Thursday, June 29, 2006

Infernal Affairs II

(Mou gaan dou II)
Andrew Lau & Alan Mak, Hong Kong, 2003
3 out of 4 stars

What a tangled web a studio can weave when they realize they desperately need to make some money off of a sequel to a film that didn’t need one. That’s not to say that this is bad, but it would strike me as an ordinary film even if I hadn’t seen the extraordinary film that came before. This “sequel,” despite the number, is actually a prequel, but it doesn’t so much fill in the blanks as muddy up the waters; it’s often confusing, it’s not always clear if some of the new backstory really squares with the depictions we saw in the first one, and some of the more glaring questions are left unanswered (possibly for film number three). The young replacements the mole characters, previously played by Tony Leung and Andy Lau, are certainly not up to the task. Thankfully, the movie works because Anthony Wong and Eric Tsang reprise their roles as the respective cop and mob boss, and it is quite interesting to learn about a relationship between them that, from what I recall, was far from obvious before. I certainly wouldn’t recommend watching this before the first one, despite the chronology, but I imagine it is worth satisfying the likely thirst for more that you will most likely have after watching the previous film.

Source: Mega Star DVD
6 June, 3:15 PM

Wednesday, June 28, 2006

Crimson Gold

(Talaye sorkh)
Jafar Panahi, Iran, 2003
3.5 out of 4 stars

It’s positively amazing what you can sometimes get with non-professional actors, basically playing themselves, especially compared to the many times that real actors flub things entirely. This film follows the sad trajectory of a disaffected pizza delivery driver in Tehran, but while his journey is rooted in reality and presented, aside from the cuts from one scene to another, in something much like real time including all the boring waiting periods (and without the comforting style of similar scenes in Chinatown), the story itself is almost fantastical, probably in part because the people Hussein meets are, to no small degree, more symbolic than anything. The story is heartbreaking and the visuals held my interest without being flashy in the least. Most interestingly, director Jafar Panahi provides us with a removed, rational view of modern Iranian society even as he shows his considerable skill in unobtrusively guiding us along with one man’s unfortunate journey.

Source: Wellspring DVD
28 June, 9:11 PM

Superman Returns

Bryan Singer, Australia / USA, 2006
3.5 out of 4 stars

I thought that Richard Donner’s 1978 film, which I recently reviewed here, came from the right place, but was largely unsuccessful. You would think, then, that I wouldn’t get much out of a Superman franchise reboot that is nothing more than a rejuiced version of the Donner films, seeing as how I enjoyed Christopher Nolan’s pastiche of all the best Batman elements.

It is perhaps true that Bryan Singer’s choice of adaptation can be limiting in that he wasn't able or willing to drop anything that perhaps didn’t work ideally. Despite this, the film is an incredible, almost miraculous success. I’m really impressed with how well Singer does at creating good riff on something I didn't find that impressive, as I am with his general ability to sustain an un-ironic “earnest” tone without being overly corny (give or take a few minutes) or excessively anachronistic. The best example is Kevin Spacey’s Lex Luthor; he took Gene Hackman’s Luthor, which I was none too fond of, and made it work (with help from the script I presume). Certainly, there are problems; some scenes go on forever despite their lack of suspense (the filmmakers only get a pass on the “will Superman save them” thing for the first time), and the ending is abrupt in all the wrong ways. Finally, I’m not sure if this will convert you to the pro-Superman camp, but it will satisfy both casual and true believers.

Source: Warner 35mm print
28 June, 10 PM

Sunday, June 25, 2006

Mulholland Dr.

David Lynch, USA / France, 2001
4 out of 4 stars

This film is usually Exhibit A in my argument that you don’t have to entirely understand a film in order to not just appreciate it, but to enjoy it as well. After I watched it in a French theater, my dad sent me a thorough e-mail explaining his interpretation of the film, and later, I saw various webpages backing him up. My viewing this time was colored by his interpretation, but discussing it with my friend (who has seen it 10 times already), she poked several holes into his reading. When I first saw it, though, I really had no idea what was going on and what the connections between the two sections were. I knew that the film started life as a television show and I figured that some of the discontinuity could be explained with this in mind, but that didn’t actually go too far within the context of the film. Mostly, I was captivated, both times, by the extreme surrealist approach which never started to alienate me as a viewer even on a visceral level (okay, maybe the last music scene). Strongly recommended, just don’t tax your brain too much if, like me, you meet with little success when you try to “figure it out.”

Source: Universal DVD
25 June, 6:22 PM

Wednesday, June 21, 2006

Paradise Now

Hany Abu-Assad, France / Germany / Netherlands / Israel, 2005
3 out of 4 stars

I expected this film to give me a good look at the experiences of two potential suicide bombers, and at Palestine in general, and it certainly did. However, it’s not exactly some kind of verité piece either. It’s very beautifully shot and contains some rather affecting moments. While the directing is largely unobtrusive, it’s not absent either. I did think that there were some aimless patches and that some of the motivation shifts weren’t quite clear, which is unfortunate considering that this film is almost entirely about motivations. However, the film succeeds because the director takes a clear eye at a very difficult and disturbing issue, and doesn’t choose to preach or condescend to the viewer. It’s meaningful, but unlike, say, Hotel Rwanda, it doesn’t just coast on its meaningfulness.

Source: Warner DVD
20 June, 10:56 PM

Monday, June 19, 2006

The Untouchables

Brian De Palma, USA, 1987
2.5 out of 4 stars

Perhaps I was just frustrated because this film brings up some ideological issues, but then turns out to be largely visual. Or perhaps I don’t respond well to the cloying nostalgic music and acting, even. There was certainly one really strong sequence, taking place in a train station in the final half-hour of the film that actually really bored me at first. I think perhaps that some of what Brian De Palma tried to do for suspense struck me as indicating lack of momentum. Certainly at the beginning of the scene, I found myself largely wondering what I was supposed to think was going on, and I’m not even sure if that was deliberate. It probably contributes to the thrill when the confrontation does ensue, but maybe there’s a smoother way to do that, especially when regarding the particularly lethargic.

Certainly, the colors are very rich, and there are some masterful shots, which all shows a good level of artistry. Maybe I just expect my action to be too fast, or maybe this is really more of the Disney version of cops vs. mafia, ambiguous morals and hardcore violence aside. Of course, Costner’s inevitable woodenness doesn’t help much.

Source: Paramount special edition DVD
19 June, 7:56 PM

Tuesday, June 06, 2006

Pride & Prejudice

Joe Wright, UK / France, 2005
3 out of 4 stars

Perversely enough, I started to become interested in seeing this film after I heard three of my friends railing against Keira Knightley when she was nominated for the Oscar. Indeed, Knightley is the weakest link in this version, not standing up too well to Jennifer Ehle (1995 BBC version) or even Aishwarya Rai (2004 “Bollywood” version). Thankfully, Matthew Mcfayden, while still no Colin Firth, does us the pleasure of not trying to be Firth, and certainly whups Martin Henderson’s ass (not much of a challenge, admittedly).

Overall, I quite enjoyed this rendition. What it lacks in thoroughness and in acting (compared to the BBC), it makes up for with production values, which are thankfully not put to use. The cinematography is quite beautiful, especially when regarding the English countryside where some key tableaus occur, and the dinginess of the Bennett home is keenly brought into view in a clearer fashion than I’ve seen in most Austen interpretations. Finally, Joe Wright has a strong style, with some signature, abrupt reaction shots and other little flourishes I’m not knowledgeable enough to name, and ultimately, this helps the film be a worthwhile contribution rather than a half-assed cash-in type of remake. Knightley, however, did bug me, especially in the opening part of the film, which made me feel that, despite her age, she might have been better cast as Lydia, someone she probably resembles more closely. Every time she crinkled her nose laughing, she seemed to convey a lack of depth that didn’t fit her character. I imagine marketability was, to put it lightly, the main reason for her inclusion.

Source: Universal DVD
6 June, 9:10 AM

Saturday, June 03, 2006

Kings and Queen

(Rois et reine)
Arnaud Desplechin, France, 2004
3.5 out of 4 stars

It starts out with a woman describing her various marriages, then, after a bit, we meet a man right before he is condemned to a mental hospital. The connections and the backstory aren’t clear at the outset, but this is not at all frustrating in this film. Instead, I was captivated from the beginning. The dialogue is all top-notch, very literary but also grounded. The style of the film is quite remarkable; the two plots are expertly intertwined, and the director makes judicious use of a quick-cut technique in which he rapidly shows the viewer two, usually brief, takes of the same action or emotional reaction. The acting is very strong, and the characters are sympathetic but also, well, “complicated.” Finally, the story is very poignant and at times crushing, but it also contains a wealth of little charming moments and amusing quirks. I can’t really do justice to how good this movie is, though, so really, I can only say that I highly recommend it!

Source: Genius DVD
3 June, 8:25 PM

Thursday, June 01, 2006

Lady Vengeance

(Chinjeolhan geumjassi)
Park Chan-wook, South Korea, 2005
3 out of 4 stars

This is yet another film that I started to lose faith in as it got nearer to the end, and I kept asking, “and then what?” I think that it suffered unfairly from comparisons to Park Chan-wook’s previous film, Oldboy, so I will probably need to watch it again when it comes out on DVD. I did really enjoy the main character, even though her very personality is hard to pin down thanks to the machinations of the plot. The other characters are interesting, but there are a lot of them, and it’s hard to tell who’s who after a while. In general, there are several confusing aspects of this film that made me feel as if I would need a full plot summary after watching it.

I do think that this film is saying something interesting and important about revenge, and that this is reflected in the somewhat-slow concluding portion of the film. The “message” does strike me as a tad bit obvious, but then there are a lot of different ways to react to the protagonist’s decisions near the end, so there does seem to be a worthwhile amount of ambiguity. I think the best parts of the film are the jail flashbacks and the adoption subplot. Once we get fully into the vengeance, the film becomes more contemplative, but somewhat less interesting.

Source: Tartan 35mm print
1 June, 7:18 PM

The Bourne Supremacy

Paul Greengrass, USA / Germany, 2004
3 out of 4 stars

It can be a little frustrating seeing a “spy plot” unravel to the point where you realize there wasn’t much of anything there at the center of it. It’s especially frustrating when the ending comes with 20 minutes to go, and you don’t even really feel the need to see what happens afterwards. Luckily, this film has a tremendous amount of visual style, and it’s almost surprising to me that this was enough to make me enjoy the film, as I’m not always a big fan of the “handheld camera” thing when it comes to action films. In this case, however, the jolting camera was an important part of the action and of the character, such as it was. I think ultimately, this is a very forced sequel that doesn’t justify its undoing of the last film’s ending (while also relying too much on the audience’s knowledge of its predecessor). Most of all, though, I think it’s a pretty clear case of a good director, Paul Greengrass, having been saddled with a half-assed script.

Source: Universal DVD
31 May, 11:10 PM