Change Your Image
Vash_ebas
Reviews
Somewhere in Time (1980)
A beautiful love story, masterfully told
This is one of my favorite movies of all time. It is a beautiful work of art. I had seen it in a theatre when I was in college, but I never forgot it. The characters and the music are so memorable, and the story is so unique that it was unforgettable. Recently I bought the DVD and when I watched it, I noticed a lot of finer things that I had not noticed in the 1980s. I was not aware that it had been a box office failure or that it had been on cable.
What I love about this movie is its simplicity and directness, the subtle things, the lyrical quality, and integrity in making the movie. It was made with a very low budget, but you cannot tell when you see it. The sets and costumes are gorgeous. There are no gimmicks, special effects, CGI. It's all about the story, the characters and the idyllic surroundings the movie was shot in- Mackinac Island, Michigan. I have never been there but now I want to. The location- Grand Hotel appears truly grand. The cinematography captures the beauty and magic of the place very well, and the music is out of this world. Although I am a fan of classical music, and a fan of Rachmaninoff, whenever I heard the Rhapsody on the theme by Paganini, I think of 'Somewhere in time' first, then Rachmaninoff. The score by John Barry has made this movie truly romantic and powerful.
This is a story about a young man doing time travel from 1980 to 1912 (and back)to meet a woman whose photograph he is drawn to. The director has cleverly used pastel colors in 1912 and dark/deep colors in 1980. The use of light is very effective and the 1912 costumes are gorgeous. Jane Seymour as the lead female character is equally gorgeous. She displays the 'soft on the surface, tough inside' Ellise McKenna very well. Her face is very expressive and the main picture/photograph that is central to the movie is absolutely beautiful, with a Mona Lisa like mystical quality.
Christopher Reeve does a marvelous job of portraying the character of the young playwright Richard Collier- persistent, polite, charming, and heartbroken in the end. The last part of the movie is particularly touching, with Reeve expressing his deep hurt upon his loss, without a word, but using only his face, eyes and body to express what he is feeling.
Christopher Plummer is splendid as Elise's manager/mentor. You hate him every time he appears to spoil things between the two lovers. He is powerful and controlling, concerned, worried, but he never becomes 'evil' (though he lies to Elise about what happened to Collier)- that's a tribute to Plummer's great abilities as an actor.
Other actors who have smaller roles (the most memorable one is Arthur as a child and as an old man) support the main characters effectively.
The antique watch which the old Elise gives Richard in 1972 becomes a key piece of the circle within a circle in this time travel story. Some people dislike the time travel concept, but I find it intellectually stimulating. The watch was not a part of the book the movie is based on, but it definitely adds something extra special to the movie. In spite of the deep emotions in the movie, it never becomes melodramatic or mushy. There is an explanation or everything. Everything is understated in the movie, and the director has maintained that subtle, light quality without compromise.
I have seen this movie many times, now that I own the DVD. The special features and the commentary by the director are both excellent because they give a lot of background and point out some finer points about the movie. The interviews with the actors, particularly with Reeve- after his accident- are interesting.
I love this movie and I recommend it to anyone who has an open mind, and likes subtle romance.
Hoosiers (1986)
A movie about leadership and teamwork
If not for a Leadership workshop, I would not have known about this movie. About 10 years ago I went to a one week leadership workshop. The instructor showed us half of this movie as an example of a leadership style (Coach Norman Dale's). It was so interesting that we asked to see the rest of the movie. It did not disappoint. Recently I watched the DVD, and paid attention to other aspects of the movie- like acting, which was superb. Cinematography, score all very good. Since this is an old movie (1986, but seems older), you don't see some of the technical advances in movie making, but the story is straightforward, and the movie focuses on the story and the characters. Gene Hackman is great as the coach. Others support him well. The sound is not very good, and the DVD did not have the English subtitles (only French and Spanish, which did not help, obviously). It was hard to hear the dialog clearly at times. I had to watch the movie for the second time on the DVD to fully understand it. Other than that, this is a very good sports movie about small town folks in Indiana in the 1950s, and their kids in high school, with their dreams of winning basketball games.
If you don't expect to see some fancy technical things that are now being used in movie making, this is definitely worth seeing if you enjoy sports, and stories focused on characters.
The Lovely Bones (2009)
A Huge disappointment
I read the book 'The lovely bones' by Alice Sebold and loved it. I could not put it down. So I wanted to see the movie, and it was a huge disappointment. It is difficult to catch the subtleties and details of a novel in a visual medium like a movie, but Peter Jackson could have done a better job of the adaptation. Instead of focusing on how Suzie's feelings evolved while she was in the in between place, after her murder, he resorted to inordinate amounts of special effects. The CGI worked well in Lord of the rings and Kingkong, but this movie needed a different kind of handling, with CGI being used only where essential. The special effects in this movie are overpowering and they eclipse the movie. The biggest disappointment for me was that movie was a downer, which was quite a contrast with the book which is surprisingly humorous and uplifting.
The screenplay took too many liberties with the book which spans 8 to 10 years, to make it fit in a two hour movie. It is understandable that some changes would be unavoidable, but it is important to stay faithful to the main story. This movie is not. It missed the main point of the book. Suzie in her in between world was watching her family, and growing with them, feeling happy or sad with them, until she arrived at a realization, and so did her family and friends- to move on. This happens over an 8 to 10 year period.
The characters in the movie are dull and undeveloped, in contrast with the vibrant ones in the book. Saoirse Ronan is a good child actor, but in this movie she was severely limited by the badly written screenplay.
The movie does nothing to explain how she came to the realization that she and her family had both moved on with their respective lives, that revenge and forgiveness were both irrelevant at that point. It is still satisfying to the viewer and the reader in the end that the horrible Mr.Harvey did die. Stanley Tucci was the only bright spot where acting was concerned. His acting surpassed all the other actors.
Grandma Lynn (Susan Sarandon) appears early in the movie and does not really help the weak screenplay. Rachel Weisz would have had a lot of scope for acting out her grief if the movie had stuck with the book, instead of rushing her out to the wine country of California and making it look like she had been away for just a few months.
Mark Wahlberg as the grieving father is just adequate. I believe the weak screenplay limited both him and Rachel Weisz. Sarandon was not really needed for the grandma role. Almost any actres would have been enough; there was no scope for acting, and whatever Sarandon did, did not help.
The relationship between Lindsey and Samuel is a very sweet part of the book and it's throughout the book. It's almost like Susie lives her own dreams of love through them. Instead, Samuel is almost completely absent except for two very brief scenes, and a great opportunity was lost. Toward the end (in the book) Suzie uses Ruth's body to make love to Ray- this was a gift she had received for a few hours, and she had no choice but to leave when her time was up. Instead, the movie makes it look like it was her last wish to kiss Ray before moving on to heaven, and it was something that she willed. That was a grave injustice to the book.
The scenes of the 'small heaven' are too much CGI, and not enough soul. That is the problem with this movie. It lacks the soul that the book has, and it is just a gimmicky movie with a lot of special effects. I had expected better work from Peter Jackson, but may be he is a good director for big budget films with lots of special effects, but not for subtle films. The movie does not really 'get it' what the book is trying to convey, and the message is lost.
In summary the only positive about this movie is Stanley Tucci's acting. The rest is better forgotten. Read the book instead.
Mississippi Masala (1991)
One thing spoiled what could have been a pretty good movie
Mira Nair is one of the best directors. Her movies are different and deep. I liked the concept behind this movie. It addresses prejudices in different cultures. This should have been a really good movie. It wasn't. What spoiled the movie for me was the choice of the female lead. Sarita Chowdhary could not possibly pass as the daughter of the two parents on the screen (played by Sharmila Tagore who was one of the top actresses of her era in Bollywood, and Roshan Seth). If you see their features, they are angular. Sarita has a completely different face- thick lips, flat nose, rectangular face, darker skin than both parents. She did not even look like an Indian. That killed the whole racial difference theme of the movie.
In the beginning we see a young Meena about 9 years old, in tears when her parents decide to leave Uganda. They were basically forced to leave their home and their belongings behind. What was most painful to all three of them was losing their Ugandan friends. Meena loved her African friends, and it is not surprising that she is attracted to an African American after moving to the USA, much to the chagrin of the resident Indians.
The end was touching, however, and lifted the movie quite a bit. When the father goes back to Uganda, which he considers his true home, and feels love toward an African baby, he realizes that color does not matter. That was the high point of the movie. He also realizes that his past home is no longer his home. So the beginning and the end of the movie are good. The in betweens are not as strong.
The accent was an issue. If Meena (Sarita Chowdhary) spent several years in Uganda, then UK, before moving to the USA, why did she not have some British accent? The parents accents were Indian. If the father was born in Uganda, he should have had a different accent (not Indian).
It's not clear what profession the father had in Uganda, why he chose Mississippi and not one of the northern states, why the daughter was uneducated. The lack of education is very un-Indian. Culturally Indians (even those who live in other countries) place very high value on education.
There are too many deficiencies in the body of the movie, and for me watching Sarita Chowdhary as Sharmila Tagore's daughter was just too much. She spoiled the whole movie for me. It was too unrealistic, despite a very good idea behind the movie.
The Boy in the Striped Pajamas (2008)
Heartbreaking, devastating and stunning
SPOILERS ahead...........
I finally saw this movie, on a DVD. The first few minutes were a bit boring but then the movie picked up and i was glued to my seat (my sofa at home) till its heartbreaking end. I was so stunned, I did not move for several minutes after it ended.
This is an extraordinary film. I knew it would have a sad ending because it was about the holocaust, but I was totally unprepared for what happened in the end. The characters feel so real. The musical score is haunting. It is well acted. I never thought Vera Farmiga could do this kind of role- innocence turned into shock, bitterness, anger and the final devastation, from which she would probably never recover.
Through the tutor of the children we get an understanding of how people in Germany were brainwashed those days to hate the Jews. Bruno's 12 year old sister is a good example of how children were influenced. Bruno is a more adventurous child, and he cannot hate the Jews because he has met some good ones (Pavel, a former Jewish Doctor who puts bandage on his wound, and his 8 year old friend Schmuel). The short film shown to the soldiers, and one that makes Bruno believe that the 'camp'is actually a pretty nice place, with a cafe and entertainment. Obviously the world was fooled by this propaganda until the truth came out. The innocence of the children is heartbreaking. I cannot get out of mind the images of Bruno and Schmuel.
If the movie has a flaw, it's only a very small one. The children playing (hands like aeroplanes) at the start was a bit overdone. However, rest of the movie is so fluid and so intense that it can be easily forgiven.
I found this movie more powerful than 'Life is beautiful'. It's one of the best holocaust movies I have ever seen.
I am shocked that a beautiful movie like this got less than 8.0 on TMDB. I recommend this to anyone that cares for truly artistic films that are not just meant to entertain, and are not sci fi movies, but are meant to bare the souls of us humans.
The Last Station (2009)
Brilliant and moving drama
The Last station is one of the best movies of 2009. With a historical backdrop of 1910 Russia, with a famous historical character Leo Tolstoy, this is more than just a story. It depicts through the characters the struggle between the old and new Russia in 1910. The struggle between the two philosophies is shown through the tensions between the characters. Tolstoy's ideas of giving up material possessions were embraced by his followers but very few actually understood the spirit behind them. His wife Sophya Andreyevna Tolstoya is completely against those ideals, creating friction and drama between the couple. The relationships between the characters are intricately woven and brilliantly acted by Helen Mirren, Christopher Plumemr, James McAvoy, Paul Giamati and others.
Paul Giamati as the villain Vladimir Grigorievich Chertkov and James McAvoy as the 23 year old idealist Valentin Federevich Bulgakov are both devotees of Tolstoy. Vladimir is heartless, due to blind devotion to Tolstoy's philosophy, and he cannot see the human part, even when Tolstoy is about to die. Valentin is compassionate and understanding, while remaining true to his belief in Tolstoy's philosophy. Bulgakov eventually left Russia and spent the rest of his life in Prague, as a writer, and an advocate of the pacifist movement. Tolstoy himself does not live by his own philosophy, which is ironic.
McAvoy proves once again that he is one of the best actors today (why no Oscar nomination for him?). He is actually the central character in the movie. We see the story as it unfolds, through his eyes, and his expressive face conveys a lot more than words.
The direction, Screenplay, cinematography, music, costume design, art direction all are top notch. The cinematography captures the beauty of the Russian countryside and the atmosphere of that time and place in history very well.
Besides the four well known actors, others have given strong performances. Kerry Condon as the independent/skeptical Masha (Maria Philipovna) and Anne Marie Duff as Tolstoy's daughter Sasha who is in the Vladimir camp both make impact in their roles. Sasha is a very emotional person, like her mother and that creates some very interesting scenes toward the end.
Helen Mirren and Christopher Plummer absolutely carry the movie with their portrayals of the Tolstoys. Their scenes together are both explosive and romantic. Mirren's ability to really get into the character, and making even her flaws draw sympathy from the audience is extraordinary. I am shocked that she did not win the best leading actress Oscar for this role.
The special features on the DVD show the deleted scenes and a tribute to Christopher Plummer. I would have liked to see more about how they made the movie- creating the 1910 Russia, her people, etc.
I am not familiar with the history, so I cannot comment on the historical accuracy of the story or the characters, but as a movie this is one of the best movies I have seen.
Up (2009)
Touching and exciting
I had heard of this movie but since I am not crazy about animated films, it took me a long time to rent the DVD and watch 'Up'. I knew very little about the movie or the story, so everything was a revelation. The most important one was that if a movie is really good, it does not matter if it's animation or not.
The animation was top notch, the story idea was unique and very creative. The 'heroes' were- a 78 year old man and an eight year old boy. There was lots of action and imagination. However, what really made me like this movie were the subtle emotions, and how old man Frederickson changes from being a lonely, sad man to a happy person in the end.
The story begins with Carl (Mr.Frederickson as a young boy) meeting his future wife and love of his wife Ellie. They grow up, marry, and live happily until she dies. Carl is attached to her memories, including the home and furniture they built together, and her 'Adventure Book'. . He decides to follow the adventure that Ellie introduced him to, when they were kids.
He is not friendly to the 8 year old kid Russell who wants to get a badge by helping an elderly. HOwever, once Russell gets on his 'flying house' to go to South America, their friendship develops. Carl starts caring for the young lad. Their adventures take them to see Paradise Falls, which was Carl & Ellie's dream. They fight evil dogs and an evil person and triumph in the end. In the process Carl lets go of the things he was attached to, and is a happier person as a result.
It is a wonderful story that has adventure and action, and philosophical depth. The message at the end is so subtle, it is not at all preachy, and yet one gets it. That's what makes this movie so special.
Roswell: Four Aliens and a Baby (2002)
Very touching
This is one of the most touching episodes, especially toward the end.
SPOILERS AHEAD.............
Tess, who has not appeared in the third season yet, makes an appearance, with her baby. Naturally she is not welcomed by anyone. Everyone knows that she killed Alex, and she killed numerous people on the airbase when she arrived, which has exposed the rest of them and created danger.
Max & Isabel's secret is finally out and their parents are trying to handle this. Isabel is being pulled in all directions and having a tough time. Good job by Katherine Heigl. Max & Liz have been back together since the end of the previous season, but Tess's memory (her relationship with Max) is not completely erased from Liz's mind.
The acting is very good in this episode. It's a well told story. In the end, Max has his son, but it is too dangerous to keep him with Max. In the most emotional moment, he gives up the baby for adoption. Jason Behr (Max) does a great job displaying his various emotions, particularly when he finally lets go of his son. His chemistry with Liz (Shiri Appleby) is as good as always, but his emotions as a father are even better played.
Roswell: Graduation (2002)
Well done
SPOILERS AHEAD.............
All is well that ends well. Even though I will miss this show, I was pleased with the way it ended. It was a bitter sweet ending. Max, Isabel, Liz, Kyle will miss their parents for a long long time (until it's safe), because they are forced to leave Roswell to protect themselves. Tess is gone for good, even before this episode, and it is nice to see Liz & Max have a real relationship. Max & Isabel's parents and Isabel's husband have all accepted them for what they are. The only problem is- they may all get killed, according to Liz's premonition, but they are able to escape, thanks to 'the power of love'. There is a very touching moment when Max creates a diamond out of a coal and then proposes to Liz. Their chemistry is great, as it has been throughout this series. They get married sometime after they escape from Roswell.
I think Jesse should have joined them, as it would be dangerous for him not to. However, Isabel convinces him to go to Boston and live a normal life. Katherine Heigl does a wonderful job as Isabel in that scene.
There is a very touching moment between Kyle and his father, the former Sheriff Valenti. Kyle wants to be with his alien friends, and does not want the same career as his father and grandfather. Kyle and Jim say "I love you" before Kyle goes back to the van to join others.
At the end, Liz's father is shown reading her diary, which she sent him by Fedex, telling him as much as she could, without putting herself and her friends in danger. All we learn is that they are far away, hiding from the law, helping others.
I heard that the producers of Roswell were forced to end the season earlier than planned. That is why this episode feels like it was a bit rushed. Still, it is very effective, and I like the happy ending, with Max/Liz married, Michael/Maria together (though not married) and all six of them together.
I really enjoyed this series, and will definitely miss the characters that were so well acted. They seemed so real.
Il y a longtemps que je t'aime (2008)
Sensitive, nuanced, powerful- a must see movie
After I watched this movie, my first reaction was- why can't Hollywood make such films? It's more a rhetorical question than anything else. I am not fond of reading subtitles, but that is the only way I get to watch high quality foreign language films. I wish I knew French.
I was totally absorbed in this sensitive and understated movie. Kristin Scott Thomas is phenomenal and it is a gross injustice that she did not get an Oscar nomination for this role. It is a story of two sisters and their families, their past, the secrets, their struggle to move forward in life after a tremendous tragedy. The director and screen writer have done a wonderful job of developing this story, but without the powerful acting by Kristin Scott Thomas and Elsa Z. it could not have achieved the height it did. KSC's face and body shows so many different emotions in such subtle ways that it kept me guessing how many layers her character had. One more thing- the sisters in this movie actually look like sisters. In most movies siblings or parents-children pairs rarely look like they belong in the same family.
This is a must see movie of the year.
The Soloist (2009)
A very meaningful movie
Amidst the current action packed, technology enhanced group of movies, it was refreshing to watch a movie about humans and humanity. What makes it even stronger and touching is that it is based on a true story.
It is a story of a friendship between a newspaper columnist Steve Lopez (Robert Downey Jr.) and a homeless, schizophrenic cellist Nathaniel Ayers (Jamie Foxx). The story is well developed and realistic. The acting is excellent. There is a message for everyone- about the homeless and their suffering, and the limits of what one can do to help, as Lopez discovered. The scenes from the homeless shelter in LA are very realistic, using real homeless people to act as themselves. It is a complex story because it is based on a true one. There is no dramatic transformation in Ayers, as a result of Lopez's kind actions. His mental illness remains, but he and those who care for him are able to accept the reality and live with it. There is some improvement in Ayer's living conditions and more important he is able to do what he loves doing- play the cello. Lopez's actions improved Ayer's life to some extent, and he was able to eventually accept the limits of what he could do to help.
If there is a weakness, it is in the beginning. Too much time has been spent on trivia regarding Lopez's life. To some extent that background was necessary, to understand why he got interested in the Ayers story. However, some of the graphic details of his injuries, hospital visit, etc. were unnecessary and did not add to the story. Instead, it would have been better to jump into the Ayers story as quickly as possible. That's when the movie becomes interesting. The plot could have focused more on Ayers and less on Lopez, but I can see why Lopez was the focus- he was the one who wrote the story.
What I particularly liked about the movie was the lack of preaching, and the understated acting. There is no melodrama. It would have been very easy for Foxx and Downey Jr. to become melodramatic, but they kept it more natural. The credit for that should go to the director and the actors.
This is an uplifting film, despite its minor flaws. If you want to see something serious, sensitive, and uplifting, go see this movie.
The Great Debaters (2007)
Wonderfully uplifting
I really liked this movie. When it was running in the theaters, I somehow missed it, and finally watched it on DVD.
First of all, I was not sure how one could make a movie about debates. This movie kept me glued to the seat (OK, the sofa) throughout, as if it was a sports or a drama movie. Actually it had elements of both. There was a real story that moved at a very nice pace. The atmosphere of the 1930's seemed well depicted. There is some violence, but it is never over the top. The romantic scenes were tastefully done, and they added to the story/drama.
The best part was the acting. All the main characters- Denzel Washington, Nate Parker, Jurnee Smollett (sp?), Denzel Whitaker, Forrest Whitaker were all superb. The younger Whitaker is very talented. Is he the real life son of Forrest Whitaker? The scene between him and Nate Parker after Parker returns drunk, was particularly well done.
The debates were just the right length- just snipets of the key points. Longer speeches would have slowed down the movie and made it boring. Excellent direction (by Denzel Washington), editing, cinematography. The music was very appropriate.
I really enjoyed this movie. I highly recommend it.
Sicko (2007)
I was totally blown away
I have never been a Michael Moore fan, although I liked "Bowling for Coumbine' very much. I was totally blown away by this movie 'Sicko'. WOW! I know we have a problem in the healthcare/insurance area. What I did not know was- a)how bad our problem is, b)how well some other countries are handling this very important issue.
The real contrast is that in the USA, of which I am a citizen, it's all about ME. In the countries Moore showed in this movie, it's about WE. When greed takes over, we have a catastrophic situation as we are experiencing now.
After showing some horrible cases in the USA, Moore takes us to Canada, UK, France, and ....Cuba- yes, that communist country which is supposed to be so poor that many Cubans try to take a boat to the USA. In this movie the boat went from the USA to Cuba, and the story Moore showed was so heart warming that it brought tears to my eyes.
If these countries can provide healthcare to their citizens, why can't the USA do it? Again, the answer is greed and MEism.
This movie was an eye opener for me. It almost made me want to immigrate to France (yes, that beautiful country with the Eiffel tower), but any of the English speaking countries would be more convenient- LOL.
Seriously, if you have not seen this movie yet, you have really missed something. I highly recommend it.
The Prince & Me (2004)
One of the worst movies ever
This was one of the stupidest movies I have ever seen. The prince of Denmark- a womanizer- goes to school in the USA, falls in love with a farm girl in Wisconsin and is completely transformed into a responsible royalty ready to lead a country as a king. In between there is some sort of a race in the farm community of Wisconsin where our prince proves his mettle because he has been doing car racing as a pastime in Denmark (while he was an irresponsible Casanova).
The silliness does not stop there. Paige leaves for Denmark on a whim, to follow her lover, and is ready to become queen. However, when her sweetheart is interrupted while kissing her, to address some important business about his country, she becomes sullen and decides to go back to the USA.
They could have ended the story there- not a bad way to end it. However, this is Hollywood, folks! It must have a romantic, happy ending. Paige graduates from college despite missing two weeks of school, and while she is celebrating her graduation, prince charming returns,- out of nowhere- after he has been crowned the King of Denmark, and asks her to marry him after she finishes medical school. He would wait for her, he says. So the Queen of Denmark would be a practicing physician (or surgeon). THE (happy) END. This is saccarin sweet.
The acting was not bad, but Julia Stiles is hardly a beauty. That is acceptable; the character was not meant to be beautiful. The story is so bad though that even suspending your intelligence does not make it palatable.
I apologize to those who enjoyed this movie. To each his own.
My recommendation- stay away from it if you value your time.
Lars and the Real Girl (2007)
Unrealistic but charming and heart warming
I had not read the synopsis of this movie, so I did not know what to expect when I rented the DVD. I did expect a good performance from Ryan Goslin, and he was terrific. He really sold the character. The supporting actors were great- Emily Mortimer is a beautiful and talented actress who played his caring sister in law, Karin. Paul Schneider was superb as the older brother Gus who had a mixture of emotions in dealing with his 'crazy' little brother.
Lars has psychological problems but no one is really aware of that until he buys a life size doll Bianca, on the internet, and starts treating her as his girl friend. Gus and Karin are forced by circumstances to accept Lars' plastic girl friend as real. The biggest surprise is that the town's people accept Bianca as a real girl. We never get the full psychoanalysis of what made Lars a delusional person; there are hints about the early loss of mother, and the older brother leaving the little brother with the father. Whatever it may be, Lars is working out his problems through his 'girl friend'. In fact he is she (or she is he). Slowly he becomes aware of real touch, real nature, and he makes the decision that Bianca would get sick and die, which amounts to his being 'cured'. It is all shown so beautifully that it is touching.
For me the only negative was the actress who played Lars' colleague Margo who is interested in him. Eventually the realization that she is different from Bianca leads to his final transformation into a 'normal' person. I don't know if Margo was made plain looking by design, but she looked quite ugly next to Ryan Gosling.
No matter how unrealistic the story- where do you find caring people like these(?)- this is a very creative and entertaining movie. It is truly heart warming to see people doing 'anything'- even accepting a make believe doll as a real person- to help a troubled soul.
The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian (2008)
Pretty good, worth seeing
I love all the Narnia books and I loved the first Narnia movie. So I was determined to see this one. I love watching those Pevensie kids, and they were great. The sets, the landscapes, the talking animals and other creatures were great, particularly Reepicheep the mouse. I wish this had been as true to the book as the first one was. The romance between Caspian and Susan was totally uncalled for (too much Hollywood). The battles were too long to hold my interest, although technically they were well done. Ben Barnes was good as Prince Caspian. Somehow I did not enjoy this as much as the first Narnia movie. May be my expectations were too high, or because I knew the story? When I saw the first one, I did not know the story.
Overall a pretty good movie, definitely worth seeing. Just not as good as the first one, but it has made me hungry again for more Narnia movies.
Fracture (2007)
Smart and captivating
I missed this movie in the theaters (actually I went to see it and the projector broke down), so I ended up watching it on DVD. I was glued to the seat nevertheless.
'Fracture' does not really deal with any social issues, but it tells a story in a way that holds the attention of the audience. The main credit for this goes to the two main characters (Ted Crawford and Willy Beachum) played brilliantly by Anthony Hopkins and Ryan Gosling. David Straithern does an admirable job in his small role of Gosling's 'soon to be former' boss.
The main suspense is about the murder weapon. I thought in one scene the secret was given away, but no real damage was done because the story is more about the cat an dmouse game played by the two main characters. The change in the personality of the young lawyer (Beachum) is very believable..... from being a hot shot attorney who is about to leave the public office for a high paying law firm, to a dedicated public servant who wants justice done. Ryan Gosling has once again performed brilliantly. Hopkins is creepy, as his character demands it. The supporting cast is good.
One major flaw IMO was about Beachum and his new boss (played by Rosamund Pike) flirting and getting in bed. That was totally uncalled for. The movie would have been just as interesting without a love affair.
The background music is powerful and helps create the mood. The use of the story about eggs fitted in well with the title of the movie. Overall, Fracture is a clever and entertaining movie. It exceeded my expectations.
Water (2005)
Beautifully shown
This is a poignant and beautiful movie. Although filmed in Sri Lanka, the venue is Varanasi, a holy city in India. The use of water throughout (as river, rain, and other ways) and the cinematography are exquisite. We see the plight of widows in 1938 in this part of India through the eyes of an 8 year old child widow Chuiya. All the characters - the other widows where Chuiya is sent to spend the rest of her life, and the others in the society, including Narayan- a young man who falls in love with a young widow Kalyani, his family and friends, and the Hindu priest who acts as a glue between the scriptures and the masses- are well done. The acting is subtle and sensitive. The relationship between Kalyani and Narayan is shown beautifully and with restraint, as are the relationships between the different widows. Even a sad movie like this has its lighter moments- the humor is used well. Deepa Mehta has done a great job as a director.
I have a couple of complaints, although minor ones. First, Lisa Ray who acts as the young widow Kalyani, was the wrong choice for this role. She does not look Indian, even though she learned the gestures and body language of rural Indian widows. Ray is a Canadian with an Indian born parent, and she does a fine job with the Hindi language. However, she does not look 'Kalyani', an Indian woman.
The second problem I have with this movie is that it creates an impression that all widows in India are treated like the characters in this movie, and that the situation has not changed since 1938 (I doubt that the situation was like this in ALL parts of India even in the 1930's).
Child marriages were made illegal several decades ago (soon after India became independent). One has to remember that this movie shows a certain segment of a society in a small geographical region of the country. Unfortunately the tendency of viewers is to generalize about the whole country, and that is the only major negative I see about this movie. The other part is about the Hindu religion itself. Every religion has its abusers and we see some of them in this movie. It can create a wrong and biased picture of the religion. May be the resistance to the making of this movie in India had something to do with it. I understand that it was eventually released in India. I don't know what the reaction upon viewing the movie was.
As a work of art, as a story, this is a beautifully made movie. I would highly recommend it, but I warn the viewer not to generalize about a country or a culture or a religion based on this one movie. Just enjoy the unfolding of the story on the screen.
Something New (2006)
A meaningful Rom-Com, very entertaining
Finally, a romantic comedy with a meaningful message. I am not an African American, so some of my observations may sound incorrect to some.
I missed this movie when it came out in the theaters. I finally watched it on DVD, liked it and watched it again. I noticed things that I had missed the first time....like the use of flowers, the garden as the metaphor of Kenya's life, the use of color in the titles and in different scenes later in the movie. Little things go a long way in this very entertaining movie.
First few minutes of the movie I was not sure that I was going to like it much, but it picked up quickly when the Brian Kelly (Simon Baker) character entered. Both leads acted very well, with great chemistry and sensitivity.
It portrayed the issues faced by the racial divide. Growing up as a highly educated African American, Kenya is very aware of her race and sticks to only black men. That security is destroyed when she meets and later falls in love with a white man. The conflict in her mind is shown beautifully until she is able to finally resolve it, with some help from her family and friends.
Kenya faces prejudices in subtle ways in the corporate world. No matter how advanced we consider ourselves, these do exist. They may be a bit exaggerated in this movie- Kenya is a Stanford Graduate at the top of her class, went to Wharton, she is making good money at what seems like a very reputable accounting firm. Normally that would spell success for anyone, black or white and male or female. This movie may be set about 15-20 years earlier, and that would explain Kenya's feelings of being discriminated at work. It is hard for a white male (Brian) to truly understand what she is facing but as he says at one point- they would work through the challenges.
Kenya is unhappy in her personal life and does not really know it because she is so hung up on the career- she has to work twice as hard as others to be successful. That is the reality for most minority women. The movie does a great job of showing her frustrations without being preachy.
The main part of the movie is about the relationship between Kenya who is black and Brian who is white. The development of their friendship/relationship/love is shown with sensitivity, and without being preachy. The only preachy part comes toward the end in the scene between Kenya and her father. That was a little too much Hollywood.
The scenes between Kenya and Brian were creative and well done. I particularly liked the scene where Brian takes Kenya hiking in the mountains and she is all uptight and complaining until they walk through a small tunnel. When they come out, she has a smile on her face... she has opened up to nature.
The changes in Kenya's thinking and approach to life are subtle and convincing. Sanaa does a great job of showing Kenya's feelings without overacting. Simon Baker portrays Brian with great sensitivity, without being overly macho or overly sensitive. Max the dog has a very nice place in the movie and Kenya's attitude toward him also changes as she opens up to life. Brian makes her garden bloom, and Kenya does too.
The part that was missing was- how does Brian's family react to his dating a black woman? We see how Kenya's family views him- suspicious at first, but finally accepting.
The message is to be open to different possibilities in life and not get hung up on your own race/culture. We live in a country that has so many different races and cultures. The more we open up to others, the more we all benefit. It is done in an entertaining way, without being preachy. That is why I enjoyed the movie so much.