Change Your Image
gahnsuksah
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Loving Annabelle (2006)
Derivative, predictable and boring
I imagine tha once prime-time television had accepted lesbianism as acceptable and 'norma'., we will seeing a lot more boring versions of this syndrome-driven erototrivia with its cheesy tense emotional moments and salacious content. Difficult not to guess how the next thirty seconds unfolds, the daringness of their relationship fades into ... but what am I saying? Anybody at school these days would not last a week in such a relationship, the teacher rapidly uncovered and fired. Just look at your local newspapers to see what happens in reality.
Cracks (2009)
emergent eroticism
An unfortunate title but a terrific movie in terms of the possibilities for social realism where the erotic is forever implied but rarely demonstrated. Great casting, wonderfully convincing portraits of eccentric teachers (and they were) and the peculiar claustrophobic isolation that such schools acquire away from society. However, in our time, with its incessant paranoia about 'pedophile' teachers, it hardly needs pointing out that Miss G would be in instant trouble for her behavior (nude swimming at midnight!) and probably sacked by the end of the very first term. Such teachers did exist and were the brunt of conventionality (that even today always wins concerning choices for reading). Perhaps it was the epoch of the 30s that permitted bare-bottom spankings, where the girls' behavior was not considered overtly sexual, and thus Miss G earns a modicum of credibility. Great historical realism! A good movie!
The Golden Bowl (1972)
unique! - singular in its sinister accomplishments
If you find reading Henry James tedious for his endlessly spun-out and inconsequential sentences, you need not fear. This production is subtly habit-forming throughout its inveigling four episodes. Especially, as other reviewers have commented, for everything that is not said in the text. Perhaps not too sinister, by contemporary standards, it nevertheless treats infidelity, not simply as an extracurricular activity for the lazy rich, but also as a labyrinth of quiet deceptions and undercurrents running through 19th century propriety, presented in a suave and 'delicate' manner. I watched all the episodes several times, sometimes twice in one evening. You too, perhaps, when you 'get caught' by the disquieting and ominous dialogues wafting from scene to scene.
Sade (2000)
a very likable man - and a good movie
This movie allows the French to give their own version of Sade and is historically accurate to the extent that it contains references to Sade's actual beliefs, as they appeared in print, and events in his life that have been corroborated. Sade turns out to be a thoughtful, philosophical man who looks at life head-on without illusions about the supernatural; moreover, the Sade of this movie is remarkably free from malice, cruelty and resentment.The script is well thought out, offering every point of view, and depicts some wonderful tender moments when he bids farewell to his protégé who similarly returns his affections with substance and sincerity, for she has undergone 'a learning experience'. No sign of wanton cruelty or mindless prurience there.
Splendid acting, thoroughly believable characters, each individual a depiction of concord or dissent, the film shows every opinion circulating during the Revolution. The story does not portray 'the seduction of a young girl' for she is totally willing to accede to Sade's predilections and simply wants to experience life - that which her class and religion has denied her - before joining her ex-nobles at the guillotine.
There are very few pictures of Sade that remain and it is difficult to assess how his physiognomy was representative of his disposition. Was he a besotted blockhead or just an unusual philosopher? Anyone who looks into the history of Sade's life is surprised by just how un-monstrous he turns out to be. Generous, tolerant and life-affirming, Sade was more simply a libertine - one who regards freedom of sexual expression a desirable thing and encourages people to get acquainted with their animal passions. His matter-of-fact atheism and his love of nature make him a very likable man - far preferable to the unhealthy vengeful Christianity that loves sending unbelievers to hell and eternal torment - for there be another version of sadism, indeed.
And concerning sado-masochism, who amongst us has not enjoyed a massage that was a bit too strong, or a little spanky-panky in their sex life? Sade does not advocate thoughtless cruelty and his sex acts are strictly consensual among those with eclectic tastes. Hm-mm.
The Paper Boy (1994)
Does Johnny convince us as a killer?
Does Johnny convince us as a killer? A great idea for a movie that often does not really work through lack of credibility. Marc Marut (Johnny) is a good actor and is convincing in his anguish to please. The viewer quickly catches on to the idea that Johnny is a revenge killer - revenge on neighbours for 'denying' him affection. He lacks self knowledge in that he never sees his demands as intrusive and hardly likely to win affection. Moreover, the rage scenes are a bit hammy and Johnny changes too rapidly from manic teenage killer to avid sycophantic 'friend' and he loses the opportunity to astound us in his all-too-rapid transformations. We thereby sometimes lose our willing suspension of disbelief and find ourselves watching just a bunch of low-budget actors. The mother, Melissa, (prettily attractive Alexandra Paul) is perpetually vapid. Too many fatuous greetings and god-awful tawdry scenes of affection - like a hundred other 'family love' movies with tweedle-dumb music to harness our sympathies - mostly lost through a boring script that surely needed some enlivening before acceptance.
The first murder scene occurs way too soon - we cannot identify with any of the characters and feel alarmed or sorry for anyone. Johnny's murderous disposition is also revealed way too soon without any backstory. Marc Marut is a good actor and could have done better if the director had worked a bit more on his screen personality. Some slower facial transformations? Some better convincing 'psycho' soliloquies? Credibility, and the echo of a dozen other similar recent films, makes this movie not so interesting to watch - and proves Hitchcock did it so much better 50 years ago. Pity.
Darling (1965)
Was Julie Christie well cast?
Definitely a period film for those interested in identifying old cars, hairstyles and suchlike. One gets used to the black and white. Script full of silly egoistic banter with rather poor jokes (to us, anyway). I suppose the 60s were a bit like this movie but a lot seems just plain silly. A lot of facial expression shots that don't quite fit with the story development. Continuity suffers as a result of this. Was Julie Christie well cast? The Diana personality does not really fit her good looks and class - and she certainly comes over as a rather greedy and ignorant person who does not know herself at all. Her looking at herself in the mirror whilst kissing Robert (Dirk Bogarde) taught her nothing. Lousy relationships and trouble all round.