Reviews

Tree of Life is the fifth feature for the legendary director Terrence Malick whose career is now into its fourth decade. His latest won over the prize committee at Cannes winning the prestigious Palme D'or but it is bound to divide the general audience.

Malick does not leave it up to the audience to figure out the meaning of this film revealing it in the opening minutes of the film. It is in the trailer as well. Tree of Life is an allegory on existence. Malick explores the notion that everyone faces the choice between nature and grace as a path through life. Struggle or compromise. Cunning or tolerance.

Tree of Life centers around the O'Brian family in Waco, Texas in the 1950s. The parents represent the principal theme of the film. The father played by an increasingly impressive Brad Pitt is a failed musician who runs a disciplined household and teaches his children that you just cannot be too good in this world. The mother who is played by Jessica Chastain has a graceful, almost childlike simplicity that the father considers naive.

The couple have three boys, the oldest Jack is played by an impressive Hunter McCracken as a 11-year-old and Sean Penn in adulthood. The boys become torn between their loving mother and assertive father. Hence, nature versus grace. Tree of Life consists of what appears to be random childhood memories from Jack meant to ponder the meaning of existence. These scenes have an engaging subtlety that is the great strength of the film.

The scenes that are bound to polarize the audience occur outside the O'Brian family home. Malick breaks from the family scenes on several occasions. We see what appears to be a recreation of the origin of the universe, numerous sea life and even dinosaurs. (Yes, dinosaurs). Malick presumably meant this to further the discussion on the existence of life on earth, as well as the role of God within it.

The problem with the Tree of Life is that these scenes do not successfully tie together well with the family scenes or the central theme of the film. For example, the scenes with Jack in adulthood consist nothing but Sean Penn looking gloomy as he goes up the elevator of a tall Dallas skyscraper. It just does not complement the scenes of him in childhood very much.

Malick deserves a lot of credit for trying to change the structure of filmmaking in a Hollywood increasingly running out of ideas. Perhaps in a decade Tree of Life will be considered ahead of its time. But for now it is bound to catch many people off guard particularly the opening thirty minutes. At least a half dozen people walked out of the theatre in the opening half hour.

Despite this, Tree of Life is worth your time mainly because of the scenes of family life in the 1950s as the family experiences conflict, death and the loss of innocence.

Woody Allen's latest film might be his most entertaining and rewarding ever. Midnight in Paris is hardly new material for Allen. Many people have long accused him of recycling old ideas. At the same time, Allen's newest creation touches on familiar ground but still seems refreshing all the same.

Gil Pender (Owen Wilson) is a successful Hollywood screenwriter spending some free time with his fiancée Inez (Rachal McAdams) in the French capital. They too are a classic mismatched couple familiar to Allen fans. Gil an aspiring novelist hopes the inspiration of Paris will help him complete his first novel. Inez on the other hand is content spending time shopping and dancing with a 'pedantic' old flame named Paul played by Michael Sheen.

Gil believes that he is wasting his talent at screen writing and dreams up a story revolving around a nostalgic shop. He is particularly fascinated with Paris in the 1920s when it was home to many great artists, poets, writers and even filmmakers of that time. Michael Sheen's character Paul refers to it as 'golden age thinking,' that your personality is best suited in a specific time frame of the past.

The film explores the idea that many people think that their lives would be easier or more fruitful if they had been born at another time. But in reality the people of any so called golden age likely long for a different time frame. It is mostly found in people with a deep intellectual curiosity. Perhaps the idea is erroneous like Paul says. But Woody Allen's film seems to say,'So what?' Perhaps it is not the allure of Paris in the 1920s that is so engrossing Allen. Perhaps it is the bleak pessimism of the present that is so troubling to Allen. Gil's materialistic fiancée, her right wing Republican parents and the pretentious pseudo-intellectual played by Martin Sheen are clearly archetypes of people in his own time.

Midnight in Paris is typical of many Allen films. There are bad romances. There are true romances that could never be fulfilled. This film is not as multi-layered as Annie Hall and Manhattan, widely held to be his best work. But you will not care.

You will not really care to know why exactly he is picked up at the same corner of Paris by a classic Peugeot every night at midnight either. Midnight in Paris might just be the most entertaining Allen film ever. It is as mesmerizing and full of charm as the people he meets in his adventures.

Tamara Drewe is a real gem by The Queen director Stephen Frears. It is an updated version of Thomas Hardy's Far from the Madding Crowd but based on a graphic novel by Posy Simmonds. A dark comedy set in the English countryside, the story is centred on a writer's colony run by Tamsin Greig's character Beth and her crime writer husband Nicholas, played by Roger Allam.

Gemma Arteton plays the title character who lived in the same small down in Dorset known as Ewedown during her teenage years. Now grown up she returns to restore and hopefully sell the house she used to live in. With help from a surgically reconstructed nose, Tamara Drewe has blossomed into a beautiful woman and her presence shakes the sleepy town as Bethsheba did in Hardy's novel.

The film is true to the memory of Thomas Hardy maintaining the turmoil of sexual desire and even obsession across all age groups which so commonly adorned his novels. One of the characters, the sympathetic American novelist Glen played by Bill Camp is writing a novel influenced by Hardy and references the author on many occasions.

The film breaks the notion of a quiet and sleepy town, like so many British films do. Underneath these seemingly close communities lies an underlining suspicion. Everyone is in everyone else's business in Ewedown and Tamara's presence only helps fuel the tension.

The pivotal scene that embodies Tamara Drewe's character occurs when Glen tells her that life must be very easy for her because she is beautiful. She laughs it off citing that it has always been difficult for her to be taken seriously.

Behind the character of Tamara Drewe lies something more sinister. The sudden appearance of a beautiful face in the town leads to a series of events that causes the balance of everyone's life to be upset. Men are suddenly smitten by the prospect of sex while women are often jealous or angry by the disruption they cause.

The story really begins to escalate when Tamara begins to date a drummer in a rock band played by Dominic Cooper and sets up permanently in the town. Soon, everyone in the town is invested in the lives of these people in some way.

The voyeurism of the locals who regard Tamara Drewe as both someone to envy and detest is likened to the celebrity status of her rock star boyfriend. Tamara quickly becomes the target of two schoolgirls who are both obsessed with the drummer and jealous of Tamara for disturbing the order of things.

The film eases its dark themes with its excellent use of subtle humour. The updated version of one of Hardy's most celebrated novels exposes the reality of a voyeuristic society too concerned with the lives of other people.

Along with Frears excellent direction, the other great strength of this film is its actors with special distinction going to Tamsin Greig. Greig is familiar to the London stage scene while others have played minor roles in big films. Gemma Arteton was one of Bond's muses in the Quantum of Solace. Roger Allam has been equally excellent in Frears academy award winning film the Queen as well as in V for Vendetta.

On one final note, I read one review that argued that the climax just does not amount to much which I personally felt was very misguided. The ending was true to the traditions of Hardy which is what Tamara Drewe is all about.

Inside Job is an enthralling documentary about how the reckless actions of Wall Street lead to the near collapse of the financial sector and subsequently the deepest recession since the 1930s. This is the second film by director Charles Ferguson, the first being No End in Sight an equally engaging indictment of the Bush Administration's handling of the occupation of Iraq.

Ferguson focuses on the Wall Street culture and the blatant arrogance of a half dozen men as the main causes of the financial turmoil. Inside Job begins in Iceland where the deregulation of the financial system in the 1990s lead to three banks accumulating assets almost ten times the small country's gross domestic product.

It becomes clear by the midpoint of the film that Iceland is a micro example of what has become a global problem. Runaway banks have been accumulating assets through toxic loans and other manoeuvres while paying themselves lavish bonuses.

Inside Job is easily one of the most frustrating documentaries ever made. And that is undoubtedly Ferguson's intention. The film is critical of Wall Street executives, credit agencies and especially regulatory agencies for the crisis.

Inside Job includes interviews from IMF head Dominique Strauss-Khan, congressmen Barney Frank, former New York attorney general Eliot Spitzer and many others. Ferguson traces the evolution of the banks from a small, largely local service to an out of control industry. He does not hold back criticizing every administration since Ronald Reagan in the 1980s.

Ferguson argues that despite what most people think, there were many people warning of an impending crisis in global financial markets. Ben Bernanke, Alan Greenspan and Timothy Geithner ignored various signs of impending doom. Not to mention former treasury secretary and incidentally former Goldman Sachs CEO Henry Paulson.

Inside Job makes the argument that the federal regulators are as responsible for the breakdown of the system as are the executives of Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns. More frustrating still is the revolving door between Wall Street and government agencies.

As the banks became more deregulated, the more speculation became a problem. Derivatives, and credit default swaps, complicated trading schemes that most people do not understand is what caused the collapse of Lehman Brothers sending shockwaves through financial centres all over the world.

Credit agencies like Moody's and Standard and Poor gave firms like Bear Stearns, Lehman brothers, and Morgan Stanley A grade credit ratings within weeks before they nearly collapsed. And also having one of their executives standing up in front of a congressional committee and telling congressmen that their ratings are just merely 'opinion'.

It becomes clear that this is not a problem that emerged from the housing boom early in president George W. Bush's second term. Rather this was a systematic breakdown driven by a neoliberal ideology supported by Ivey league economic schools across the United States.

Inside Job is simply a story of bankers more interested in collecting bonuses and making more money than providing what should be an essential service. What makes it even more frustrating is that many of the key figures behind the crisis are currently on Barak Obama's staff. The film leaves us with a bitter pill to swallow.

As Ferguson notes, Wall Street has returned to normal with no federal prosecutions against any of the guilty. And one of the most poignant scenes in the film comes from Robert Gnaizda, the former head of the Greenlining Institute, a consumer lobbyist group who laughingly dismisses recent legislation to regulate banks with a simple 'Hah'.

Inside Job helps explain many of the complex terms such as derivatives and insurance backed securities that confuse those not immersed in the banking community. It is essential viewing for any citizen concerned about our broken system.

21-year-old Xavier Dolan is fast becoming the star of Canadian cinema. The Quebec prodigy stormed on to the international scene with his debut J'ai tué ma mere (I killed My Mother) winning three awards at Cannes last year.

His follow-up is Les Amours Imaginaires (Heartbeats in English) and centres on a three-way love triangle. Dolan himself plays Francis, a gay Montrealer who becomes infatuated with a young socialite named Nicolas, played by Niels Schneider. Instantaneously, Francis' close friend Marie, played by Monia Chokri develops feelings of her own for Nicolas.

As the tumultuousness of love for Nicolas deepens for the two of them their close friendship begins to suffer. The two friends become embroiled in a struggle to please Nicolas who appears to represent Dolan's own ideal.

The theme of idealization is explored notably in Alfred Hitchcock's Vertigo and Thomas Mann's Death in Venice which was made into a film by Luchino Visconti. There is a scene at a party where Marie envisions Michalangelo's David, the artist' own physical ideal when staring admirably at Nicolas.

Romantic obsession begins to take hold of the two friends as they vie for the affection of someone who will never return their love. Like in I killed My Mother, his follow up is about Dolan's struggling with his own homosexuality. The film is also a meditation on the senselessness of love and why its own madness is what makes it so appealing.

Dolan is undoubtedly a big talent. Monia Chokri who plays the muse of the film shines the brightest in front of the camera. Her archaic hairstyle and fashion sense would remind anyone familiar with French actress Anna Karina. And that provides a clue in who Dolan draws his cinematic inspiration from.

Three-way conflicts were a hallmark of Jean-Luc Godard and other new wave directors like Francois Truffaut. Dolan may have drawn his inspiration from Truffaut's own Jules and Jim. But Les Amours Imaginaires has many more references to Godard's early work.

Everything down to the scene settings, cultural references and camera shots are deliberately taken from Godard's early classics such as Breathless and Band of Outsiders. The characters too represent the remnants of the 1960s-style cultural rebellion that Godard's films often explored which still thrives in Montreal today.

One final stylistic note, the film also includes a roundtable of characters not related to the main story discussing relationships. Dolan manages to make it relevant to the story and continues the tradition set by Godard in Masculine Feminine. The third sequence however does run a bit too long.

Les Amours Imaginaires is already out on DVD in Canada. It will be released in theatres in the United States on February 1, 2011 so look out for it.

The Social Network stars Jesse Eisenberg who plays Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg in his college days at Harvard less than a decade ago. When we meet him it is difficult to believe that he was working on a multibillion dollar idea. At the time Zuckerberg was more concerned with girls and joining exclusive fraternities than developing his unrealized potential.

The origin of Facebook begins when three students approach Zuckerberg to design a social network site for fellow Harvard students. He then enlists financial help of his best friend named Eduardo Saverin, played by the impressive Andrew Garfield. As soon as the new site is launched, the battle for control of Facebook begins.

I went into this film very sceptical about how this subject matter could translate into film. And then I realized that the film is more about the control, both financial and influential over the social network website that claims over 500 million members. And this is where screenwriter Aaron Sorkin and director David Fincher get it right.

The Social Network plays out more like a sequel to Wall Street. The film's great strength is its compelling drama. Fincher shot the film in short scenes that transition flawlessly one to the next. The screenplay packs several good lines that act as comedic relief. But what works best is the tension that unfolds in front of your eyes.

The performances are terrific all around, particularly Jesse Eisenberg who should get a best actor nomination. Justin Timberlake gives an excellent performance as Sean Parker, co-creator of now defunct file-sharing website Napster who takes Zuckerberg as a protégé.

The film gave me a feeling of disgust. It is difficult to like any of the characters in this film. From the frat boy mentality of Zuckerberg's fellow Harvard students to the superficiality of Shawn Parker, there are not many sympathetic characters in this film. But that is exactly why you will be taken in by this film. It evokes so much raw emotion that it will keep you enthralled for its entirety.

It is rare to find a film that is flawless on every level and the Social Network falls into that category. The academy I am sure will take note of this. The Social Network I am sure will be given a host of nominations.

Christopher Nolan's latest film attempts to explore its complexity with only modest success. It became instantly one of the most highly anticipated films of the summer when the trailer was first released, many expected it to be a mind bending science fiction film. Instead, the film succeeds largely due to its strong cast and sometimes breathtaking visuals.

Nolan has been one of the shining lights of the film industry directing the brilliant Memento, the imaginative The Prestige and for resurrecting the Batman trilogy. This is Nolan's first original screenplay since his debut The Following. And unfortunately he shows the rust.

The film stars in-form Leonardo Dicaprio, the enchanting Marian Cottilard, and a strong supporting cast including Ellen Page and Joseph Gordon-Levitt. The story centres on Dicaprio's character Cobb who through some ill-defined technology could enter people's minds and steal ideas. Cobb is given a proposition by a Japanese businessman played by Ken Watanabe to implant an idea in the head of a rival company's heir, played by Cillian Murphy.

Cobb is haunted by the death of his wife which serves as the central conflict of the film. Inception suffers from a lack of development when it comes to its characters. Ellen Page plays Ariadne an apprentice of sorts who goes along with Cobb on what he hopes to be his final assignment. Nolan's script does not find time to explore Ariadne's character. Nor does it explore Joseph Gordon-Levitt's character Arthur who is Cobb's close confident.

The film's highlights are mainly visual. Joseph Gordon-Levitt's floating scenes in the hotel hallway are a highlight in the film. Yet, the visuals seem very scaled back. The trailer includes a clip of Paris being turned on its head which we find out is part of Ellen Page's character's training. If you are expecting magnificent visuals you will be disappointed. Nolan's dream sequences consist nothing more than an empty city of identical apartment buildings, a hotel and a ski slope.

At the Movies hosts Michael Philips and A.O. Scott summed up the position best. The film lacked imagination. Nolan's dream world lacks something like Freudian symbolism found in Alfred Hitchcock or Luis Bunuel films. Nolan creates a dream within a dream concept that just seems contrived.

But why recommend this film? There are enough good action sequences and excellent performances to please the general audience who are most often not interested in looking further than where Inception will take them. In the end, the dream sequences are a ploy to fool you into believing you have watched something more than an above average action film.

Tom Hardy's character Eames tells Arthur in one scene that is applicable to Nolan's vision: "You mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger, darling." Perhaps Nolan's subconscious may have been trying to tell him something there! Verdict: 8/10

When this film was released there was a small minority of critics who did not like this film. But like many Kubrick films Eyes Wide Shut is ahead of its time in terms of artistic impression and thought-provocation.

First I will like to talk about some of the criticisms many had about this film when it was first released. The slow pace at the beginning and the seemingly "staged atmosphere" is believed to have been created to convey a "dream-like" ambiance. I don't know whether everyone will find this film compelling but I think the ambiguity of the plot creates everything open to interpretation.

After his wife Alice(Kidman) confesses a near act of infidelity, the "good-doctor" Bill Harbord(Cruise) goes on an odyssey-like walk through the empty streets on New York (Its suppose to symbolize his spiritual emptiness), in a vindictive pursuit to prove his character as a man. When meeting his friend Nick Nightingale (Todd Field), he learns of an underground society that indulges in group sex. Realizing this is the opportunity to reassure himself he ventures into the society only to be revealed as an intruder and cast out. He then tries to retrace his steps in true Kubrick fashion.

This film like most of Kubrick's films is artsy and rigorous picture that is just simply not designed for everyone to like because contrary to what you might think it is unique and unconventional. Can you name a film that resembles Eyes Wide Shut in terms of the density of the storyline, emotionally intense, psychologically compelling and strangely thought-provoking? You likely can't because it is a anomaly in a bland and rigid film industry.

If you did not like this film, I suggest that you watch this film again and think about what I said and OPEN-UP to it. Take it for what it is trying to put forth. I've heard many people say that the first time they saw this film they did not understand it, but later came to enjoy it. And this is the case for many Kubrick films. In fact when I first saw A Clockwork Orange, 2001: A Space Odyssey, as well as Dr. Strangelove I could not understand why the academy considers them classics, but they grew on me as well.

In the end, Eyes Wide Shut like 2001: A Space Odyssey will be a film that was misunderstood by many people when it came out but inevitably will be widely considered as another landmark in the career of the greatest film-maker of all-time.

Rating: 10/10 A Kubrick Classic