Change Your Image
spambouk1000
Reviews
Parade's End (2012)
Outstanding Drama
This is an impressive adaptation. It is obscure in many ways, but that is, I think, the point. An old-fashioned, decent Englishman, Christopher, has a fling with an aristocrat on a train, Sylvia, and this sets both of them on a downward spiral. Why did they do it? Why do people get mixed up with the absolute wrong person? I think their attraction is that they are both completely outdated types: She is the worst of a selfish, dissolute aristocracy, who gets its way through clubby connections and manipulation. He is the best of the old ways: honorable and self-denying. She sees his value as nobody else does and she uses her nasty, underhanded tactics to defend him as much as to corrupt him. He on the contrary uses his code to admire her as much as repress her. It is the last gasp of Old England. Complicating the story is Valentine, the suffragette. She is truthful, unselfish and decent to others, like Crissy (as they call him), but she hates the old ways and offer him a choice. Is there a place for such values in the dawning 20th century? The stories about corrupt government ministers, crazy churchmen, nasty adulterers, cruel gossips and the horror of WWI unfolds against this basic conflict between the dying gentlemanly code and the unfolding new century. Benedict Cumberbatch is outstanding as Christopher: he always balances the exterior coldness and interior passion, and we can like him without sharing his dated beliefs. Rebecca Hall also does a lot with Sylvia, who could have been a cheating nasty B but shows us how much she hopes for love and is unable to find it in the narrow upper-class world.
This series demands that the viewer do the work. It never plays down to the audience, and I'm glad of it. It's worth pondering why people make the choices they do, especially under the pressure of a World War. Really top-notch.
Shame (2011)
Moving, pathetic, brilliant
I didn't expect to like Brandon or Sissy: they seem unlikeable and the film seemed unlikeable. I expected the usual art-house, depressing, emotionless "look" at sex addiction. Yes, there were many scenes of emotionless sexual encounters, but the film was more than that. This film stayed in my mind for days. It was a very moving, very human film about two people who are deeply unhappy but still struggling to make their lives meaningful.
The real highlight of the film is Michael Fassbender's performance as Brandon. Brandon is a sex addict: he is successful in many areas of his life and is even admired by his boss, a serial adulterer. But his life is a painful search for connection, which he gets in sex but can't bring himself to get in relationships. His very painful first date with a nice girl emphasizes his fear of really opening up to people. In a remarkably restrained performance, Fassbender shows us that Brandon is deeply unhappy, ashamed, but still human and deserving of pity and sympathy. This intensifies when Carey Mulligan's Sissy comes to town. Where he deals with relationships by keeping them superficial and cold, she begs for love. In the end, both are completely dysfunctional yet try to show love for each other.
I loved the film's restrained yet warm performances. I liked the script's elegant storytelling (no Lifetime movie explanations about why Brandon and Sissy are like this). The film is beautifully shot, with a lovely color scheme. It is not a cheerful film but it is memorable and worth seeing.
Crazy, Stupid, Love. (2011)
Creepy stalking is not funny
Awful film. As others have commented, it is one cliché after another. But more than boring, it was very creepy. The "dad" teaches his son to stalk his babysitter by ignoring her when she asks him to stop. The son follows her, spies on her, humiliates her in public, texts her after she asks him to stop and even says that she is uncomfortable with his conduct. Worse, the producers of the film thought it would be cute to end the film with her giving him explicit photos of herself...because it's good that she has learned to degrade herself in order to satisfy weirdos who won't leave her alone.
I thought the father's interference in his 27 year old daughter's relationship also very creepy. He seemed to think that he owned her and could prohibit her from dating men he deemed too promiscuous. Similarly, the man goes to his wife's lover and says "you can have her," as if she were a dog he's giving away.
While his wife was certainly wrong for cheating, he condemns her then sleeps with 9 women himself...dumping them all painfully to feel better about himself. Why should they be punished for his wife's error? For that matter, why isn't his cheating condemned, even mentioned as wrong in the film? Although wronged, he is still married and did not tell his 9 partners that he is still married.(see the Charles and Diana mess for proof that two cheaters don't make it right...it makes them both wrong) What a skeevy film.
Water (2005)
Moving, beautiful, and inspiring
I've just seen "Water" and am moved and impressed by this film. It shows the struggles and joys of a group of widows in 1938 India, when widows were not valued or treated well by their families or by their society. At the same time, the film constantly mentions the trials and sufferings of Gandhi, who was also engaged at that time in challenging tradition and in championing new rights.
The film focuses on an 8-year-old child bride who is introduced into the group of about 14 women. This young actress is wonderful and brings a sense of joyousness to the film. The youngest widow discovers that an older, very beautiful, widow is being pimped out by the greedy leader of the ashram, while an even older, religious widow, Didi, struggles to protect both younger women and to find meaning in her life.
Like Gandhi, the lead characters try to reach beyond their limitations, especially Didi who joins with a sympathetic Brahman man to save the little girl. Gandhi freed a nation, and Didi frees one girl. The film shows us how much power every person has to be a force for good.
The Duchess (2008)
Ralph Fiennes steals the show
I am not a fan of Keira Knightley, but in this film she manages to do an okay job. The Duchess of Devonshire was indeed a fascinating woman, and Knightley manages to convey the impression of a woman learning about motherhood, marriage, and love as she matures from a young girl to a strong woman. The scenes with her children are the strongest, especially the heartbreak of having to give up a daughter. I think Knightley does well but that many other actresses could have done better (ex. Kate Winslet, Rachel Weisz, Natalie Portman). She doesn't really manage to show wit, liveliness, or shine. Why would anyone think of her bland duchess as a fashion plate? As a light for the Whig party? As the best hostess in London? Knightley rests on pretty, as she often does.
On the other hand, Ralph Fiennes does stellar work with the Duke of Devonshire. Fiennes is everything that Knightley is not: he brings to what could have been a flat role a sense of depth and complexity. He shows, as Knightley should have, that power is not everything, and that even the richest man may suffer disappointment and heartbreak. The contrast between his scenes with his wife and those with his mistress and her sons show that Fiennes can embody both a man sleepwalking and a man with heart. I was more interested in the Duke's story (and his mistress's story) than in the dull, poor-little-rich-girl duchess.
Pride & Prejudice (2005)
What a waste of 2 hours...not a flick for chicks (or for anybody else!)
This film is so boring! The acting is so bad! The script is so terrible! Please don't waste your time. If you want a good version of this novel, try the 1995 Colin Firth/ Jennifer Elhe version or even the 1940s Greer Garson/ Lawrence Olivier version, both of which are much funnier, wittier, and more enjoyable.
Keira Knightley running around the sodden, muddy landscape has more in common with Kate Winslet's silly Marianne from Sense and Sensibility (a much much better movie) than with anything having to do with bright, articulate, witty, funny Elizabeth Bennett. The Bennett girls' giggling is annoying and makes the twits in Bring It On (a much funnier film) seem like Regency wits. And the vulgar, obvious script makes Airplane (waaaay funnier film) seem subtle.
If you haven't read Pride and Prejudice, don't bother with this film. It won't explain why people love the book so much or represent anything of the book's beloved characters and plot. If you have read Pride and Prejudice, don't bother with this film. It won't even make sense to you.
Carve Her Name with Pride (1958)
Ordinary People/ Extraordinary Film
I was just wasting time in front of the TV when this movie came on. I was initially interested because of Paul Scofield, who was so wonderful in "A Man for All Seasons" and in "The Crucible." He is indeed excellent in this film, as is the lead actress.
The story involves a young British woman who because of her French heritage and married life in France becomes a spy for the British during WWII.
Unlike other modern war films, where everyone is "hero" just for waking up in the morning, this film shows people who deserve the name 'the greatest generation.' Just like the characters, the film is understated, as, for example the moment when Violette's father realizes that his daughter is a spy but says nothing. Another moment is when the two spies are in Paris buying a dress for a little girl as if they were merely a couple shopping rather than wanted criminals risking a firing squad. Paul Scofield's quiet "Oh god" expresses volumes, as he realizes what has happened to his friend after they meet in bad circumstances. Even running from the Nazis is understated, with no grandstanding speeches, no "Hollywood" punches and no bullets whizzing underwater. There is only good story, good acting, and good script.
This is a story that shows the extraordinary power of ordinary people who do not proclaim their own virtues or demand recognition of their efforts. It is worth watching.
Jude (1996)
Wonderful-Horrible, a Must-See
This film tells the story of a boy who from his childhood dreamed of becoming more. He hopes to leave the brutal rural world of pig-slaughtering and rolls in the hay for the intellectual world of the university, which to him represents the freedom to think one's own thoughts and to live one's own life.
Sadly, his conduct and, more importantly, his opportunities cannot bear his aspirations. When faced with a "pregnant" girlfriend, he marries her, as any "good" man should. When faced with mockery from wealthy undergraduates (a scene all the more odd because it pits two Doctor Who's against each other), Jude tries to prove his intelligence by reciting Latin in a pub, realizing in the end that no matter how much Latin he studies he will always be a laborer to these people. He becomes infatuated by his free-thinking cousin, Sue Bridehead, who is similarly pursuing education and independence and who also rejects Victorian conventionalities about women belonging in the home.
Sadly, the two cousins find that they cannot reject the values of their world without dire consequences, for them and for their children.
Happily, this film beautifully depicts Sue and Jude's struggles in gorgeous shots of the landscape and rich images of the two leads. Christopher Eccleston gives Jude a warm humanity and Kate Winslet creates a Sue Bridehead whom we easily believe could both rebel against social custom and also be crushed by it. I particularly liked the depiction of the harshness of Victorian life: the working in the rain, the beatings, the cruelty to animals, the pain of childbirth, the lack of privacy endured by poor families. The film is not Masterpiece Theatre (no criticism just a comment on style) and shows us clearly what the university means to Jude and just what he is trying to escape.
If you liked "The Remains of the Day," "The Age of Innocence," "Tess" or "The Idiot" (book, I've never seen a film of this), you will appreciate this film and the book, as well.
Clarissa (1991)
Wonderful adaptation: a must-see
This is an unwieldy novel from which to make a film, but the writer manages a worthy adaptation that delivers the rich characterization of the novel in a faster paced and beautiful film.
Sean Bean shines as Lovelace, the prototypical villain of British fiction. Bean captures Lovelace's ability with language and his talent to deceive while appearing sincere. Just as in the book, we want to believe in his repentance, and Sean Bean manages to make us root for him, even though we know that Lovelace is a villain.
That said, Saskia Wickham does a fantastic job with the admittedly less exciting role of Clarissa. The novel needs the two to balance out, and Wickham holds her own, even in scenes where Clarissa is self-loathing and potentially unsympathetic.
I wonder about the two siblings: I never had the sense that they were incestuous in the novel, but the film gives the impression that their unnatural behavior extends beyond simple greed and envy. It worked for me. Similarly, Shirley Henderson steals scenes as the envious, nasty prostitute.
I didn't find the actual rape scene as in-character as in the novel, but, otherwise, this is a wonderful and thought-provoking adaptation.
28 Days Later... (2002)
Bloody, Great Film
While the idea of zombies run amok in London seems like the premise of the film, there is a lot more here. I can't help but wonder if folks who didn't really like this film are actually reacting to their own mistaken expectations.
Actually, the film invites us to think about the horror of violence in human nature: if the "zombies" are not terrifying enough simply as zombies (and they are pretty disturbing), the idea that we are already among the enraged zombies is perhaps more disturbing.
The film follows Jim (Cillian Murphy) around London, as he awakes from a coma to find the city deserted. He encounters two other waifs, Selina and Mark, and from them learns that a virus has unleashed the normally suppressed hatred in humanity. The whole city has killed itself. In saving herself from the infected, Selina has become hardened and anti-social, but encountering a father and daughter makes her realize that surviving at all costs may not the best option.
The high point of this film for me is Christopher Eccleston as Major West, who supposedly rescues Jim, Selina, and Hannah but has ulterior motives. His cool, calm exploitation of these people reminds us that while civilization may hide our basic aggression, civilized people may be just as cruel as the bestial infecteds.
The film recalls scenes of horror in Sarajevo, in Poland, in Phenom Phen and in colonial America: a really moving (and terrifying) film that is hard to watch at times and very very hard to forget.
Casanova (2005)
More a snack than real hearty fare
This version of Casanova is delightful in many ways. The cast is outstanding, especially Tennant as younger Casanova and O'Toole as the older Casanova (who is narrating the story to a young woman years later). The sets and costumes are lavish and romantic and the script is witty and funny. Tennant makes the most of moments such as "You love your wife, I love your wife, we're on the same side!" and also plays the romantic plot with his true love, Henriette, very well. Henriette is outstanding, as are Rocco (his friend and servant) and Bellino (who is almost a castrato, almost a man, and almost Casanova's wife).
Where the film goes wrong is in the later scenes. Casanova never seems to learn anything or to grow at all: by the end, I almost couldn't care less what he did or where he went. Also, by celebrating the idea of his "shocking" lifestyle, the script wants us to like him, and he isn't all that likable. This was most clear when it came to Casanova's affair with his daughter (yes, it was him and not his son who slept with Leonella. They had a child together and were an item, on and off, for quite a while). In wanting us to see him as a romantic ideal who "shocked" the old fogies, the film avoids any real shocking behavior.
In the end, this is a delightful romp that becomes tiresome because it never seems to understand what it wants to do: romp, celebrate, love or shock. Enjoyable but not much else.