as f*ck. And it just keeps building up until the suicide which, you think, it is the climax of the movie.
Then, surprisingly, the movie doesn't seem to finish. At first I was quite bothered, why would the movie not finish yet? Yes, the scene in which Scottie has that weird, LSD-like dream is pretty awesome, but it just seemed to me that Hitchcock was stretching the movie too much. Until you realize that you didn't see it all, and that the woman who fell from the tower is not the woman Scottie fell in love with (is it not? who did he feel in love with exactly?).
Then it just gets way to f*cked up. And Scottie begins to be a creep with Judy, and you just wish that nothing happens to her. And tension begins to build up again, and you just can't stand it anymore, up until the last scene, which oh god I will never forget. The shadow in the end shall haunt me in my dreams for many nights to come. It definitely ranks among the best final scenes I've ever seen (Psycho's climax is also pretty high up there, too, though it's not exactly the last scene). So yeah, this is among the best thrillers I've seen in my life.
Annie Hall (1977)
The best of Allen
It's beyond discussion that this is Woody Allen's masterpiece. It's so identical to aaaall of his movies, yet it takes all the distinctive marks to a higher level. The classical Woody Allen playing as himself, the lovely Diane Keaton being a mess, New York, intellectual parties with pretentious conversations, hilarious dialogues that mix Jew jokes with literary references; not to mention the beautiful cinematography, the sudden scene changes and the kind of intemporality in which the movie takes us into. There's no cohesive plot line, it's a bunch of scenes put together without before or after, exactly the way memory works. Exactly the way one thinks of a relationship during a break up: just individual pieces that somehow tie together, beautiful, lovely, unreal memories. So unreal that in Singer's memory it makes perfect sense that he starts talking about Annie to passers-by, or that he breaks the fourth wall and starts talking to us the public, or that Annie's family can have a conversation with Singer's family at different moments and places.
Annie Hall is the ultimate break up movie. Forget 500 Days of summer, The Notebook, or anything that came after 1977. They stand as ridiculously fake, Hollywoodesque, cheesy. This movie does not have any pretensions of rightfully portraying reality, but in its crazy and surreal way it is far more loyal to the mood of somebody who is going through a break-up.
Apocalypse Now (1979)
Never seen anything like this before.
This movie is a complete mindf*ck. From the opening scene, with the takes of helicopters and Vietnamese jungle and Captain Willard in a hotel room, all with some background, intense, progressive rock music, you know you are not going to watch an ordinary movie. This is something special, this plays with your mind.
Scene after scene, the movie keeps getting weirder, but it's such a slippery slope up until the end that you don't even realize that what you are watching is completely bizarre. From the beginning, Coppola sets the rules of the game and makes the public abide to them. And once you're deep down in the movie, there's no way out. This is not an ordinary Vietnam War movie, yet in its insanity and surrealism there's no other movie that depicts the cruelty and madness of war so well. Coppola makes no effort in trying to show a realistic Vietnam War, but because of that is that no other director has fully apprehended the meaning of war so well. To understand the traumas that war veterans go through, it is not enough with just showing a lot of cruel scenes, blood and friends and foes dying, you need to go beyond reality, you need to grasp the subconscious part of it. And Coppola does it terrificly.
Music deserves a special mention. A big part of the state in mind in which Coppola puts you in is because of the amazing soundtrack. I had never seen another movie with such a good use of sound effects and music in order to convey the desired message.
I didn't really know what to expect of this movie before seeing it. I only knew is about Vietnam. I really did not expect this movie to have the effect it had on me. Needless to say, this movie is a must- see.
Jagten (2012)
Moving, slow story
Mads Mikkelsen does a great job in this movie. Featuring a teacher whose life gets suddenly ruined, he manages to transmit the feelings of somebody who has lost it all.
The movie is about a kindergarten teacher that suddenly sees himself involved in a child abuse scandal after his best friend's daughter says she saw his private parts. Dealing with a very sensitive topic, the movie manages to portray on one side the importance of the issue, together with all the prejudices and violence that imply living in a small town where everyone gossips and nobody is inclined to consider Lucas' innocence.
The ending is somewhat disappointing, and many things are left unexplained. In that sense the story is very catchy, but doesn't quite deliver the public's expectations. The last scene tries to sum it all up, and it is indeed quite shocking, yet when the credits come one has the feeling of "what? but, what about this and that?".
I still recommend the movie. It is beautifully shot, very human, and it's nice to see from time to time a film that is far away from the shining Hollywood style.
Sunset Blvd. (1950)
Two lost epochs
Sunset Boulevard is a beautiful film about a lost time. Two lost times actually. One, the silent movies' Hollywood, the years of glamour in which Norma Desmond lives. The second lost time is for us that 50s Hollywood, the violins playing behind the actors' old American accent, the complete lack of computer effects, the movies that try to catch you not with eye-filling visuals, but with moving stories, even if self-referencing to Hollywood's industry.
Gloria Swanson deserves special reference. Her performance is quite amazing, with that accent that reminds me of Cruella de Vil when she says "Anita, daaahrling..." in 101 Dalmats. So much glamour, so delicate moves, all mixed up with terrible psychological distress, craziness, spotlights overdose. The final scene, with Norma Desmond walking down the stairs, is simply one of the most memorable final scenes I've seen in quite a while.
Dallas Buyers Club (2013)
An archetypal Oscar movie
After you've seen enough of them, you begin to identify their characteristics. There's this particular type of music that are tailored for the awards season, and more specifically, for the Oscars. They are released on a certain date, and they have a certain cinematography and editing. The plot usually revolves around a certain character that faces a big challenge, usually due to a systemic injustice (eg: slavery, or the way pharmaceutical companies make business with AIDS medicine), and in the process of overcoming this challenge, the character goes through a deep transformation and comes out as a hero. If it's based on a real story, even better. And this is somehow bothering: it's a cold reminder that after all, Hollywood is an industry, and within this industry there's a particular niche for movies that are nominated in the Oscars, who aim at a specific target market and make money out of priding themselves as "quality movie", as certified by the Academy. It's almost a joke the way in which the first ten months of the year Hollywood releases cr*ppy movies with weak plot lines and millions spent in visual effects, and then towards the awards season cinemas are flooded with allegedly "better quality" movies. Dallas Buyers Club is one of these.
But at the end of the day, the Oscars do award better than average Hollywood movies, and they Oscar movies are indeed of "better quality" than the rest of what Hollywood makes. In this case, a special effort was made for the casting. Matthew McConaughey and Jared Leto are simply superb, and they definitely deserve their Oscar for Best Performance. Both of them are unrecognizable in their roles, and they pull out an amazing acting when interpreting their characters. Of course, the role of a terminally-ill AIDS patient is specifically designed for giving the actor enough cues to pull out an Oscar-worthy performance, but it works. Jennifer Garner is not bad, but she is completely overshadowed by the other two actors. The story is pretty good, quite predictable (after all, the character is told at the beginning of the movie that is going to die) but enjoyable, and definitely emotional. So while you have to be psychologically prepared for watching a tough movie about AIDS, you will definitely not regret having watched this movie.
The Imitation Game (2014)
Never let truth spoil you a good story
What is truly amazing for this film is that it is based on a real story. Really this Cambridge professor helped Britain win the war by cracking a code? He really saved millions of people? And nobody knew about it for 50 years, and he ended up killing himself after having been forced to chemical castration because of homosexuality? And we're talking of the founding father of Computer science? If I hadn't heard of Turing before, I would have a hard time believing this is a real story.
So this movie is brilliant because the story of Alan Turing is unbelievable. There's something intriguing about secret services, all these Top Secret files that few people in the world know about. Because we don't know what they say, we can expand our imagination limitlessly when wondering what do they actually say. As far as we are concerned, they might entirely change the way we conceive history. And this fact, the idea that Turing died without ever being recognized on his contribution in WWII because it was Top Secret, it's what makes you sit on the edge of the chair when watching this movie.
The problem is that, when you do a little research, you find out that the movie takes HUGE creative freedoms when it comes to truthfully depicting the story. It creates struggles where they never existed, completely alters the nature of Turing's work at Blechley Work, and makes Turing meet people who in the movie blackmail him but that he actually never met (to just name a few...). All of this to give more drama to the story. And they succeed on it.
Then yes, of course, Benedict Cumberbatch pulls out an amazing performance. The role of a compulsive genius allows him to show all his potential. The portrayal of Turing as a complete asocial allows the script to have a couple of very funny dialogues, that actually make you laugh. And Keira Knightley is not bad, but I bet the real life woman was not as beautiful.
What makes this movie not perfect? It's actually full of common places. The one cheesy tagline that is repeated two or three times across the movie. The sudden realization that owes itself to a completely unrelated comment but requires the hero to run back to his workplace. The cliché dramatic pauses before an important line. Tywin Lannister acting as Tywin Lannister, but with WWII uniform. Little things that, overall, don't spoil the movie that much. It's still very much worth watching.