Change Your Image
Ricc0
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Irishman (2019)
The Golden Age.. Lost again
I know it is better to get into a movie with low expectations.. but whatever you expect from Scorsese and De Niro this movie wont match it.
Many have said it but I should start with: The movie was too long with the wrong pace and missing any tune. For the first hour and a half it was like watching a huge amount of pictures one coming after the other.. I really don't know what went wrong with the directing and editing.. and all that time it felt like the narrator was just introducing the personalities involved.... it felt like nothing really is happening.
From what I heard I expected to see outstanding acting.. Pesci was fine but his role was small.. the same for Romano. Al Pacino was average, overacting at some points... and for De Niro he was simply unable to perform especially in the scenes where he was supposed to be young (one example mentioned by many is the fight at the grocery store). The few good ones were when he was playing the old Frank.
For such a movie there was no personality study.. the actors did not age well.. the CGI de-aging technology was annoying.. that dark funny side in Scorsese's movies was missing and a lot more to say if we continue...
Many movies fail to entertain but it is only an issue when you have De Niro, Pacino, Pesci, Keitel and others coming one last time together with Scorsese to remind us of the golden age.. and disappoint.
El Camino: A Breaking Bad Movie (2019)
El Camino: A Bad Movie
It failed on every level.. the writing, the directing, the acting.. this movie was absurd.
They could have wrapped it up in two scenes to tell us how things ended up with Jesse.. It was a shock that it went on and on for more than two hours without anything really happening..!! But I guess it is not a farewell for Jesse's character anyway.. it is a commercial movie, it is out there for the money.
I cannot even say that I now know what happens with Jesse.. I am simply unable to relate between such a movie and the best TV series ever made..!
To me, that last scene when Jesse was crazily crying, laughing, and shouting was the last thing I saw of Breaking Bad..
La La Land (2016)
Amusing but not great..
A lot of reviews on IMDb thought that this movie deserved a 1/10, and more considered it a great one. And while it seems that this movie is having an undeserved rating, I wouldn't consider it really a bad one. In fact, I had fun watching it and though it is a bit long for its content, it is nevertheless amusing.
Yes, movies are subjective.. but still one can judge a movie for what it has got to offer.. especially for movie lovers a set of artistic principles can be laid.
I'll be quick on its positive aspects: The music (not the dancing and singing) is good. The plot is entertaining.. some of the scenes (especially between Stones and Gosling) are innovative, and others attempted to revive the classics. Chazelle also put a great deal of effort with the camera-work.
Well for the negative side, the singing and dancing were not so good.. and for a musical this is really important. Some said that it was better that the singing was modest, for it appeals more to the characters. But really, a musical should introduce something beautiful for the viewer to get emotionally attached and it won't seem abnormal.. it is a musical after all. Look at West Side Story (1961) or Singin' in the Rain (1952); every song is memorable.. well and that is another issue with La La Land. I forgot the songs the minute the movie ended.
The characters also seemed a bit shallow. Gosling's character was a bit deeper than Stone's, but his acting was bad. Emma made a good effort in acting to enhance her character.
The script also seemed of little depth. So it is about following your dreams (an idea now overused) and the conflicts one may encounter with the person he/she loves.. and while there is nothing indeed special about this, I have to say that the execution makes it somehow dull. The dialogue is bluntly thrown at us with nothing to take hold of. At some point in the movie I remembered "In the Mood for Love (2000); a drama/romance movie that I found much deeper and better executed.
I won't say anything about the movie's last 15 or 20 minutes that would spoil the movie for you.. but I'd like to point out that it is really inconsistent with the rest of the movie. I think many had the same feeling.. and the way the movie neglected some of the details was not helpful at all.
All in all, "La La Land" is a descent movie and a fun to watch.
The Monuments Men (2014)
A Total Disaster.
Based on real events, this film was a disaster! I'm writing this review while the film is still rolling... well it took me 4 days (everyday watching a bit of it) to get to the last half an hour of this film and I cannot bear watching one more second. If I was watching it in a movie theater I'd surely walk away.
In the true story, a force of around 300 men chased a huge number of European art treasures to save them from the Nazis and rescue the heritage of the Western civilization. I guess that the number of men was enormously reduced in this film so that the viewer could relate and connect to the characters.. well probably I couldn't care less even if a bomb demolished them all. Some of the real events were altered to serve the dramatic portrayal and every time the film tried to look serious the scenes only seemed hilarious.
The WAR COMEDY film was not funny and the war action scenes were so badly executed that they seemed like rehearsals.. For a moment there I thought that the main characters did not care about what they were doing.. as if some of them were forced to do it.. and this goes even for Cate Blanchett! I don't know how the movie managed to make her look so bad.
I did not really expect something so serious, but at least a light movie that makes you laugh.. something like "The Men Who Stare at Goats". Yet, this movie failed at every level. I only gave it 3/10 because it is based on a true story that was historically quite important. Or else I consider it only slightly better than "Battle of Los Angeles (2011)".
The Producers (1967)
Springtime for Hitler
Once the King of Broadway, Max Bialystock (Zero Mostel) is now a greedy, lustful, and corruptible producer that sexually manipulates old women to get some money. Upon meeting Leo Bloom (Gene Wilder), the hysterical and insecure accountant, the two come up with the perfect scheme to gain a fortune. This time they have to fail (something they are both good at) by producing a flop rather than a hit.
The producer (1967) was the first film to be directed by Mel Brooks. His debut film is an amusing satire with a mood that makes the viewer lightheartedly go along the wickedness and fraud shown by the main characters. The jokes are rather genuine and the performances help a lot. Many say that the characters scream a lot (especially Wilder), but I only found that to be part of what made his hysterical personality so funny. The gay characters of Roger De Bris (Hewett) and Carmen Ghia (Voutsinas) and the Nazi Franz Liebkind (Mars) added a lot to the hilarious plot. Also, I should say that some of the names and jokes used reflect a witty and culturally knowledgeable Brooks.. (Using the name Prince Myshkin from Dostoyevsky's novel "The Idiot", or Carmen Ghia = Karmann Ghia.. etc.)
The film was criticized also for depicting the two main characters Bialystock and Bloom as two Jews that are trying to cheat theatrical investors; an aspect that many found unoffensive and remarkably clever especially when added to the "Nazi play scheme" planned for by the protagonists.
Although the film was more shocking back then in the 60s (it is claimed that Peter Sellers had to intervene with the executive producer Joseph E. Levine to convince the studio to release it! And it was released on one condition that is changing the title from Springtime for Hitler to The Producers), it is in fact gaining more and more respect throughout the days. Many critics such as Roger Ebert, consider it one of the funniest movies ever. Whatever the taste of the viewer is, I recommend this movie for it is really a brilliant classic film.. the type missed nowadays.
Ningen no jôken (1959)
..Trying to catch the train of humanity
"No Greater Love" is the first part of the 9 hours 47 minutes trilogy directed by Masaki Kobayashi based on the six-volume novel by Junpei Gomikawa. A captivating, haunting, and touching anti-war epic film where Kobayashi masterfully criticizes and confronts the Japanese practices and applications via WW2 through a self-righteous character who is trying to "catch the train of humanism before it's too late".
Kaji is a socialist and a pacifist with great morals. His self- righteousness is shown from the first beginning when he refuses to sleep with his girlfriend for the concern of being enlisted soon in the army and not be able to fulfill his duties towards her. He has his own theories and principles also in dealing with work environment and laborers. He gets a job offer to be a supervisor in an iron mine in a small Manchurian village. Since he opposes war, he accepts it as his only way out of conscription. He also gets to be with his girlfriend (they soon marry).
Kaji now in his new work faces moral dilemmas that prove day by day not to be easier than those he was going to face in the military. He struggles with the old, brutal, and oppressive mentalities. Things get nastier when 600 Chinese men are brought to the mine as prisoners of war.. plots, deceptions, racism, torture.. the list goes on. Many try to shake his convictions by convincing him that the theories may prove wrong when applied, and also that peace theories do not apply in war time. His answer was that either the theories are wrong or they were faultily applied. Yet, even his wife doubts his intentions for a moment.. will he surrender?
Kobayashi's humanist film is a delicate study of the human psychology during hardships and the capabilities of the man to stand still and fight for what is right. It is also a sincere revision to a difficult era in Japanese history, reacting responsibly in opening a new page for the coming generations. "It's not my fault that I'm Japanese.. yet, it's my worst crime that I am", states Kaji. What can we do to deserve this beautiful name "man", one prisoner ask him.
Kaji represents in his fight to become the man not the beast all humanity not only of course the Japanese.. every generation from the first beginning. The masterful Kobayashi contributes greatly to this epic film with extraordinary execution.. and Tatsuya Nakadai was a great choice for the leading role. A piece of art considered by many to be one of the greatest ever.
Ikiru (1952)
Ikiru.. and how to live when you're facing death
Partly inspired by Leo Tolstoy's short novel "The Death of Ivan Ilyich", "Ikiru" (To Live) is a Japanese drama film that revolves around the life of an old bureaucrat who learns that he has few more months to live due to terminal cancer. Kanji Watanbi is not so shaken by the fact that he is going to face death as he is by the fact that he left nothing behind.. he could not even remember a moment that he truly lived. He has been long dead! Now, he looks back with regret.. his eyes are frozen, his soul is empty, and he finds himself drunk in a bar singing with a voice that is so cold. Is it too late now to start searching for a meaning?
The film shows at the beginning the protagonist sitting on a desk with piles of papers around him.. drowning in this inefficient system of bureaucracy, going by the codes and regulations without emotions, without feelings. It doesn't matter if he saved some money, or if he has been the section head for some time... he is a mummy. Yet, after being confronted by mortality, Watanabi now is determined to go on a last quest to discover his own-self and find what is truly meaningful.. this time not behind a desk but in helping, caring, loving, and being a righteous human being.
"Ikiru" sheds light on the deficiencies in the social system of Japan post WW2 (the film's events occur in the 50s), on the decay of the family life and bonds, and on the matters of life and death and the responsibilities of every human. The script is touching, deep, and warm that it truly inspires.. with "Ikiru" you are not just an observer. And for the closing shot.. well it is considered to be one of the best ever, especially when you live with Watanabi his last days, hours, and moments. Another masterpiece and my personal favorite among Kurasawa's masterworks.
Andrey Rublyov (1966)
Andrei: Rublev and Tarkovsky
"Agreed-upon" to be one of the cinema's masterworks, "The Passion According to Andrei" or simply "Andrei Rublev" revolves around the life of Russia's 15th-century great icon painter. The unique and great Tarkovsky carried the idea of this film from the first beginning, even before finishing his first film "Ivan's Childhood". Yet, after a single premiere screening in Russia (Dom Kino) in the year 1966, the film did not get a public release. Tarkovsky's masterpiece struggled for years in the Soviet Union and upon releasing it in December 1971 there were several cuts applied to it, where it was shown in the 186-minute version (the original was 205 min. long). Before that in 1969, the film was requested for Cannes Film Festival where it won the FIPRESCI prize, and from there on it was widely regarded as one of the greatest movies of all time.
Rublev's character appears for the first time leaving the Trinity monastery with two other monks to search for work in Moscow. At the end of the movie, Rublev goes back to the same monastery, where he began his journey, to paint his "Holy Trinity". Between this and that, Rublev accomplished his spiritual journey and found his voice (innerself) not between the walls of monastery, but in the harsh circumstances of life back then. The film indeed shows little about Andrei Rublev himself and yet in a way shows a lot. As always Tarkovsky surprises his audience. The biographical film does not tell us about Rublev in the traditional meaning of the word, since he is most of the times a witness of what was going on and a passive observer. Yet, it tells us more about the interaction of this personality with existence, life, and with the conditions and occurrences of his time. In fact, Tarkovsky's psychological stance and spiritual meditation had to do a lot with the result of this film. That is why many regarded it as an allegory to Tarkovsky's own struggles in Russia or with his own-self. It is then the passion according to both Andrei Rublev and Andrei Tarkovsky.
The film is divided into eight chapters (with a prologue and epilogue) each with a unique title. The opening scene starts with a prologue of a hot air balloon ride. Some consider this amazing scene as an allegory to our spiritual relationship with the "world of appearances". It may also seem an allegory to the struggles of the innovative, the spiritual, and the human in general with the circumstances life presents. Well, it may also mean both; since Tarkovsky uses powerful images that carry lots of meanings to evoke our emotions and drive us to react to them from our perspective. A horse (to Tarkovsky it resembles life) is seen collapsing. Rublev then is shown leaving the monastery.. the journey begins.
Envy, desire, love, betrayal, freedom, faith.. wars and tortures and murders and struggles all of which Rublev feels and witnesses, and so he'd be greatly affected. He becomes disturbed and shaken.. and undergoes a vow of silence until he finds his faith again. Then, after seeing a boy achieve by faith what he was incapable of by knowledge, Rublev finds himself again in a moment of inspiration. Now we're ready to see Rublev's work in detail.. the film concludes with horses standing peacefully (the only scene shot in colors alongside Rublev's frescoes).
The film's spirituality offended many officials, its depiction of Russia's history offended many nationalists, and its boldness offended some of the religious. Yet, Tarkovsky was not trying really to take sides or attack or criticize anyone. He was just being Tarkovsky.. the genius.. with his thoughts and emotions. He was presenting from what he deeply felt a piece of art.
Zerkalo (1975)
Everyone's Mirror
The mirror is a story of a dying poet experiencing a stream of consciousness. Aleksei the protagonist whose face is never revealed (since the memories shown are his true face) is recalling all the memories, dreams, thoughts, and feelings that he once encountered. The film shifts for that through three different timelines of pre- war, war, and post-war (asserting how the circumstances surrounding the person's life affect it). It is considered loosely autobiographical where the director is trying to reflect somehow on his own past pushing through its spiritual meanings, engaging in his country's history and present conditions, and depicting worldwide moments that concern all humanity. And with a brilliant touch the poems incorporated with several scenes are in fact written and read by the director's father Arseny Tarkovsky (It is important to note here that his second wife as well as his real mother appear in the movie).
The highly unconventional film follows a nonlinear narrative.. and the dream-like sequence is often interrupted with archival footage that contributes to making the film a universal experience. Tarkovsky does not believe in using symbols, but every image of his carries one or several deep meanings. What about his perspectives then.. after all it is autobiographical. What is he trying to say? It seems that Tarkovsky is trying to show that everything is a reflection of another and that in every truth you'll find a mirror for the other. You'll find the mirror in the past and in the present.. in the spilled milk, in the open fields, the wind and fire, in the hardships and suffer, in war.. in the small moments of human sympathy, in the disembodied families, tragedies and lost love of a woman or mother... The director clearly uses elements from his own childhood.
Tarkovsky believes in using images that provoke feelings more than thoughts and expects from his audience to perceive them from their own stance contributing by that to his work. And before going through some of the scenes, I would like to say that the camera work Tarkovsky employed is highly appreciated by critics.. the moving camera shots were fascinating and contributed thoroughly in the dream-like pace that defeats time.. mentioning also the slow motion and long shots.. the montage.. the switch from colors to black and white.. a piece of art.
Interpretations to The Mirror starts with the opening scene.. the boy with the stutter may be a metaphor of how hard it is to communicate one's feelings (others said that it meant Tarkovsky has found his voice - maybe Tarkovsky meant both). The spilled milk appears in different parts of the movie as well as it does in other Tarkovsky's movies such as Stalker.. and it is accompanied here with the disembodied family. After several scenes, a thrilling shot of the husband washing Maria's hair is displayed (they need to take a different approach?).. at the end of the scene Maria views her physical appearance as an old lady facing her (the past haunts us - a reflection). Aleksei (post-war) talks to his mother on the phone and they always argue. Aleksei also quarrels with his wife Natalya and the same actress depicts both mother and wife (did Aleksei choose a woman similar to his mother to compensate "the missing love" or just as his wife stated that meant he is incapable of having a normal relationship with anyone"?").
Engaging in his country's issues, the pre-war "printing incident" scene implies that the state is suppressing.. Another scene shows an archival footage of soviet soldiers accompanied by poems about immortality and that everything in life is in a way everlasting (the spiritual journey appears in all of Tarkovsky's films). The archival footage also shows the Chinese - Russian conflict. Events that are "more universal" are also shown.. the Kurdish balloon journey, Spanish civil war (Insights, invention, and human sympathy), and the atomic tests of the year 1946. War and sympathy for its victims appear also in the scene of the Asafiev; the orphan who lost both his parents. After the shooting scene, the boy goes up to a snowy hill (implying how deep the suffering is) and a black bird stands on his head and Asafiev captures him (maybe a metaphor for the human potentials that were obstructed by war and tragedies). A blonde girl appears through several scenes and in one time with an injured lip (lost love).
Leonardo Da Vinci's book is revealed in the hands of Aleksei and his son Ignat (also the same actor depicts both characters). The book makes time irrelevant and mixes the past with the present.. everything seems interrelated and reflects one another. A leaf (sadness, decay) appears in the book (representing art - decline of humanity due to war?). Ignat reads Pushkin's letter to a character that seems to resemble Anna Akhmatova (it is implied then that the character's presence was imagined - though the same character appears at the end sitting on the bed of the dying poet).
Near the end, young Aleksei goes with his mother to the rich woman's house to sell her earrings.. Maria feels sickened (from the aristocratic presence?). The rich woman pushes her to "slaughter" a chicken for dinner and from there the film goes into the "levitation scene" where Maria's body rises up and a dove flies above her (the quest for peace through all this madness? - note that in a previous scene a co-worker compares Maria to a confused character in one of Dostoevksy's stories). The scene is thrilling and intense. We see then Aleksei dying.. he releases a bird from his hands (his soul to eternity?). After that, the last scene combines the three timelines all together as if happening at once!
Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964)
"Mein Fuhrer! I can walk"!
Considered to be one of the best dark comedies and political satires ever, Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove is one of the most amusing and brilliant films I have ever seen. The plot is rather simple.. an ill-minded and psychotic United States Air Force general launches a first strike "preemptive" nuclear attack against the Soviet Union exceeding his authority. The United States president then tries to stop the attack from the war room, communicating with the Soviets and their president to try everything possible to prevent a nuclear war that would destroy the world.
One could say a lot about what makes this cold war classic among the best. The directing was ingenious with its various camera styles (Documentary, close ups, long shots - different styles for different locations)... cutting back and forth and keeping it consistent with the story... the varying pace (going faster and faster as the film gets nearer to its crazy, hilarious, and symbolic ending).
The screenplay clever, innovative, and witty.. The acting superb.. Sellers, Scott, and Hayden had remarkable performances (especially for Sellers with his three distinct roles).. memorable phrases and jokes: "Gentlemen you can't fight in here! This is the war room". The score lovely and fit.
Yet, the best thing about this movie is in its ideas, allegories, and metaphors. The film came in the mid 60s and that in itself is astonishing with what it held of its time's fears and the theories that all turned out to be true (as many critics and newspapers remarked).
The film's major theory was connecting war with sexual desire. This was shown through various images (mating airplanes, spewing coke machines, "impotent" bombs, playboy magazine..), spelled out through words and phrases ("loss of essence", "Bodily fluids"..), hidden behind symbolic names (Jack Ripper: a killer especially of prostitutes, Merkin Muffley: female pubic area, Desadeski: perverted sexual love in the 18th century, and the same in Strangelove, Mandrake, Kissof..), and even presented in the only female character (Miss Scott) with her bathing suit or presence on the cover of a playboy magazine.
Another important theme is how technology dominated human life. The film shows numerously how things are getting completely out of control and away from moralities. Also Capitalism gets its share of criticism through the memorable scene of Mandrake in the phone booth.. "Shoot with a gun.. that's private property". Moreover, the statement that has been used by many throughout history to justify massacres; "Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed, but I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops, uh, depending on the breaks", was brilliantly implemented in the plot.
By focusing on the relation between war and sex, the film in return shows how the human conduct is leading to a lack of love. The only woman (that is a symbol of love and affection) is presented by one character and by sexual means.. also the theory of Dr. Strangelove at the end adds to it. This leads us to talk about arguably one of the weirdest characters in the history of cinema. His Nazi approach only points out that Nazism may occur in any of our acts, whether on the governmental, corporal, personal or any other level (and it is significantly present in the act of war); "Mein Fuhrer! I can walk".
The anti-war (which is its overall theme) film succeeded in depicting the different aspects of the cold war from its politics to the paranoiac atmosphere that controlled the minds of nearly everyone. Throughout this feature Dr. Strangelove also succeeded in bringing philosophical theories that concern the human life. A masterpiece.
Mildred Pierce (1945)
Mildred Pierce: The psychological and philosophical approaches
Widely acknowledged as one of the greatest movies ever made, Curtiz's "Mildred Pierce" is more than a film about the life story of a hard working woman and the mysterious murder occurring in her house. It is a study of the human psychology.. the needs and desires.. and an approach to how people differentiate between illusion and reality and whether it is really valid!
"Mildred pierce" is a film noir told through flashbacks with a voice-over narration from the protagonist, where she is telling her life story to the detective investigating in the murder of her second husband. An attractive housewife separates from her first husband due to disagreements related mainly to the raising of their two daughters. Mildred's Life then starts to take a different shape with all the struggles and sufferings, only to find that her hardest challenge is her older daughter Veda with her greedy, mean, and spoiled manners; all of which lead to destruction.
The plot and its protagonist Mildred Pierce reminded me of "Gone with the Wind". The film though is more cynical and the characters are in a way or another two-faced.. The acting was great and that helped a lot in introducing the complicated characters and deep dialogue successfully (3 actresses were nominated for Oscars with a win for Joan Crawford in addition to Best Writing nomination). The incredible execution of the film intended to make it gloomy and succeeded.. it is dark, deeply shaded, mysterious, and "deceptive".. wonderful cinematography (also nominated). And the directing.. well it was masterful.
What I love about this movie is the way Curtiz introduced its meanings and allegories. Starting with the opening scene, Curtiz shows us Monte (the second husband) being murdered without showing us the murderer. Going through Mildred's story the bits and bits of her life build up for us the image of the killer. The mystery (of life?) carries within it great illusions. In one scene, Mildred goes into a room to search for a bathing suit and Monte follows.. it is then revealed, as Mildred moves closer, that the initial shot was for a reflection of the mirror and for a moment there Mildred is facing herself in the mirror. A similar scene (of a mirror shot) is when Monte is embracing Mildred (do we perceive things in life as they are? are we even honest to ourselves? our feelings.. affections..). Remarkably in the same scene, Monte mentions the sound of his beating heart to Mildred.. after a while the "love scene" ends with Mildred telling Monte to stop the record "from beating" (the sound then - or his feelings I should say are artificial and his words deceptive).
Note that in a scene on the beach, Curtiz plays with the light. It is the only "shiny" scene in the film without the contrasts where Mildred is seen happy with her lover Monte (before he becomes her husband).. Curtiz is being artistic and stylish.
Curtiz then presents for us the human psyche at-most.. a devotion of a mother that in itself carries the seeds of destruction.. The strengths and motives that turn into weaknesses.. the desire to be wanted that makes someone try to buy the love of another (is "love" ever unconditional or does it always come from a need).. loyalty and betrayal.. the dark humor coming out through memorable words.. and the two faced characters.
A beauty.. and a must-see classic.. Mildred Pierce.
Idi i smotri (1985)
Ruthless
A Soviet drama war film directed by Elem Klimov, Come and See is considered as one of the best war films ever made. Its ruthless depiction of the human actions in WW2 makes it one of the strongest anti-war anti-fascist (as Klimov said he wanted it to be) films in cinema history. In many scenes you get the feeling that Klimov is trying to say that sometimes you're better off dead.. the horrors of war are unbearable.
The film opens with an ambiguous scene of a Belarusian young boy digging for something.. we know after a while that he is searching for a rifle to join the resistance against the Nazis. He then starts to witness the horrors and tragedies of war starting from the smallest incidents (such as having to switch his new shoes to old ruined ones) all the way to the massacres committed by the Nazi soldiers in Belarus.
The film's accuracy in depicting what really happened in that era (illuminating the Belarusian tragedy rarely shown) is one of its most important features.. and adding to its realism the surrealistic approach used by Klimov only makes it a piece of art. The two approaches are blended in a way that evokes intensity and emotions and masterfully displays the absurdity of human actions during war. The score also is used amazingly in a way to suit the tragic story. The animals' noises, dull hums, war sounds, classical music are all mixed together drawing more and more intensity. In an early scene the protagonist goes deaf leaving us to hear what he hears from noises (strengthening the disturbing atmosphere, especially that in this period he discovers what happened to his family - where he starts acting in a sort of denial).
The main subject of the film is the cottage scene in the village "Perekhody" where the Nazi soldiers put all the villagers in the cottage and burn it. Then they start shooting it while it is burning (showing excessive brutality or maybe absurdity). Before burning it they allow some to flee the cottage but without the children (in the execution scene a Nazi soldier explains the reason - he did not want this inferior race to continue!) and so the child of a young mother that tried to run away with him was taken from her and thrown again into the cottage and she was later raped (her screams were heard but nothing was shown). The protagonist was also allowed to flee and seemed to age throughout the film (pointing out how war kills innocence and how horrifying it is). The main character was a success in this film where the viewer can easily get emotionally attached to the terrified wandering kid.
The symbolic and memorable scenes in the film are many. A beautiful German soldier is seen lustily sucking food (linking lust to anger and war? or mocking the "superior Aryan race"?) and after few scenes she is shown dead with one of her breasts visible. Another scene is the protagonist stepping on a bird's nest killing her babies still in eggs (implying that war gives birth to suffering - or that it kills innocence).. also the death of the cow (some say that Klimov was trying to show that death is sometimes incomprehensible).. the cruel Nazi commander with his unpleasant pet.. the raped young mother with her legs covered with blood and playing on a harmonica a dull and annoying music.. and above all the old peasant that was thrown out while still laying on her bed (the close ups on her face were so emotional and also symbolic). In fact all the close ups from the beginning to the end help the viewer to feel the tragedy and connect with the terrified characters.
The German soldiers responsible for the burning of the cottage are then executed.. some tried to burn them to avenge the villagers but few peasants shot them quickly. The scene leaves a lot to interpret but you can feel that even though justice was obtained, nothing could really take back what happened.
The best is left to the end where the protagonist for the "first time" uses his rifle only to shoot Hitler's picture thrown in mud.. and each shot inter-cut with an archival footage of Hitler that is moving backwards. At last when the archival footage comes to a scene where he (Hitler) is a baby in his mother's arms the protagonist could no longer shoot the rifle! The film then plays a classical music with the resistance going into the woods (implying that there is still hope) and the film ends with a shot of the sky. Some assume that the director is questioning God but since the title carries a name from the book of revelation this interpretation does not seem right.. the scene is more likely to be spiritual.
A masterpiece from a director that never made any film after it claiming that he did everything he could in that film (and without using even professional actors!)
Hacksaw Ridge (2016)
Faith in Battlefield
Gibson's work is a biographical war film about Desmond Doss, a conscientious objector, who "fought without a rifle" during the battle of Okinawa in WW2. Desmond Doss enlisted in the U.S. army voluntarily as a combat medic refusing then to carry a rifle or even touch it only to save 75 injured soldiers and clear them from the battlefield on his own. Doss won the highest medals in his country to become the first and only conscientious objector to receive the medal of honor in WW2.
Desmond, who died in 2006, turned down many offers for books and films because he was scared that they'd portray his life inaccurately. Gibson's film on the contrary, depicts Doss's life rather accurately except for certain events such as him taking the gun out of his father's hands, the details of his first marriage, and bringing him his bible out of the battlefield directly after he was wounded. A veteran of WW2 also stated that the term "Hacksaw Ridge" was not used back then but rather "the escarpment". Otherwise, the life story of Desmond down to the slightest details was depicted accurately. The same veteran even mentioned that they teased Doss a lot asking him all the time, "What are you gonna do, Doss, if a Japanese comes around the corner and he's got a gun?".
The film starts with scenes from Desmond's childhood were he used to be violent.. then it moves to his romantic life with a bit of comic atmosphere around it.. then the dramatic struggle of Desmond with his comrades and commanders for what he believes in. This is for the first part of the movie.. the action starts with the second part when Desmond goes to Okinawa.. and while the movie starts to become more and more violent the spiritual atmosphere all around it gets stronger (implying that Desmond's faith became stronger after witnessing the battle unlike what happens in many other cases). It is important to note that Desmond in fact was religious and one of his comrades said that he maintained his strong faith even during the battle. Gibson showed in one scene a courageous soldier afraid of death after he was fatally wounded implying also that faith at such moments is vital. The humanity of Doss towards his comrades as well as his enemy was touching (the film showed him rescuing 2 or 3 Japanese soldiers).
The symbols were nicely included yet I would say that it was not sentimental enough for its spiritual mood.. maybe it is about the characters' depth (I was not able to get emotionally involved as I did in "Braveheart") or the sequence of events where I found a gap between the two parts of the film.. Or maybe the incidents shot were more of an action for the second part and comic in the first part and that didn't help in maintaining a general mood of sentimentality.
The war scenes nevertheless are thrilling and turn sometimes to more of a horror genre.. and Gibson did pick up the horrors of war, yet, it did not seem as natural as it was with his "Apocalypto".
The score was appealing but I would not say the same about acting. I'd say Hugo Weaving was the best while I wish Andrew Garfield was a bit better. Vince Vaughn, an actor that I admire, was as always really funny where he should but I cannot say that his role as sergeant Howell really suits him.
All in all, Gibson directed a good movie about an interesting character that defended his beliefs in and outside the battlefield.. he stood for what he believed in, did not surrender, and the hardship he went through only made him stronger, more faithful, and more of a human.
Al-Zeer Salem (2000)
The Best
Considered by many critics to be the best Arabian Drama Series ever presented. "Al-Zeer Salem" revolves around the life of the well-known poet and vigorous warrior in Pre-Islamic Arabia Udai Bin Rabia who led the Basus war to avenge his brother and so went down in history as the hero of the first Arabian Epic.
Also Known as Abu Layla Al-Muhalhel, Al-Zeer Udai was famous for his playful manner and his love for hunting, drinking, and for women. He never led a serious life and rather tried to enjoy it, yet obeyed any order given to him by his brother Kolaib who was the leader of Taghlib tribe. After a series of events Kolaib became a king in the Arabian peninsula and tried to lead his people to a new life where they could improve their social, economical, and military statuses. Many tribesmen could not adapt to the new laws and habits and a conflict happened between the strict Kolaib and his cousin Jassas from Bakr tribe where the latter came to kill the king. When Al-Zeer knew what happened he mourned and cried his brother that he loved for days and days only to lead his tribe after that in a war that lasted decades against their cousins in Bakr tribe and killing many by it some of which he admired.
The series is acknowledged for its accuracy in depicting the Epic (or shall I say; in depicting one version of it). Many doubted certain events included in the series, such as the war over Al-Jalila, the way Al-Zeer died, or other information as in presenting Jassas as the second oldest whereas he was the youngest. Yet, it is crucial to point out that history did not write down one version of the story and no one can say for sure what happened exactly.
The directing, acting, music as well as every other aspect of this series were perfect and suited the epic with its interesting characters and striking events. The culture in the Arabian peninsula prior to Islam was presented with a lot of attention to the various details that the viewer could learn a lot about the life back then just by watching this series. The poems and quotes by the real characters were included in a lovely manner making it more and more educational.
It would be hard to find an Arabic work executed with such perfection as in "Al-Zeer Salem".
Taxi (2015)
If you want to do something for whatever reason.. do it properly
Jafar Panahi is banned from making movies so he disguises as a taxi driver and makes one in a taxi cab. He didnot change his appearance of course but wore a hat and made a documentary-like film mostly while driving in the streets of the capital Tehran.
Panahi used non professional actors to perform the scenes, so the acting was rather bad and didnot seem normal at all as Panahi intended. The dialogue was more like a speech with a lot of messages to the authorities.. It was not like anything written for a movie not even if it is considered a documentary. Panahi only gathered what Iran is criticized for and just made the non professional actors state them bluntly.
Yes I am familiar with the situation he is in and saying it objectively: if you want to do something whether you are right or wrong do it properly. After all he was the Kiarostami's assistant (the director of close-up, one of the best movies I have ever seen).
All in all the execution was weak with no creativity in it.. He failed to connect with the social and cultural realities of Iran and really failed to connect on the emotional level through the stories he made with the audience. I expected much more.
Nema-ye Nazdik (1990)
Brilliant!!
The plot is quite simple.. Hussein Sabzian a cinephile, impersonates his favorite director Mohsen Makhmalbaf and enters the house of a well-to-do family convincing them that they would star in his next movie. After few meetings the family suspect that he is an impostor and inform the police. The film's opening scene starts here where a journalist is escorting two policemen to arrest Sabzian. Then the trial of Sabzian begins.
The film is based on a true story and this is rather the case in many movies. But what makes this movie so special is that its director Kiarostami intervened in the actual trial of Sabzian! When Kiarostami heard about Sabzian's case he put his next project on hold and started preparing for a documentary on Sabzian.. he visited him in jail and helped move his trial up and acquired from the ministry of justice the permission to shoot it. He (Kiarostami) had the permission also to ask questions through out the trial, demanding Sabzian more than once to talk about certain aspects he found essential. The footage of the actual trial was included as it is in this film.
Kiarostami brilliantly then convinced the individuals involved in the story to star in his film that is depicting their case. He made them re-enact some of the past incidents of this story and then arranged a meeting between Sabzian and Makhmalbaf; the director that Sabzian impersonated. Kiarostami shot their meeting from a distance using a sound record machine, following them with his crew while they were riding on Makhmalbaf's motorcycle to the house of the family Sabzian previously conned. Again the shots were included in the movie. The film that is brilliantly executed by Kiarostami can be divided into three parts; re-enacted scenes from the past, the actual trial, and the real meeting between Sabzian and the director Makhmalbaf.
The judge tried to convince Kiarostami to find a more interesting story to write about but the famous director found something else in the story of Sabzian and he was right. Kiarostami was able to communicate with us the suffering of a human being.. his quest to find his true identity... his attempt to achieve a dream, to be appreciated or at least recognized as a distinct individual with distinguished characteristics. The story also goes beyond that to talk about poverty and its destructive impact on the individual and on the society. It also sheds the light upon many interesting cultural and social values in Iran. Kiarostami was able to introduce a masterpiece that holds great meanings, memorable scenes, and artistic execution. Even the score was beautiful.. every single aspect.
The film got Kiarostami a worldwide recognition and many considered it one of the best movies ever to be made. New York Times film critic Stephen Holden described the film as "brilliant", whereas Los Angeles Times critic Dennis Lim considered it as eloquent and that it represents the psyche of a complicated man alongside the cultural and social realities of Iran. It ranked #43 in the British Film Institute's critics' poll of the 50 best films ever made, and among "The Top 50 Greatest Films of All Time" list in the 2012 Sight & Sound poll.
(500) Days of Summer (2009)
Fate
There are a lot of reviews here that summarize this romantic comedy- drama film that talks about a "boy that meets a girl". Many described the nonlinear style of narration in this movie where the plot goes back and forth without following the chronological order of the events.. the chemistry within the movie.. the reality in which it deals with romantic relationships.. heartbreaks and tender moments.. the life stages Tom goes through from "summer to autumn" and the messages the movie is trying to deliver..
Yet there is an important idea that I didn't observe in the reviews I read and that's what made me write this review.. I think this idea is one of the most significant ideas the movie is trying to communicate with us.. "Fate".
Yes the movie is trying to say that not every person you meet is "the one and only" not even if you share a lot with him/her.. not even if you fall in love! Yes the movie is trying to say that life will always provide you with opportunities for you to be happy.. that you shouldn't fall back because of a bad experience and that you shouldn't lose faith.. that you should work hard and never give up your dreams.. but the movie is also trying to say, especially in the last couple of scenes, that life is meaningful and the world we live in is not just a number of coincidences. Things happen for a reason and whether it is in a sense "good or bad" we can always make the best of it and benefit from the experience.. and there truly you will be content with the fate life has favored you.
Seppuku (1962)
A journey that you should undergo..
Tsugumo Hanshiro, a Samurai with no lord (ronin), goes to the estate of Li clan to commit Harakiri (Japanese ritual suicide), yet a senior counselor there tells him a story about the fate of a younger ronin that came to the clan holding the same request. The story that was intended to scare away Hanshiro only carried him to tell a story of his own and so he did in the oddest fashion. And through flashbacks we learn it and the more we know the more we understand.. the more we feel.. the more we think.
Harakiri (1962), that its events are set out between 1619 and 1630 of the Edo period, is a perfect study of the human mind, heart, and soul. It is also a study of the human relations and that of the society and individual..
Through its characters and their contradicting personalities you will learn a lot.. Sincerity and hypocrisy, faith and appearances, love and hate, caring and indifference, courage and fear... The social structure: flaws and corruptness.. The society's symbols and traditions: their depth and when they are only a cover. And then there is history: how it happens and then how it is written.
This is all one thing about Harakiri and the other aspects that make a film are just as perfect.. the cinematography, soundtrack, acting.. every single aspect.. and the duels we see reminded me of the duels in "The good, the bad, and the ugly', only that here it's with swords.
Truly the film is a masterpiece.. a journey that you should undergo.
Okuribito (2008)
The harmony between life and death
..The Godfather, 8 1/2, Solaris, Taxi Driver, Citizen Kane, Paths of Glory.. etc. When it comes to the old cinema, it is easy for me to find a film that I consider a masterpiece.. that's not the case among "new films".
However, this is not the case with "Okuribito (2008)".. a truly flawless movie that is simply perfect. Based on "Coffinman", a memoir by Shinmon Aokia, the film follows the life of an untalented musician who goes back to his hometown only to find himself doing one of the oddest jobs for a living.. preparing the dead for funerals (Nokanshi).
The film drags you into it from the first beginning.. the highly executed film will draw your senses and pull your feelings to where the protagonist "Daigo" is.. you will feel his desperation, his confusion, his attempt to find himself, his place in a life that had not granted him enough talent to dig a safe place for himself as a cellist. He is lost and so he goes back to his hometown so maybe he'd find the rebirth.. he is searching for a new beginning.. for an answer.
Daigo is now preparing the dead for cremation.. his wife doesn't know and he is not sure about it.. he hesitates.. he struggles with his "repulsive" new job but keeps on doing it. After a while things really starts to change. He doesn't care about all the criticism, the social taboos, or the prejudices.. through one of the most controversial issues he now finds harmony.. through the horrid appearances he finds peace.. through pain he finds love, and through death he finds life. Now he too thinks that death is a gateway.
His wife left him when she knew what his job was.. she went back to him when she knew that she was pregnant thinking that she would find him wrecked without her.. the man who is now in harmony with life, who started to rediscover his own music and the love inside him is far from being wrecked.. he could love her, love everything, and simply live against the conditions.. even the ideas and feelings he carried for his father that left him when he was a child were about to change.
Every scene every shot in this masterpiece held certain significance.. The writing, editing, cinematography, acting.. every aspect of it was great. I should say I was fascinated by the character of Daigo's boss Ikuei (depicted by Tsutomu Yamazaki). The old man who has been in touch with the dead for a long time is now so wise about life in everything he does and says.
Some reviews criticized the film for overt sentimentality and predictability, while simply this film is not about twists or unpredictable events.. it's a journey to the inside.. a search a quest for peace and love and therefore also its sentimentality was more than proper.. it rips your soul from your body only to find yourself questioning yourself and the life you've been leading. In its drama, romance, or humor this film was just fascinating.
Solyaris (1972)
A man needs a mirror and not new worlds to discover.
The film talks about a scientist "Kris" who joins an expedition to discover "Solaris"; an oceanic planet with artificial intelligence that is able to create. Upon arriving to the circular station where the expedition is set, our hero Kris meets a materialized memory of his dead wife. (The expedition to discover his inner self starts).
The film as most of you know is Tarkovsky's reply to Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey", a film that Tarkovsky found cold and sterile and focusing on "the outside" (the wrong side) instead of the inside.
Tarkovsky's masterpiece starts with memorable scenes from the main character's parents' lake house. The beautiful images and dreamlike pace pull the viewer immediately to a mood that is closer to a meditation stance. Kris then is seen watching a tape of an earlier expedition set to discover the ocean (cerebral system) of "Solaris".. the scientist that survived the mission is being mocked by the investigators for shooting a scene of the ocean's surface and the rest of the scenes he shot were of clouds (since the film is more of a discovery to the inner self it is likely that the director is trying to show through these images how mysterious it is to explore one's true being and how shallow our knowledge is).. also the sight is covered by fog (resembling the distractions of life from the meaningful truth that the person should aim for). Yes the ocean of planet Solaris is a metaphor of the ultimate truth that we exist through.. and Kris was going on that "expedition". After that we see a long and slow shot of a car going through a tunnel surrounded by many buildings, cars...etc. (Some interpreted this scenery as a way to show how long and confusing Kris's next journey is going to be.. While maybe the director is just trying to show us how distracting life is from exploring ourselves). The allegories in the film are not only consistent with the main subject but they are also well made and beautifully executed.
Kris arrives at the station.. a scientist is dead and the other two are confused. The ocean immediately starts "materializing his memory of his dead wife". She (the guest - resembling his wife) is "as real as his wife was".. the sentence used in the film is in fact meant to question our humanistic relations and whether we really get in touch with others or only with the conscience of us knowing them (has he really known his wife? did he really love her? or did he love what his mind sorted about her?). The guest knows little or nothing about the dead wife she depicts (her limited knowledge is only a reflection to Kris's own limitations).. "And you? Who the hell are you?", one of the scientists (Snaut) asks Kris when the latter is confronting him with questions about "the guests" (you ask about others but do you ask about yourself?). Yet, at least he (Kris) still has the ability to get involved emotionally with his memory (implying that there is hope - Kris has the ability "to feel").
The ocean, that I believe resembles the simple truth, means also it is a mirror (simple truth reflects in everything as does everything reflects it).. and now Kris needs to go into the mysteries of death and love to preserve the truth. He talks with Snaut about Tolstoy and how he suffered while trying to love everyone and everything and not one thing specifically. Now Kris thinks the scientist before him died because of shame.. the shame of not being able to love truly.. to know.. to see clearly.. "A man simply needs a mirror and not new worlds to discover" (here Tarkovsky clearly states everything about the film). In another scene (considered by some "the peak of the film"), gravity reaches a stage of zero, Kris and the guest (that resembles his wife) are floating in the air and for that moment they are in touch with the "simple meanings and feelings".. and floating with them is a candle! "In his endless search for the truth, man is condemned to knowledge" (Kris only needs to surrender and not resist - there he could find his inner being).
The growing plant seen nearly at the end of the film aboard Solaris is considered one of the most interesting shots in the film (carrying a lot of interpretations to Kris's special journey).. the earth then and Solaris with what it resembles are interrelated. Kris now is seen again beside the lake house where it all began. Kris though will never return to what he has been his entire life, he will see things for what they really are (this is implied in the scene where he looks inside the house and it is raining from the inside!).. he kneels to his father (as he did with the guest of his wife).. the camera zooms out and the lake house is seen in the middle of "the ocean".
Tarkovsky may be considered one of the few directors if not the only one (among the famous directors at least) to create with no regard to the different tastes and box office success. He did it for the art itself, for the truth in it.. he did it to meditate on the human nature and existence. He did what was truly unique and great, and people with such a great taste admire him for it.
Salinui chueok (2003)
Keys to understand the movie
It is quite hard for the viewer who is unfamiliar with the history of South Korea to decode what the director of this movie brilliantly depicted. I read some reviews, interpretations, and articles to help me understand Memories of Murder and so I would like to share them to help as much as I could.
From the outside it is a movie about detectives who are trying to catch a serial killer who is raping beautiful women and leaving no signs behind. From the inside it is a movie that is trying to relate to the hardships of a society; the division of Korea, the occupations, the military dictatorship that ruled.. etc. It is important to note here that the movie's events were taking place in the year 86 just few years away from the military rule.
The movie also communicates with the role of males that were emasculated by the horrifying events that they went through.. Watching at a time their wives turning into prostitutes for foreign soldiers and there was nothing they could do about it.. losing their jobs, their houses.. etc, are few of many examples. The male characters in the movie were not fully shown as emasculated yet they were failing and falling into anxieties.. they were wandering aimlessly.
The movie was showing the failure of a system.. scandals, brutality, corruption, detectives that were like the system that they part of acting unprofessionally.. Park that is the main character was not smart and mostly behaving alongside the other young detective as if what they did had no consequences. The young detective Cho is shown in one scene attacking civilians and among them were women. The other main character that is Detective Seo is smart, cool, educated, and a good detective.. the movie simply shows us how the system with time manipulates him and how he starts to change. The characters as we could see are well built and also symbolize a greater case.
The movie's name "memories" then is relating more to the national traumas than to the actual memories of its characters. One obvious case is discovering that the one suspected for murder came from Gwangju that saw in the year 80 a massacre executed by the military forces against a peaceful demonstration. Showing the suspect as having such a background is yet another obvious message.. the killer represents the traumas.
The roles of the females that are depicted mostly as "mothers and lovers (or whores) were criticized by many. It seems though that the director wanted to symbolize their roles to the utmost.. in showing an unbearable society, the failing role of men.. etc.
One other aspect that was discussed is the movie trying to link life and death. A detective is trying to find his male subjectivity and also save lives yet keeps bumping into continuous deaths.. A killer killing but in a way searching for life in his demonstration of sexual instincts (a Freudian analysis of equaling sexual instincts with life).. Also in a sense it may be discussed that another message was that the deaths after each sexual intercourse of the killer is meant to point out the incapability of the male in that society to pertain his role (since sexuality in that matter may symbolize a demonstration of power and death demonstrating its failure).
This movie is a masterpiece.. it challenged its society after all to face its history and succeeded.. the movie was a hit in Korea.
La strada (1954)
It is all about love..
With such simplicity one might wonder how Fellini pulled it off so marvelously. I saw this film after watching his masterpiece 8 1/2.. This one did not carry those complex scenes that need lots of interpretations, yet it had much depth in it and left a great deal of impact on me. Perhaps it was intended to have this simple plot because love that is the subject of this movie is simple and that is why it is so powerful.
Zampano is the unmindful cruel man that cares for nothing but his pleasures.. he is a simple showman that travels from place to place to perform his acts. He starts taking Gelsomina, who is a poor simple minded young woman, with him in his rides after her mother sold her to him. Gelsomina is his contradiction.. an innocent pure soul that cares for others.. that wants to love and be loved.. that wants to give meaning to her life.
She was miserable.. struggling with her new life when she learned from another showman, a character which seemed shallow from the outside and truly was deep from the inside, that everything was there for a reason and a purpose. Zampano, and so she thought, was the purpose of her being in life, and love was there.. but was it enough to change him..
After a while she seemed crazier.. or maybe the insanity of people's acts were reflecting on her as she was purer and clearer than a mirror. She had a purpose and fought for it and there in every detail of this great film you will reflect on the simplicity and greatness of love.
De'ah Da'iah (2008)
A piece of art that you wont get enough watching
All these distractions of today's world only blur the truth and make the obvious debatable. It deprives you from the ability to act, the ability to fix and change the circumstances in which you and your society are stuck in. "Dayaa Dayaa", though a comic show, strips all that blinds you to show simply what is right and true. By simplifying life it only makes it more meaningful and sophisticated.
Considered by many to be one of the best comic works ever to be accomplished in the Arabic world, "Dayaa Dayaa" or "A lost village" takes you to a poor and isolated yet gorgeous village on the Syrian coast that technology did not properly invade. There life will take the shape of two neighbors and few other inhabitants only to make you amused and thoughtful, laughing while sympathizing, and relaxed but passionate. Every moment is hysterical, its phrases will stick, and you wont get enough watching its episodes over and over again.
One of the funniest shows I have ever seen, "Dayaa Dayaa" is a true piece of art that entertains you yet makes you want to act, criticize, and get involved more and more.. and while reflecting the daily life issues of the human in general it will also go specifically to face the political, economical, and psychological aspects of the Arabic world. A show that makes you laugh loudly and think deeply.