I missed this back when it was released but it was always on my mind to catch this. I liked Jarmusch's last venture, Only Lovers Left Alive and was expecting a similar cool indie film with great visuals but Paterson is a wholly different beast and in my personal opinion better. It's a "slice of life" genre of film rather than drama so nothing much happens but beneath the surface there's so much to process. Adam Driver (gives his career best performance here and continues to prove that he is more than just Kylo Ren) is a reserved bus driver who doesn't speak much to his co-workers, his friends at the bar or even his live in girlfriend but truly comes alive while writing poetry. The film never holds your hand and you have to work out the ins and outs of his mind. He isn't troubled, leads a very normal life, is loved by his girlfriend, liked by his friends and coworkers. There's nothing wrong with Paterson and spoiler alert nothing will be found wrong with him when the film ends, but this quiet person scribbles away in his poetry book expressing his innermost thoughts, fears and desires which he hides from rest of the world. The film also has a theme of Paterson running into twins which I think is Jarmusch's way of hinting twin personalities of not only Paterson but all of us. Two people who look the same but are different people just like Paterson has two twins, one's what we see a reserved person with his coworkers and girlfriend and the other is this private expressive poet. The film saves it's best scene for the last which was very moving and got to me. Very interesting mature film, would highly recommend.
Reviews
44 Reviews
Phantom Thread
(2017)
Another gem from PTA and DDL
23 July 2018
While I watched this film earlier in the year, I revisited it again last weekend, it had been on my mind for a while and the second viewing only made it occupy more mind space. PT Anderson enjoys showing power dynamics between the Master and the servant (see what I did there?). Phantom Thread is a similar film along those lines. Reynolds is a dressmaker played impeccably by Daniel Day Lewis in what may be his final role, who gives it his all in such a way we don't see a star or a bombastic performance as in PTA's There Will be blood but a far more nuanced performance. Vicky Krieps is the second lead playing his muse and sometimes lover who did an admirable job but in some scenes her accent starts to act up and a strong German accent hits the viewers which I don't think figures in the origin story of her character. Lesley Manville plays the overprotective sister who's also the business head for the venture while Reynolds' artist she's surprisingly the comic relief in the film as well because of her deadpan and dry delivery. The movie is gently directed with long shots and soft classical music which goes a long way in my books. The ending is however this movie's real strength lies, it was a lot of food for thought and talking more would give away the details. Would love to talk about it in the comment section though.
The Killing of a Sacred Deer
(2017)
Wonderful!
24 February 2018
I was a bit skeptical while checking this out. Yorgos Lanthimos' last venture (The Lobster) didn't do much for me, despite critical acclaim. The first half was great but the second half was repetitive and devoid of rich ideas of the first. But we are here for the deer and not the lobster so let's jump into the relevant film. This film was really good, YL was able to sustain the momentum from a good first half and delivered a stronger second half. The shots are long, the cuts are few, the angles are great, it's a very smooth and polished film. The real standout of the film was the music, really made me uneasy, combined with a very mechanical performance by the leads (Farell and Kidman) the mood building for a psychological horror film was cultivated well. This is the kind of horror you're better off not asking the hows, it's more about the journey. There are some mystical elements in here and their clash with science, a theme which was present in The Lobster as well. It's also quite big on biblical and mythological references (I haven't seen Mother yet so interesting to have another film in the same year like that). Colin Farell and Nicole Kidman evolve from these mechanical sophisticated people to desperate parents naturally but not without some tense moments and gorgeous scenes. These are the kind of films which should have gotten noms, TKSD over Get Out or Shape of Water any day. Would love to talk about it in the comments section beware of spoilers.
Blade Runner 2049
(2017)
Another year another Villeneuve success
13 October 2017
To start off I would like to say that I liked this film despite some shortcomings, this is the third good film by Denis Villeneuve in three years, what a monumental achievement, never have I seen this level of consistency or even frequency in both mainstream and art house films. Among the many things it does right, Blade Runner 2049 is a very good looking film with great cinematography and excellent music. There's great atmosphere building and heavy themes just like in the original Blade Runner but the film falters in the plot department. Blade Runner was a thinking man's science fiction film with very heavy themes, 2049 doesn't shy away from them and embraces them but the plot is riddled with loopoles and is very messy. The original Blade Runner's vehicle (so to say) for themes was a simple bounty hunting mission, this simple plot allowed it to put in deep philosophical ideas in the film. 2049 wants to have it's cake and eat it too, the plot or the vehicle to deliver the heavy themes is a modern day noir mystery which is too complex for it's own good and logical loopholes creep in, but one could argue that the plot isn't the spirit of 2049, it's the ideas, the themes of who or what is a truly a human, and these are present in the film just that the scenes and story surrounding it doesn't do the movie much favors. Must say though the romance in this film is it's highlight and strongest suit, it's a mix of Her and original Blade Runner (if done right, because let's face it 1982's romance was it's weakest department). Lastly would reiterate, while I really liked this film, I would definitely put it a notch below the original Blade Runner which tackled similar if not more complex themes more elegantly.
Dunkirk
(2017)
Not a Nolan fan but this was monumental
28 July 2017
I was quite uncertain about Dunkirk, I strongly disliked Nolan's last two films and the one before that felt a bit too inspired from Satoshi Kon's Paprika to really have an identity of it's own like his Insomnia, again not an original work. Nolan has been a director who has been out of form for nearly ten years in my opinion however with this one, Nolan has again become one of the directors to look out for. This is indeed worth the hype, the best war film in years. A technical masterpiece worthy of the IMAX experience. What really surprised me about the film is that dialogues are kept to a minimum and Nolan is always a dialogue heavy director, first 15-20 minutes or so just have a handful of lines, it's all about the environment and the atmosphere, which was very refreshing, I have always criticized his films for having more to say and less to show but he makes amends here. Nolan does add his own signature to the film by mixing the timelines of multiple story characters but it's done to a minimum so that isn't gimmicky and doesn't overstay it's welcome. However it's more of a technically flawless masterpiece of a war film (Saving Private Ryan, Black Hawk Down etc.) rather than an emotional or character driven one (Apocalypse Now, Platoon, Full Metal Jacket, The Thin Red Line) which is fine, I wouldn't necessarily rate the latter group higher than the former, I do like the latter more but each group has it's appeal and I enjoy both. In the acting department everyone gets the job done but I wouldn't single out anyone as giving a standout performance, Mark Rylance almost gets there though, he is the audience's character, the heart of the film, the common man. This is as much as Hans Zimmer's film like it's Christopher Nolan's, so much so I wish there was lesser usage of background music in it which is almost present in every scene, background music doesn't necessarily enhance the atmosphere of gun shots, shells and bomber planes flying, was sometimes being a distraction and breaking the immersion. All in all these are minor nitpicks of an otherwise an excellent film. Nolan's finally back on track after nearly ten years and this is his best in my opinion replacing his previous best Memento.
New York, New York
(1977)
Picks up in the last hour
20 July 2017
New York New York is a musical about a passionate jazz player and his struggles with love and career with a Hollywood love letter thrown in as well. Now which film does this remind everyone of? Just like La La Land, New York New York is a homage to the golden age of musicals but packs Scorsese's intensity. Robert DeNiro is in his 70's prime and knocks it out of the park with his performance, easily the best feature of the film. Liza Minelli does a decent job but she's there for her singing and does great in that. However this is easily the most flawed film I have seen from Scorsese, it stands at an enormous run-time of nearly three hours, there's more than a few scenes which could be trimmed down, especially during the first hour and a half, I think a lot can be blamed on Scorsese unable to handle a big budget film back then, the sets were expensive so were the cars and the props but he was spending way too much time in pointless scenes. However the film really picks up and the last one hour is where this movie truly shines. DeNiro was just brilliant in his role of an insecure but ambitious saxophonist. A film despite it's flaws should give you a handful of scenes which will stay with you once the film is over, one scene in particular will always stay with me, DeNiro is angry and frustrated with his wife Minnelli but keeps it bottled in and it comes out during a magnificent scene with him and his saxophone playing an energetic and a furious melody while his eyes rain down fireballs on her, no dialogue just music and body language.
The Piano Teacher
(2001)
Another gem by Haneke
8 June 2017
Michael Haneke has a knack for creating odd or even disturbing scenes or characters out of the most mundane situations and this is on full display in The Piano Teacher. Anchored by Issabelle Huppert, a very competent support cast who hold their own and wonderful classical music (Schubert's iconic piano number from Barry Lyndon makes a return among other melodious pieces) this film explores the dark recesses of Erika's mind, her struggle with loneliness and her unconventional desires. Erika is forty years old and lives with her domineering and controlling mother. She is an overtly strict, harsh piano teacher but behind this persona lies a vulnerable woman who is so sexually repressed that it has given rise to her odd and unconventional sexual needs. Erika's sexual desires are perhaps the weirdest I have ever seen in film, she's into BDSM, humiliation, voyeurism and even self mutilation, she's definitely a very perverse character which is brought up later on as well. Through all this, we can often lose sight of the fact that even Erika longs for and deserves happiness but she will go about it her own self destructive way. When a new far younger student Walter enters her life she tries to push him away but they eventually start a romance. Walter wants to have a traditional romantic relationship but Erika wants her needs fulfilled by a session of rape and humiliation, it's interesting that she desires the pain and humiliation when she inflicts the same on her students, her desire to be on the receiving side of these emotions makes the viewer always trying to decipher Erika, what's really going on in her head?
Jules and Jim
(1962)
Just wonderful!
16 May 2017
Jules et Jim was my introduction to Truffaut and I was completely blown away by it, I can't wait to watch more by him. Stephen Hawking said this was his favorite movie and I can see why. The film revolves around two best friends Jules and Jim and the enigmatic woman who captures both their hearts, Catherine. The film follows their lives for nearly a decade and a half. In the first arc of the film, it's established that while both are attracted to Catherine, she chooses Jules and Jim is a good sport is genuinely happy for his friend. Years pass and after the great war both the friends are reunited, Jules and Catherine now have a daughter but Catherine is too headstrong and adventurous of Jules, Jules actively persuades Jim to be Catherine's lover and husband so that she does not run away from his life and they can be a big happy family together, meanwhile Jim who never really got over Catherine rekindles his flame for her and she starts falling for Jim as well. As you might have guessed this is a very sexually progressive film especially for 1961. However through all this complexities, the film maintains it's infectious energy and who better to guide the viewer through this maze of emotions than these fleshed out well written characters. I found the film quite modern and "talky" it has aged very well, relevant not even today but will be so long after we are gone.
Ferris Bueller's Day Off
(1986)
When teenager films were not just about emo anxious kids
28 April 2017
I have a strong dislike for teenage and coming of age films they take themselves too seriously and don't really get what being a teenager is all about. Most recently Boyhood in particular rubbed me the wrong way. Confusion and anxiety are a big part of teenage life but it's not the only thing, primarily it's about hanging out with friends, bunking classes, obsessing over girls (or boys as the case maybe), cars, lying to your parents to sneak into that party instead of fighting them like a spoiled brat and yes some confusion about one's future and existential dread as well, it's not the only thing. Ferris Bueller gets this perfect mix right. It's not only a fun movie with great moments but has some layers to it as well. My favorite scene is the iconic parade scene while Beatles' Twist and Shout plays in the parade. FB reminds us that while being a teenager can be hard, the good outweighs the bad and for the most part it's fun, something which most modern teenage films would like you to forget.
Silence
(I) (2016)
A spiritual journey
4 March 2017
Fantastic stuff by Scorsese again. Just downright beautifully shot, excellent direction and beautiful cinematography and very compelling. Lately I have been struggling to connect with modern day Hollywood films, whether it be La La Land, Manchester by the sea, Moonlight etc. Arrival got closest to making me care for the protagonist but not enough. I was never satisfied with my emotional connect to any or all of the characters of the said films. Silence showed me that I could care, I felt strong emotional bonds with almost all of the characters in the film, directed by the steady and unwavering hand of Martin Scorsese whose direction is the real star in the film. The rest do a decent job, Andrew Garfield gives career best performance here and is trying very hard but still not good enough to shoulder this movie on his own and there are a lot of solo scenes and his performance was good but not great. I could see a lot of parallels between this and Scorsese's Last Temptation of the Christ, like Garfield's Sebastian saw himself as Jesus figure of sorts, the ideology of pain and suffering brings you closer to god and similar moral dilemmas whether faith is more important than people's lives, a very emotional and spiritual experience throughout.
Even Scorsese's greatest hits B side film is better than every film of last year. It's a shame that this was not nominated, it's not only a good film but a memorable one, it's no Seventh Seal but Scorsese doesn't ape Bergman he asks different questions and while not as philosophical but it still has a place in the pantheon of religion and spirituality based cinema something which the recent Noah just failed to do, always a very hard subject. It's amazing how Scorsese is able to maintain this level at 74, outdoing every one of his much younger peers, I hope he lives a long healthy life and continues providing us with good cinema, 2016 was in my recent memory one of the weakest years of non commercial Hollywood cinema almost SAVED by Scorsese. 8.5/10.
Even Scorsese's greatest hits B side film is better than every film of last year. It's a shame that this was not nominated, it's not only a good film but a memorable one, it's no Seventh Seal but Scorsese doesn't ape Bergman he asks different questions and while not as philosophical but it still has a place in the pantheon of religion and spirituality based cinema something which the recent Noah just failed to do, always a very hard subject. It's amazing how Scorsese is able to maintain this level at 74, outdoing every one of his much younger peers, I hope he lives a long healthy life and continues providing us with good cinema, 2016 was in my recent memory one of the weakest years of non commercial Hollywood cinema almost SAVED by Scorsese. 8.5/10.
Manchester by the Sea
(2016)
A good watch
20 February 2017
Manchester by the sea is a fine film, well directed, and extremely well acted. The first hour was my favorite segment of the film where we jump between different time periods of the characters in the film, it's non linear and the viewer has to be attentive to figure out what's going on, there is no hand holding and you never know how many years ago these flashbacks happened and you are doing mental calculations to figure out the ages of the characters and how much time has passed between events. This was just fantastic as it pushed all the right buttons for me. The second hour however saw a dip in the level of the film when the film reveals all it's cards, the movie just hangs around aimlessly for 15-20 minutes before eventually coming together for a decent end. Casey Affleck just nailed it in this one and I hope he gets an Oscar but while I liked the film I don't think it was very memorable, ala last year's Carol good film with good direction and great acting but I don't remember anything about it, like Carol before it other than the acting nothing is a standout, direction, cinematography, editing and even the script after the first hour are workmanlike. I assume MBTS will go the same way, in 7-8 months it will be the movie for which Casey Affleck won his Oscar but will not occupy any space in my head which great movies do even after tens of years. Overall 7.5/10.
Arrival
(II) (2016)
Very good but falls short of being great
1 December 2016
Arrival is a good film but not great. Watched it yesterday in the local movie hall and was immediately disappointed by how drab it looked, where did all the great cinematography and camera-work of the Director's previous work Sicario had gone? Rechecked the trailers and there was definitely problem with the print given to PVR, which is such a shame because this movie looked excellent in trailers and so bad in the movie hall. As far as acting is concerned everyone was decent and I think this is the first time Amy Adams has been the first lead of a movie and she brought her A game, easily career best performance. I thought the first half was quite weak, there are a lot of "talky" generic scenes which could have been cut, the extra effort to show the military protocol of isolation, immune system boosts, suits, etc. etc. got way more screen time than it deserved, Denis Villeneuve should have trusted his audience, we understand all the protocols, don't spend half an hour to forty five minutes explaining it to us with chitter-chatter and therein lies the biggest fault of Arrival, there are just so many scenes that a person who watches these kinds of films doesn't need, some aspects just feel a bit dumbed down. There is also one convenient, really bad story angle which just adds fifteen minutes to the runtime but was completely unnecessary. If I was the editor, this movie would have lost good half an hour if not more. BUT and this is a big BUT, the second half picks up momentum and where all the seeds the film planted start to take shape, and this is quite well done, I was impressed, the climax was truly the highlight of the film and so well done but can't be discussed without going into spoilers. The music and score is good but not as good as Sicario, and often feels forced and overused (especially in an otherwise excellent climax). All in all, despite it's rough edges, I still liked Arrival, I liked it more than the usual science fiction releases around this time of the year- Gravity, Interstellar, Martian, but this is not that great first contact film that we will be talking about for years like 2001 or Soalris, just a solid film for this year.
Psycho Raman
(2016)
Not AK's best but good stuff
30 June 2016
While Raman Raghav will not be included in the best works of Anurag Kashyap it still is a good watch. Bolstered by interesting characters, good acting, witty dialogues this had all the makings of being great but is hampered by a flabby script which could have been trimmed, honestly out of the eight chapters the first five could have used some cutting. However the last three chapters are phenomenal and can hang with the best of Anurag Kashyap's work, dealing with deeper themes especially the theme about legacy and leaving something of yours behind even after death really struck a chord with me. All the actors did a good job but Nawazuddin Siddiqui deserves a special mention, Raman is a straightforward psycho killer but Siddiqui makes it very interesting to watch his antics. Vicky Kaushal as Raghav the cop is good but the writing for this character is great, he is the most complex character in the film and maybe is as bad of a guy as Raman but wearing a cop's uniform, it's hard to root for this cop in the cat and mouse game as each ends up offending the viewer time and again. It's a descent to depravity and often the viewer wonders when will both of these guys get what's coming to them.
One of the worst aspects of this film is that it's clumsy, the murders are poorly done, they have more screen time than they should have been given. Murders and brutality are done akin to 80's B grade Hindi films if you are doing gore like Tarantino you got to make it gruesome not this kid stuff, otherwise it's best that the brutality happens offscreen, if you are showing it on screen you can't half ass it, you got to commit to it. Also the way Raman operates it makes the police seem extraordinarily dumb, as someone who has watched his fair share of Hitchcock and murder mysteries a lot of the events don't make any sense, there's just too much evidence which was ignored. All in all still a good watch.
One of the worst aspects of this film is that it's clumsy, the murders are poorly done, they have more screen time than they should have been given. Murders and brutality are done akin to 80's B grade Hindi films if you are doing gore like Tarantino you got to make it gruesome not this kid stuff, otherwise it's best that the brutality happens offscreen, if you are showing it on screen you can't half ass it, you got to commit to it. Also the way Raman operates it makes the police seem extraordinarily dumb, as someone who has watched his fair share of Hitchcock and murder mysteries a lot of the events don't make any sense, there's just too much evidence which was ignored. All in all still a good watch.
Rear Window
(1954)
Another great notch in Hitchcock's belt
14 April 2016
I love Hitchcock movies and this one is no different, I watched this last week so needless to say I am late to the party. However this is one of the hallmarks of a good film that it ages properly and is still relevant even though 60 plus years have passed since it's release. Since it's a Hitchcock film the less spoken about the plot it's better so that you guys can experience it for yourself. So the plot goes like this, an ace photographer (L.B. Jefferies played by James Stewart) injures himself in his previous assignment, now this curious mind who is on a wheelchair because of his cast has developed into a peeping tom because he is restless fellow to whom reading a book would be far less interesting than analyzing and judging his neighbors. While this starts out as a harmless pass time it soon devolves to murder or at least some suspicion of it. In the mix of it all is Jeff's girlfriend played by Grace Kelly who looks good, I mean so gorgeous I don't think anyone has ever looked as good as her in any movie. Other present are, Jeff's skeptic cop friend and his nurse who is his moral voice but eventually jumps in with both feet later on.
I have always believed Hitchcock makes complete entertaining films, and this one is no different, it's sexy, has romance, murder et al. It could even be argued that romance is perhaps the more dominant genre in Rear Window than the thriller and murder mystery aspect as Liza Jeff's girlfriend plays his detective partner when he is shunned by his therapist and cop friend. Does Liza believe the ludicrous stories of Jeff? Is she doing all this just to win Jeff's affection? The movie leaves this all in the air for the audience to think and ponder about and refuses to spoon feed it to us. Liza is opposite of Jeff, he craves adventure she loves fashion, he likes to keep moving from place to place and she likes to lay down roots the movie shows the audience how different they are and we wonder why did they hook up in the first place? The answer is there in the film, these two love each other and these are shallow differences and they are more compatible on a deeper level. The film also can be quite meta and talks about neighbors being selfish and not caring for one another and the loss of simpler times when people weren't so cold and isolated. All in all I really liked this movie but would still place it below the holy Hitchcock trinity of Vertigo (my favorite), Psycho and North by Northwest.
I have always believed Hitchcock makes complete entertaining films, and this one is no different, it's sexy, has romance, murder et al. It could even be argued that romance is perhaps the more dominant genre in Rear Window than the thriller and murder mystery aspect as Liza Jeff's girlfriend plays his detective partner when he is shunned by his therapist and cop friend. Does Liza believe the ludicrous stories of Jeff? Is she doing all this just to win Jeff's affection? The movie leaves this all in the air for the audience to think and ponder about and refuses to spoon feed it to us. Liza is opposite of Jeff, he craves adventure she loves fashion, he likes to keep moving from place to place and she likes to lay down roots the movie shows the audience how different they are and we wonder why did they hook up in the first place? The answer is there in the film, these two love each other and these are shallow differences and they are more compatible on a deeper level. The film also can be quite meta and talks about neighbors being selfish and not caring for one another and the loss of simpler times when people weren't so cold and isolated. All in all I really liked this movie but would still place it below the holy Hitchcock trinity of Vertigo (my favorite), Psycho and North by Northwest.
The Revenant
(I) (2015)
What a fascinating film!
4 March 2016
After watching this film on the big screen, my second time overall, I was still in awe of this beautiful looking film. It's SO GORGEOUS, sure the film has it's other strong suits but the direction (Inarittu) and cinematography (Lubezki), two categories it won Oscars in, is so overwhelming I couldn't understand why a certain section of the audience did not find this a good watch. It is a very old school film it has this strong 70's vibe where the story is not told and is left for you to figure out. I watched this with a friend who did not enjoy this as much and suggested that the movie would have been better if DiCaprio's character Hugh Glass narrated in the film and spelled out his ordeals to the audience. I called my friend a pleb because I am a high and mighty jerk like that but on a serious note while a narration would have helped with the casual audience, it would also promote spoon feeding hand holding which has become the norm of today's films. The performances were great and a movie like this falls apart if the performances are not good they are the only thing connecting the audience to the film. Well deserved Oscar for DiCaprio, arguably career best performance from him, Tom Hardy was great too shame no Oscar though, some scenes were so intense I could feel it taking a mental toll on me of which the bear mauling scene was on the forefront. Overall a very visceral movie which used only natural light while filming and will stand the test of time, something which this year's winner Spotlight cannot claim.
Spotlight
(I) (2015)
A good docu-drama but nothing more
25 February 2016
I liked this film, thought it was a well done solid film. But I am afraid I can't say anything more than that, it is very documentary like which can be it's biggest strength (a very fact driven plot heavy film) or it's biggest weakness (characters feel cold and distant and other than the plot nothing really impresses, also quite bland in the visuals department). However the characters do start to show some life nearing the end of the film but by that time damage is done it can be hard if not impossible for viewers to differentiate between the reporters for nearly one and a half hour of the film, they all suffer from different faces but same objective syndrome and inadequate effort is made to separate one from the another. Also speaking of run-time, this film is a wee bit over two hours long, editing especially in the first half could have made this film a bit crispier. However I did like the accuracy level in the film regarding the cellphones, ads, electronics and the cars used in 2001; a lot of films these days are becoming very careless in this regard. I would compare it to last year's Foxcatcher another fact driven docu-drama film, solidly acted, but nothing special in the direction, editing and cinematography department, I would still recommend it but no way this film deserves a second watch, you can absorb everything there is to get in a single viewing. All in all, a solid well written docu-drama which will have it's time in the "spotlight" (pun!) this Oscar season and will become "oh that movie about pedo priests" by next year's Oscar season.
Room
(I) (2015)
A very average affair
5 February 2016
There it is the first movie of the award season which I did not think much of. Don't get me wrong it's a decent but thoroughly average film. The movie starts out promisingly and does a couple of things right, makes no mistakes but does nothing special or extraordinary with the situation. I gave the movie the benefit of the doubt and was hoping the psychological aspects of the film would step up in the second half but it didn't do so, the second half completely changes the situation for worse, there are new problems to deal with and the movie goes about them in it's usual half committed way which was prevalent in first half. The acting is definitely the strong suit of the film, Brie Larson is amazing and I would be OK with her winning the Oscar, though I didn't think much of the film I thought she was great. The kid played by Jacob Tremblay showed amazing depth and variety for a young child. The weakness of the film is direction, it does not capitalizes on it's setting, it has no great scenes and does not visually grab you at anytime (I am not reading a book I am watching a movie), also sometimes Brie Larson's character is quite inconsistent and unrealistic sometimes, she shows very few signs of PTSD, it sometimes feels she was trapped in Room for weeks not seven years, not her fault though, another misstep by the director, along with not capitalizing that Jack maybe better off without Joy (it touches so less on the REAL issues it's infuriating).
The Hateful Eight
(2015)
Django Unchained meets Reservoir Dogs
20 January 2016
To start off, I will say I really liked this movie because I am a big Tarantino fan. It has every thing you might expect out of a Tarantino film, great dialogue, non linear chapters, copious amount of violence which is oddly funny at times, overthetop acting which goes with a movie of this type and of course has some epic scenes bearing Tarantino's stamp. The movie reminds me a lot of Reservoir Dogs (my favorite Tarantino film) i.e. there is just a single set and most of the events of the movie take place on it and the main theme of the film is a whodunit mystery. There some great outdoor scenes as well but I think they accounted for about twenty minutes or so in the three hour epic(yes it's that long). Speaking of long I must say the editing could have been better to make the film shorter and sharper. Also since there was just a single set, this won't be the premiere movie you think of when you think of Tarantino's visual mark, he had less to work with. Another criticism that may be made is that Tarantino took very less risk with the film, he is clearly in the safe Django Unchained mode of his last film and has arguably not innovated anything as far as this film is concerned, not that I mind it too much. Other stand out features include great music by legendary Ennio Morricone, all the Tarantino regulars and the newcomers are great as well but Samuel L Jackson is the standout and gives perhaps the best performance of his career since Pulp Fiction, and is the part of the best scene of the film and almost steals the entire show.
Creed
(II) (2015)
Best Rocky movie in years but still not as good as the original one
29 November 2015
Outside of the original 1976 Rocky film, the Rocky franchise consists of some decent films but none can hold a candle to the original film which still holds up today nearly 40 years since it's release, however Creed is a very good film and earns the spot of the second best movie in the entire franchise. The film does so many things right, the gym politics between fighters is an interesting angle, the boxing choreography is the best the series has ever seen but still not at Raging Bull's (one of my favorite films notwithstanding sports or boxing movies genre) level of realism and accuracy of how boxing matches actually happen. The acting is phenomenal, Michael B Jordan will be a heavyweight (boxing puns!) in Hollywood in a few years, Sylvester Stallone however surprised a lot of people with a very touching and emotional portrayal of a man who has lost his family and is just waiting for death. Stallone's performance didn't surprise me because I have always known in certain situations this guy can deliver, watch the original Rocky movie, the guy was nominated for an Oscar, he absolutely deserved that nomination, there is more to him than Expendables franchise.
I would recommend everyone to check this out, as much as I liked this film I have to admit that it will not reach the iconic status of the original Rocky film. Primarily because the film had a few missteps in the editing department, the first half could have been shorter by 15 minutes or so, it was trying to be a cool funny film for everybody but I was glad that it ditched all that for intense heavy emotional drama in the second half. Another minor nitpick I have is I never felt as invested in the relationship of Adonis and Bianca compared to Rocky and Adrian, these films aren't about romance though so it's not a big deal. Further, I found Adonis Creed to be a lot like Apollo Creed smart, intelligent and charismatic, which is great and all but I prefer Rocky as the protagonist because he was a blue collared simple man who was not good with words but always got up after being knocked down.
I would recommend everyone to check this out, as much as I liked this film I have to admit that it will not reach the iconic status of the original Rocky film. Primarily because the film had a few missteps in the editing department, the first half could have been shorter by 15 minutes or so, it was trying to be a cool funny film for everybody but I was glad that it ditched all that for intense heavy emotional drama in the second half. Another minor nitpick I have is I never felt as invested in the relationship of Adonis and Bianca compared to Rocky and Adrian, these films aren't about romance though so it's not a big deal. Further, I found Adonis Creed to be a lot like Apollo Creed smart, intelligent and charismatic, which is great and all but I prefer Rocky as the protagonist because he was a blue collared simple man who was not good with words but always got up after being knocked down.
Crimson Peak
(2015)
A fine entry in the Gothic Horror Romance genre
26 October 2015
I don't really care much for horror but this movie is made by Guillermo Del Toro who is a genius when it comes to visual imagery and it was promoted as a Gothic Romance film with horror elements ala Francis Ford Copolla's underrated gem Dracula. This movie completely delivers on the visual front, the set designs are gorgeous, the high production values can be seen in every shot and every frame of the film, the house at Crimson Peak is so vibrant and a treat for the eyes. The story and the plot are not the strong points of this film and it's a problem which always haunts Del Toro's films, a bit predictable and clichéd. The movie has four prominent characters, Mia Wasikowska is the main lead who marries Tom Hiddleston and portrays the usual victim/detective in the horror film and serves as the audience's eyes and ears in the film, Charlie Hunnam is there for plot reasons and does nothing special in the film, Tom Hiddleston is great in this film, he portrays the handsome and charming but mysterious Thomas Sharpe who is torn between the love for his sister and his new wife; Jessica Chastain is the best thing in this film, she plays a Lady Macbeth type of a character and is constantly involved in a power struggle of sorts with the new woman in her brother's life. Siblings often hint of an incestuous relationship which is again a very interesting angle in the film. The chemistry is great as well and Jessica Chastain after how underused she was in The Martian proves why she is one of the best working female actors. However in the end the film got a bit too predictable but the climax was very good, I have watched worse movies in the same genre thought it was a decent time pass.
Bridge of Spies
(2015)
Solid but nothing spectacular
19 October 2015
I don't think I can criticize this movie, it's a Spielberg film after all, nearly flawlessly made, Tom Hanks is excellent as usual (but let's face it Tom Hanks has never acted poorly in ANY film EVER), mostly historically accurate as well. In fact if it would have been made by anyone else I may have liked it a lot more than I currently do, but alas Steven Spielberg has become a victim to his own success and ability. So all I can say is that while this movie is solid it's nothing spectacular, there are no great scenes but the story is well done and it's evenly represented, a couple of weeks ago I watched Edward Zwick's Pawn Sacrifice and found it to be very pro American and anti Russian, Spileberg of course is above all this pettiness and delivers a balanced film in which both sides are fairly represented. However, I was expecting the raw power that Spielberg delivered in Munich (last time he tackled the theme of espionage) but that's not what this movie is about, it feels a lot simpler and the stakes never feel high. Bridge of spies is a good movie and can go on the B-Side of Steven Spielberg's greatest hits along with The Terminal, Lincoln, War Horse etc. while the A side continues to have Schindler's List, Saving private Ryan, Raiders of the lost ark etc.
Sicario
(2015)
Even better than Prisoners!
16 October 2015
So after liking Black Mass my bias for crime films continues further here, I really liked Sicario, it was well directed, acted and the cinematography was beautiful. At the heart of Sciario, the plot is quite simple, a talented FBI rookie- Kate (Emily Blunt) gets called up to a higher up narcotics unit who claim that their fight makes a difference and if she wants to make a difference and start dealing with higher level cartel mafia they were the only unit which can help her out. The said unit led by Graver (Josh Borlin) has hired a special contractor Alejandro Gillick (Benecio Del Toro) of mysterious origins who is a smooth multilingual talker and a ruthless killer all rolled into one; basically James Bond without all the womanizing and silliness. Gillick and Graver take liberties during their missions and don't go about their business by the books in fact sometimes they seem bigger criminals than the drug cartel they fight against. Kate is an idealist and this disturbs her, but at the same time she also wants to make a difference, this theme is the meat and potatoes of the movie. I personally found this theme a lot more relatable than Denis Villeneuve's Prisoners' "I will fall to any depths for my child" theme because I am not a parent and but still old enough to realize that how many times I wish I could have done something which really mattered to the society I live in. Everyone's great here, Emily Blunt and Josh Brolin perform well but the man who is the spirit of this movie and it's namesake is the Sciario (meaning The Hit-man) himself- Benecio Del Toro, we find the Academy Award winner here in top form, I was reminded of the fact how physically imposing he was when he towered above Josh Brolin (who is a big guy himself); coupled with the fact he was so intimidating, this was a great casting choice and I hope to see a nomination for Del Toro in Best Supporting Actor category.
Some things I wish the film did better was if it dealt with the details, the nitty gritties which I enjoyed in Black Mass, what's the hierarchy of the cartel? How is the business carried out? How is the load distributed? Answers to these questions are lacking in this movie and it is details like this which truly elevate crime films and make them realistic. The ending was also a little too Gung-Ho for my liking, I also liked the fact while this film had better editing than Prisoners, the film still had some "fat" and could have been trimmed by fifteen minutes or so. Lastly, I am glad that this movie had a very unique well shot encounter between the Cartel and Narcotics unit it was in an underground tunnel of sorts and the shots alternated between night vision and normal vision while ominous music played in the background, good stuff, I like that Villeneuve has made this more visually appealing than his previous works.
Some things I wish the film did better was if it dealt with the details, the nitty gritties which I enjoyed in Black Mass, what's the hierarchy of the cartel? How is the business carried out? How is the load distributed? Answers to these questions are lacking in this movie and it is details like this which truly elevate crime films and make them realistic. The ending was also a little too Gung-Ho for my liking, I also liked the fact while this film had better editing than Prisoners, the film still had some "fat" and could have been trimmed by fifteen minutes or so. Lastly, I am glad that this movie had a very unique well shot encounter between the Cartel and Narcotics unit it was in an underground tunnel of sorts and the shots alternated between night vision and normal vision while ominous music played in the background, good stuff, I like that Villeneuve has made this more visually appealing than his previous works.
The Martian
(2015)
Not bad but is it good? Maybe. Great? Nope no way.
8 October 2015
Warning: Spoilers
To start off, I will say that I think this movie is quite decent and watchable, it may even be considered good if one's feeling generous, but it's far from being considered even close to great. To know why I think so, continue reading. The things to like about this movie are present on the surface, good acting, good cinematography, decent direction, Matt Damon plays a likable eternal optimist who actually makes a lot of effort to survive and I really was liking the film till the first half, some minor discrepancies here and there but nothing major, then the quality took a significant drop. At one point well into the second half a plan to rescue Mark Watney (Matt Damon) falls apart and the chips are down, NASA is cornered, and suddenly the Chinese step in to help out Watney....this is bad writing 101. What if the Chinese had failed, who else did you have? Russia? India? At that point it was clear that Mark Watney was not going to die because the writer doesn't want him to die; the writer will go to absurd lengths to keep him alive, and warp common sense if need be. Any film that introduces these "convenient act of god solutions" loses the faith of the audience; up til that point I was so emotionally invested in the film and suddenly it felt as if the film had betrayed my trust, and when that happened I stopped caring about Watney because what's the point? The film will pull out another ace out of their sleeve the next time the stakes are high. This is the biggest flaw of The Martian, no matter how accurate and scientific it was it was illogical (yes both are exclusive concepts to one another), and whenever the "shit was about to hit the ceiling" I knew everything was going to work out and that made this movie painfully predictable. Don't get me wrong I thought it was a decent film, there are a handful of tidbits I enjoyed, I liked that Ridley Scott imitated the surgery scene from his Prometheus but it's not even half as grueling as Prometheus' C-section self surgery, kind of a self appreciation sequence there but I enjoyed it. Also I liked Matt Damon's role he was earnest but don't expect anything at the level of Sandra Bullock in Gravity or Tom Hanks in Castaway (similar situation though not in space). The supporting cast is excellent as well, Chiwetel Ejiofor is the second lead and is fantastic in this film as Vincent Kapoor, a role originally meant for India's Irrfan Khan who had to pass on this because he was committed to multiple other films, that's a shame because he could have really left a mark here. Jessica Chastain is very good in her small role but her screen time is too brief, an actor of her caliber deserves better. Michael Pena played the usual big hearted lovable Mexican like he has done maybe 500 times before? One of the most talented Latino actor in Hollywood and he get's stuck with the same old shtick in every movie. Rest are OK and get the job done. I was also quite irritated by Community' s Donald Glover who is supposed to be a bright physicist but can't join two sentences together and acts like a complete buffoon which was almost physically painful to watch. I also wished the movie gave some screen time to Watney's parents, it was expressly said in the film they were close and it's odd to see the whole world cheering and rooting for Watney and his parents don't show up and their side of the story is not explored. The film also drew a chuckle from me when Sean Bean's character at NASA explains why a certain project was named Elrond (I am huge LOTR nerd). The good news is at least it's better than Exodus which was borderline unwatchable, and a very small improvement over Prometheus. The Martian is a classic example of a movie which has accurate science and still is illogical while some other films may have inaccurate science but are better movies than The Martian because they are logical and play within the rules set in their universe. In conclusion, I would recommend watching Gravity instead, a better film with better editing,acting, direction and tighter run time (91 minutes) compared to The Martian (141 minutes).
Pawn Sacrifice
(2014)
The usual mix of good and bad that haunt Edward Zwick films
25 September 2015
Edward Zwick has always been a guilty pleasure of mine, in my opinion he makes terribly flawed melodramatic films but they are very entertaining, engaging and likable because they take themselves seriously despite having logic flaws, case in point - Legends of the fall, The Last Samurai and Blood Diamond. While Pawn Sacrifice is not as good as these previous Edward Zwick films I mentioned it's still a very decent, watchable film. Tobey Maguire is in peak condition as the eccentric but genius chess legend Bobby Fischer, an Academy award nomination worthy performance, people have been paying attention to what he has been doing outside of Spiderman and the good work just keeps on coming. Liev Schreiber plays his nemesis and antagonist, the that time chess world champion Boris Spassky and delivers a good restrained performance compared to Maguire's loud and flashy Bobby Fischer. Good film but there are cheesy moments which have always hung over Edward Zwick's films like grim music playing when Russians win, and cheerful music plays when Americans win, I found this to be rather simple, childish and manipulative in an otherwise a decent film, the audience is smart enough to pick sides but Zwick insists on telling us which one to root for. There are some other daftly executed scenes in the film as well which hurts the film's quality. I spoke to my Dad after watching the movie and according to him, movie is still a bit restrained in showing how crazy Bobby Fischer got regarding antisemitism and conspiracy theories, truly a mad genius who did four chess moves ahead of his opponent and went to the hotel pool to relax while his opponent is still struggling to grasp what just happened. India's own Vishwanathan Anand has claimed Bobby Fischer to be the greatest chess player of all times.
Black Mass
(2015)
A return to form for Depp
21 September 2015
First things first, I am biased towards crime-drama films, I have grown up on Godfather, Goodfellas and Once upon a time in America and they have had a huge influence on my liking for crime movies. So my approach towards Black Mass was already a bit biased to begin with and how did Black Mass fare? It did great, i really liked it. I always note the level of accuracy in a film and this film nails the 70s-80's era, the hairstyles, the suits, the cars and the Boston accent (though Benedict Cumberbatch's Boston accent was a bit distracting). I must say the director Scott Cooper really studied all the Scorsese master crime films before approaching Black Mass and you can see the influence in the shots and sometimes even in the script (has some shades of Scorsese's The Departed, the voice-over narration in a crime film is a style made famous by Scorsese in Goodfellas and a scene is almost ripped straight off from Goodfellas). The film feels very authentic and it did an excellent job of making the audience understand it's backstory and aspects which a non Boston person (like me) could understand and appreciate like the turf war between Irish and the Italian Mafia and their natural hate and dislike for each other.
The lead actors are terrific, Johnny Depp showed some of his old acting chops which I thought he may have lost since he became a pirate; but he is in full form here, truly menacing and if you are in a room with his James "Whitey" Bulger, you will be too scared to make an eye contact with him and will try to slip out of the room asap, very intimidating. Joel Edgerton plays the second lead, he is the liaison between Bulger and the FBI so that Bulger gets protection and he gets to nail the Italian mafia, a common enemy of both the FBI and Bulger's Irish Winter Hill Gang. Edgerton's Agent Connolly plays a very interesting character and shows that it's not necessary that a criminal is out there committing crimes, sometimes the criminal is in the system manipulating it to suit his needs. The politics in the FBI maybe the dark horse aspect of this film that only crime drama veterans may appreciate, all the talking and manipulation (aka boring stuff to casual movie goer). Rest of the cast is good and do their roles well but nothing home to write about.
There are some scenes which were a tad bit over the top and some logical loopholes arose but trust me I did some light reading about the film after watching it and yes it is factually correct. It's an imperfect world sometimes even criminals get lucky and catch a break even after taking totally unnecessary risks or murder jobs. Lastly, I made the Scorsese comparison earlier but I don't think this film will have the longevity of Scorsese films, this film has a great script and some good scenes but the shots are never visually rich like Scorsese's, you still remember everyone's death scene from The Departed but Black Mass will not enjoy that long lasting appeal despite having an arguably better story. I can't wait to see the final cut of the film when it will be released, the original movie was nearly half an hour longer.
The lead actors are terrific, Johnny Depp showed some of his old acting chops which I thought he may have lost since he became a pirate; but he is in full form here, truly menacing and if you are in a room with his James "Whitey" Bulger, you will be too scared to make an eye contact with him and will try to slip out of the room asap, very intimidating. Joel Edgerton plays the second lead, he is the liaison between Bulger and the FBI so that Bulger gets protection and he gets to nail the Italian mafia, a common enemy of both the FBI and Bulger's Irish Winter Hill Gang. Edgerton's Agent Connolly plays a very interesting character and shows that it's not necessary that a criminal is out there committing crimes, sometimes the criminal is in the system manipulating it to suit his needs. The politics in the FBI maybe the dark horse aspect of this film that only crime drama veterans may appreciate, all the talking and manipulation (aka boring stuff to casual movie goer). Rest of the cast is good and do their roles well but nothing home to write about.
There are some scenes which were a tad bit over the top and some logical loopholes arose but trust me I did some light reading about the film after watching it and yes it is factually correct. It's an imperfect world sometimes even criminals get lucky and catch a break even after taking totally unnecessary risks or murder jobs. Lastly, I made the Scorsese comparison earlier but I don't think this film will have the longevity of Scorsese films, this film has a great script and some good scenes but the shots are never visually rich like Scorsese's, you still remember everyone's death scene from The Departed but Black Mass will not enjoy that long lasting appeal despite having an arguably better story. I can't wait to see the final cut of the film when it will be released, the original movie was nearly half an hour longer.
Tell Your Friends