Reviews

Why else call my review anything else when the only reason I've written one is to dissuade you from reading the other? Haewon does not simply "go all the way" with an abundance of people. We know of literally two people in her life that she has had sex with - both of them she said she cared deeply for. They happened in approximation to each other because she was vulnerable.

This film - Nobody's Daughter Haewon - is about that; a vulnerable woman. She is strong in ways - apparently more thoughtful and compassionate than her classmates despite their bitterness toward her - yet the world depletes her. Unlike the other main characters in the film, or more specifically the men in her life, she has no vice. She reads sometimes, but rarely drinks (only does so when very upset or very happy, so it happens twice in the movie) and never smokes (unlike her Professor, Director Lee who is essentially a chain smoker).

What we see is her strength, her clean way of living and delicate countenance moving through a world that only wants to pull at her. People want to sleep with her, but she's looking for more intimate connections - maybe even just a person to talk to. Yeah she sleeps with people after they wear her down enough, talk to her sweetly enough, and tell her they love her, but how many women can honestly not relate to that? That's kind of how the world works. At least it has in Hong Sang-soo's films up to this point; a filmmaker I consider to be the most real in depicting contemporary relationships. This just happens to be told from the perspective of a woman, and not some solipsistic male.

I just came out of this one and I think I'm in love. Before I write about the film, let me say that I went into this film with no expectations. I didn't know if it'd be funny or weird or mainstream or uncomfortable. As a fan of Harmony Korine, I know what he is and is capable of, I know he's a joker, but I know he's also a unique person who follows his vision to its end, whatever it may be, but you can never tell if you're going to get something you'll like. He gives you images and leaves you with thoughts. You don't have to think too much during his movies — he doesn't much either, so I doubt it having much subtext — but that doesn't mean there isn't something worth talking about when they're over. You may feel it's a little, or it may feel like a little, but if you can appreciate what he's trying to depict, there will always be life to talk about once a film of his concludes.

When I said you don't have to think much during the films of Harmony Korine, that is not to say you should not think about them afterward. If you've shown given him your time and patience and watch the film to its ultimate conclusion, I doubt anyone can say they didn't like or take something away from it. James Franco's performance seems pretty revered – I would call it amazing. Some sequences will stick with you — Korine himself says he doesn't really remember the plots of all the movies he's loved, instead sequences or scenes — like Britney Spears' "Everytime". Okay, I was in a theater of five — three of them left, one of them during that segment. But if you sit through it all you're certainly not going to forget it! And if you leave, well, you're certainly not going to forget it, but you will resent it for the time and money it took, but that's silly, don't resent that stuff. Just enjoy the movie you see.

The film could be divided into halves – the first being the prelude to Spring Break and Spring Break and the second with James Franco. During the film, and it's awful to think like this during movies because it only distracts you from the movie, I thought to myself "The direction is kind of shapeless, the juxtapositions could be sharper, but it does have edge and the repetition is effective, it's vivid and it's making me sick," in a good way. That could be how I could summarize the film for someone, if they wanted, but the direction finds itself in the end. Otherwise those words can be my basis of thought for this movie, which is an otherwise unique movie-going experience.

As I write and think more about the film (I just got back) its nonstop audio/visual indulgence is so effective. Spring Breakers is a film that is very telling for this generation, if a little insane with its concept. "Just do it like a video game :: This is paradise :: Spring break forever ya'll" things people today feel like. And of course, the repetition is done to unforgettable effect, but especially the line "You're scared, aren't ya? Scaredy cat" toward the end. Mmm… this is good cinema.

I guess what I wrote was too long to be put here, but I thought James Franco was simply amazing in his role and go into further detail about that here: https://forizzer69.wordpress.com/

Boy was he amazing.

Joshua Seftel's first film - a satire of memorable proportions - is about just as the title suggests: The corporations effect on War.

The film is about a mercenary (John Cusack) traveling to Turaqistan (not a real country, fyi) to help the American government 'get their message across' to Turaqistan's leaders. He meets a reporter (Marisa Tomei) and we all know what will ensue with a lonely man + a hot reporter. Somewhere in the mix, a pop star named Yonica Babyyeah gets thrown in. As Yonica is marrying one of Turaquistan's most important people (a son of the president), a subplot is created where the mercenary must watch over this star, well, somewhat. The film starts off with a lonely Cusack in a bar; no more than fifteen seconds later, the film hooks you. With it's amusing and intriguing insight on terrorism and politics, the film's running time blows by you. The film has a lot more action than I expected, with the occasional scene of war, well choreographed fights and just sporadic scenes of murder. Though the story isn't much deep, the simplicity of it all makes the film perfect for both the common man and movie critics alike.

In the final act of the film, the simplicity of it all turns very hostile and jumbled. I thought it was executed very well, but other may disagree, and I could understand why. Twist after twist is what the ending is all about, and like most films, it is a true hit/miss situation. Regardless, the three writers on the film (Mark Leyner, Jeremy Pikser & John Cusack) did a fantastic job creating a realistic and entertaining satire on today's situation overseas.

Joshua Seftel does an excellent job insuring the film's integrity; not reducing the material to the most redundant of films (which I was afraid would happen). Seftel crafted the film as perfectly as one could: he created a vibrant atmosphere, one that is both examines harsh reality and cartoonish falsities; - contrasting them perfectly - as well as making the film feel as if you were watching it all. Seftel really gets you involved in all of the action and it pays off completely. No missteps here. Hopefully, he takes on more directorial jobs, for he is one director to look out for.

From the inconsistent screenplay writers of Stand by Me and Jungle 2 Jungle, Bruce Evans & Raynold Gideon bring a film that will be either loved or hated by many people. The screenplay was interesting to say the least, and will get the audience's attention to see it, even if it's only for the concept. If you haven't heard of it (more people than you'd expect don't know what it is) it's about a man who has a voice in his head that causes him to commit murders. The voice in his head is also very intelligent, so throughout his whole life he hasn't gotten caught. As well as in intriguing plot, there are a few subplots that range from fun to boring, though the boring ones aren't in the film that long. Accompanying the screenplay, is the direction by Bruce Evans, one of the people who wrote the script. Now for once in a thriller/bloody film, the director does something that was unique, and cut a few parts out that you'd expect to be in the film, to make the audience think a little bit more than usual. He also constructed a lot of the scenarios very well, setting the moody, ponderous atmosphere that worked wonders.

The cast of the film, work very well together, and basically everyone has at the very least "decent" chemistry with one another. Personally, I felt like Danielle Panabaker, was the weakest link in the film, though her role was very small. Also, when I call her the "weakest link" that isn't exactly bad, considering everyone else was pretty good. Matt Schulze also has a meaningful, yet very small role in 1 of the better subplots. He plays a killer that is on the loose, that Demi Moore's character had put away, and now he is seeking revenge on her. Ruben Santiago-Hudson plays Moore's partner in the force, in yet another small role. He delivers some of the comedic moments that the film needed, to relieve some of the tension. I thought of him like I did the cop in The 25th Hour, there to be serious, and yet giving some funny moments to the audience. Now onto the bigger roles in the film, in my order of preference. Demi Moore plays Detective Tracy Atwood, the woman that is being hunted by her former arrestee, and while trying to keep alive, she is also looking for the "Fingerprint Murderer" (Kevin Costner). She is in the worst subplot of the film, her "divorce settlements", which is really boring, but comes to a nice conclusion, and doesn't last THAT long, so all is good. I'd say her role is basically like Jodie Foster's in The Silence of the Lambs, just very lower on the scale in terms of performance, just very similar characters. Dane Cook, surprised me in the film, taking on a dramatic role very well. Executing his emotions very well, as well as giving the audience their fill of his comedic lines, though he didn't have many of them. This year has had a trend of people that were being doubted on their acting abilities, and this year Dane Cook is 1 person who has stopped skeptics in their tracks. Kevin Costner, the star of the film is as powerful as he's been in a long while. Ever since J.F.K he's been performing like the average actor, and up until this film, I thought he was losing his touch. Then out of nowhere, in a film I saw out of boredom, he redeems himself. Playing a confused man, that is always calm, cool, and collected, he brings that subtle demonicness that we have seldom seen lately, which was lovely and refreshing. The person who makes this role complete, is none other than the man with the twisted roles, William Hurt. He is excellent in his supporting role, though there could be an argument that he is co-lead, seeing as whenever Costner is on the screen, 75% of the time so is he. He plays the murderous side of Mr. Brooks, and boy does he do a fabulous job. Some evil-funny scenes, some excellently perpetuated dialog, and just uncanny chemistry with Costner. Like his role in A History of Violence, but much longer, and much better, in my opinion.

The technical aspects of the film, like most thrillers are of many varieties. First, the art direction was beautiful. From the gigantic house, and beautiful interior of it, to rugged, cheap motel, it has a great variety of interesting insides. Along with this brash decor, comes with some traditional, yet lovely costume design. Full of street clothes, along with suits, and dresses for formal occasions. Pretty basic stuff, but nonetheless good. Cinematography, an important aspect, technically(if not the most important aspect) is very good in this film, and does a great job at going above and beyond. Instead of some of the bland tracking scenes, the director kept his director of photography busy by tracking in a different style, making scenes that could be considered boring, delightful, due to the camera work. The sound editing in the film is very well done. With intense situations that could cause deafness from overwhelmingness, to bullets being fired with sirens going off in the background, it's all done very well. The make up in the film, when used, is amazing. Blood, wounds, make up for occasions, all really well done, and sets the moods in whatever situation it is used in. The final technical aspect of the film, that is really worth talking about is the score, composed by Ramin Djawadi. While it makes the situations it's used in intense, it also has a tech-no feel to it, that makes it fast paced, and heart racing, as well as making the scene seems like something interesting will rise up. It is used especially well at the end of the film.

This over used concept of a murderer getting through the legal system, causing mass havoc among the opposition, was actually not as cliché as I thought it would be. Sure, it has basically all of the elements that makes a decent, clichéd murder story, but it also has a few things most of them don't have. For instance, excellent chemistry with the 2 predominant characters, this resulted in the story being much more interesting, and therefore resulted in a better product. Another instance would be a few of the nice little plot twists at the end, and how it wrapped up so well. Through and through, this original screenplay by Daniel Pyne and Glenn Gers, was average at most, with a few exceptions. Gregory Hoblit, the director of the film, did a very nice job devising a well made film, that contained a great atmosphere, as well as a good take on the decent script.

If you go into this film, expecting Anthony Hopkins to be lead, think again. He is in the film about as much as he was in Silence of the Lambs, give a few minutes. Though even with this minuscule screen time, he achieves what many actors cannot, in a full leading role. The intensity and wit of the Hannibal Lecter seem to have stuck with him, because he delivers a performance within that range, yet again. Mr. Hopkins also has a lot of those scenes where it wouldn't feel right if it were just anyone in the role, because he has this presence with him, that is just so dreadful, yet friendly at the same time, very creepy indeed. David Stratharin isn't as major as I would've liked him to be, such a talented actor in a role that could be as short as 12 minutes, though what he does with those 12 minutes is pretty impressive nonetheless. The way he can inflict the cold hard truth upon someone, in such an honest, yet cruel way is just brilliant. Billy Burke is basically the clichéd detective at the scene, with a temper... how original. Rosamund Pike is alright, I suppose. There isn't really much to critique on her. She delivered her lines well, some of them came off really cheesy, and that's never good. But the lack of chemistry Gosling and herself had, was made up by Hopkins and Gosling, for sure. Now the for the true lead of the film, Ryan Gosling. With a variety of emotions, and good character depth, portrayed to a tee, he is consistent with his performances. See, the thing with Gosling is, you really cannot anticipate what he will do with the character, which always makes it a treat to see him perform with such heart. He often had such facial expressions that would leave you laughing, intentionally, and it's always good for some tension to be shut away by some comedy. Overall, the dynamic duo were exactly what all Thrillers need, true emotion.

The technical aspects of the film were seldom effective. The film constantly riddled with a barrage of reused and remade "spine tingling" scores. The loud bang before a moment of possible terror was used once or twice in the film, which just made me roll my eyes in displeasure. The film editing was pretty good, not much to ponder about it though. Nothing really to take the viewer to different times, and places seamlessly. The art direction was very nice, with the limited creativity they could of had with it. Beautiful court room, outside of the Court, the lovely mansion, and the busy lawyer firm. This also coincided well with the costumes, which were manly just comprised of suits, and dresses. The best technical aspect of the film without a doubt in my mind had to of been the Cinematography. This was brilliantly done, and definitely a contender for the end of the year. Going story to story, from near the pool to the inside of the house, it was just so beautiful to watch.

Lasse Hallstrom's latest "Oscar Contender" bring what his previous films in this decade have yet to accomplish, a witty but yet serious, and well devised product (haven't seen An Unfinished Life or Casanova). The direction, is mediocre to be honest. There is nothing too special about it in any way, shape or form. This was really the only flaw in this film, mind you, it is a big one. The screenplay, adapted by William Wheeler, while still historically accurate from my knowledge, is very funny. Keeping the viewer laughing, while on the edge of their seat. Delightfully surprised by how well the script was made, considering this being only his second script ever written, and the other being a Vince Vaughn film.

Onto the great ensemble cast of the film. Eli Wallach, a underappricated as a talented actor can get, plays Noah Dietrich, an operative for the "eccentric billionaire Howard Hughes". In a limited role, he gives an X type performance, but with much less dialouge, and with the feel of Michael Gambon's latest role, in The Good Shepherd. Stanley Tucci plays the head of the company that Gere is trying to sell his faux auto-biography to. Again, in another slightly bigger, but still a limited role, he entices the audience with his very powerful presence, but also tends to whimper away from a situation he cannot handle, like most men. Julie Delpy plays the on and off girl of Gere, named Nina Van Pallandt, an actress/singer. Her role is filled with the narcissistic stereotype that wannabe actresses thing that they are better than everyone else. In this performance, you can see it, not at it's maximum, but enough that makes you want to retch in disgust. She does a pretty good job in this role, that is borderline supporting. One of two definite supporting actress performances in the film go to Hope Davis, as the quirky associate of the McGraw-Hill. With excitement in some scenes, and disbelief in others, it is a well layered performance. Now, the supporting actress that stole almost every scene she was in, Marcia Gay Harden. She plays the wife of Clifford Irving, and just wow. She nails the accents she must use throughout. She also demonstrates a variety of emotions throughout, all with the accent, pretty much flawlessly. A very impressive performance in the film, and even more so considering I thought she was going to be a third tier character in the film. Now for the 2 big guns of the film. Alfred Molina plays Gere's partner in crime, Dick Susskind. Very easy to excite, either in a good way, or in a bad way, and very eager to get rich quick. In a comedic performance on first impression, it slowly becomes very rich in drama, beneath first glance. A great performance, and certainly one of the best from Molina. Onto the head of the film, Richard Gere. Alright, first I have to say, he releases his best performance to date, in this film, without a doubt. If you watch this film, and aren't impressed with his performance an hour into the film, don't worry, his performance becomes dynamic a little into the second half of the film, where it is predominately him on the screen. Not going into details, but his performance in the second half is just remarkable, and hopefully you will find great pleasure in his performance.

Alright, the technical aspects of the film are pretty good, nothing too amazing, besides one exception. This exception is for the Film Editing. It goes through time very well, often giving very good transitions as well. The score by Carter Buwell is very nice, but nothing too unique. The cinematography is well done in a lot of scenes, and might actually clinch a nomination, thus far. The costume design is very bland, consisting of a lot of suits, and basically that's all, aside from a few nice little dresses on the women. All in all, this film was very well made, aside from a few little weak points.

So, I've seen this movie for the second time, and it is still as effective as the 1st time I saw it, about 3 months ago. This is a recommended watch to all fans of either : Martin Scorsese, Matt Damon, Jack Nicholson, Leonardo DiCaprio, Mark Wahlberg, Great Gangster Film or Great Cinema in General. In Martin Scorsese's 3rd film of this decade and 3rd straight film starring Leonardo DiCaprio he delivers only as he could. Leo and him have shown that they are an unstoppable force in the film industry, throwing out their (most likely) 3rd straight Best Picture contender. William Monahan does an excellent job adapting this film from the original Japanese films the Internam Affair Trilogy. He did such a great job recreating this film for America and other audiences alike. The most unlikely of events happened, the audience and critics alike loved this remake, unlike so many other films that failed to reach that goal. Combining the best of the best from the trilogy, he creates 1 of the Best Adapted Screenplays of the Year. Surprisingly this is only his 2nd screenplay written in his career (the 1st being Kingdom of Heaven). Though the fact that this film contains vituperation, it is astounding the potency is not lost or even degraded in the process.

Mr. Scorsese's direction of this transcending cinematic masterpiece. He has total control of such a mob-thriller for the 1st time since Goodfellas and boy does he make it count. With perfectly placed violence, excellent pacing and fantastic scenes of intensity, it is no wonder why he is 1 of the moguls of Direction, for last generation, this generation and hopefully for the next generation to come. This is probably the 1st time I have ever mentioned this but, Ellen Lewis has done an amazing job casting the perfect actors for the roles they were placed. The best cast I have come across in a long time, and all thanks to Madame Lewis. After re watching this film I finally see what was so good about Mark Wahlberg. He does a really good job, but still, is #3 or #4 from the film, in my opinion. Though he does a great job with his anger and rage it is more surprising that in his midst of rage he is hilarious as well. The perfect combination, glad to see others enjoy his performances as well. Vera Farmiga is having her breakthrough year with 2 great performances, the other being in Running Scared. She is the extra subplot in the film, and could've been left out, but without her the emotional longevity is much less effective. She has great facial expressions and good use of tone in her lines. Nothing too spectacular, and in my personal opinion, she was better in her other film of 2006. Matt Damon, everyones precursor for Best Actor in a Leading Role in the summer, and now, is not in anyone's mind or on anyone's lists. Sadly overshadowed by 2 or 3 other men in the film did nothing for his performance. He was good, great portrayal of emotions, fantastic important scenes of tension, but for some reason, I felt it could've been stronger. Not saying he doesn't do a good job, but he could've expressed more rage in certain scenes, and more depression is other crucial scenes as well. Anyways, despite being under minded throughout the whole Award Season, he still her 1 of the better performances of the year. The funniest performance of the film easily comes to Ray Winstone who is also having a great year, starring in Breaking and Entering, The Propostion and the TV version of Sweeney Todd. He does a great job as Mr.French, delivering every scene with either a great punchline or a wonderful scene of emotion or action. Jack Nicholson is the most experienced actor of the lot, the Grandfather of Cinema some say. His performance was no less that excellent, playing Frank Costello a modern bad guy and a memorable character for years to come. He stole a lot of the scenes he was in and rightfully so. The fact that his performance was able to convince many that he was the character is fantastic. Many solid scenes, some funny, some intense but mostly all effective. Leonardo DiCaprio, the best performance in the film without a doubt, proving he will be 1 of the Best Actors in years to come. Teaming up with Martin Scorsese is the best thing he's ever done, and it has made him a sensational success. His performance is 1 to be reckoned with at the Oscars, due to the fact that he massively exceeds expectations, and if it weren't for Forest Whittaker, he would quite possibly be the #1 contender for the coveted prize.

I am definitely looking forward to The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt when it is released in 2008, marking ScoCaprio's 4th collaboration this decade. The film editing of this movie is very significant in the pacing of the film, seeing as the 150 minutes passed by seamlessly due to it. The score is very beautiful, but yet, does not make my list for Best Original Score, though it is receiving some very nice praises among critics and "Buzzers" alike. The cinematography is very nice, but nothing to spectacular. Very important in some scenes but not important in a lot of them. The make-up, though minor, is not insignificant in the least. Majorly important in fight scenes, it does what it needed to do to create the utmost effective effect.

This movie has gotten me completely excited about Letter from Iwo Jima now, the other side of this film. Clint Eastwood, just, wow, he did an excellent job on this film. Proving that he will be a force to be dealt with at this years Academy Awards, and for many years to come. He magnificently captured the soldiers and pandemic, that was the falseness of the raising of the Flag and the picture that revolutionized the American community. I never knew this had actually occurred during World War 2, but this movie has opened my eyes about some of the travesties that had happened during WWII. (I do know quite a bit, but I never knew about the little things like this). Yet again, Paul Haggis has shown that he has brilliant writing skills, and I wouldn't me surprised if he got nominated yet again... for the 3rd year in a row. He did his research on this topic very well, and despite all the haters and nay sayers he should get some recognition.

In all honesty, there was absolutely no way that you could consider Ryan Phillipe the leading actor. He was in the film as much as Jesse Bradford or Adam Beach. He did a good job, but he wasn't (imo) Oscar worthy, because there are more people deserving of the role, at least 8. His interpretation of John Bradley was quite interesting to say the least. Maybe all of the very high emotional scenes was what made him seem Oscar Worthy. Jesse Bradford was very good in the film, and I actually mistook him for Adam Beach for at least half the film, due to my lack of research on the actors. I was like "Why would people think HE is Oscar Worthy?". But irrelevant, he did do a good job on his speech to the American people. His 'hero' speech was just brilliant, though only a few lines long I'd say. Paul Walker did a good job in his very small supporting role as Hank Hansen. Other good small supporting roles were portrayed by : Joseph Cross as Franklin Sousley, Jamie Bell as 'Iggy' and Barry Pepper as Mike Strank. These 3 people were apart of the platoon that had also had the 3 main characters. Adam Beach was excellent in this movie, and DOES deserve some applause for his great transformation into Ira Hayes. He did such a good job on so many levels, portraying depressed, overjoyed, angry, drunk and discomforted very well. He, even through all of the competition, does deserve at least a nomination.

The film editing of this movie was absolutely magnificent. This is pretty much what made the movie what it is, going back and forth between war and the trauma that the soldiers had sustained during their 35 days at Iwo Jima. The visual effects were wonderful, perfect even. You can't really get this close to war without being in it, because this film sucks you in and doesn't let you go until the credits role. The make-up was beautifully done, while being horrendously disturbing at the same time. Seeing all of the war tragedies and "executions" being performed is just cringe-worthy and absolutely crucial to the film. The sound is absolutely perfect, considering that a lot of bullets, bombs, and even fireworks are going around as the war time flash backs occur. A top contender for the Oscar's. Finally the score of the film was haunting, and placed in the proper scenes and not overused what-so-ever.

I saw the Preview Last Night and I got to tell you that I really enjoyed this film. Too many people are underestimating these brilliant actors, just from what they have seen on the trailers. Kevin Spacey seemed like a horrible Lex Luthor from what the Commercials but out, but in fact he does a great job portraying Luthor in this rendition of Superman. Brandon Routh did an outstanding job as Clark Kent/Superman. So did Sam Huntington as Jimmy Olsen, without Sam in the film I'd think that it would have been weaker. Just because Sam brings basically all the comedy to the film. Also, James Marsden does a decent job as Richard White, Lois Lane's boyfriend. Child actor Tristan Lake Leabu did a good job as Jason White, Lois' and James' child. It was also nice to see Marlon Brando in the role Jor-El for 1 last time, that was really unique. The only thing about the film that falls short is Kate Bosworth, because compared to all the other actors in the film she is nothing. Her acting does fall short at times, but not so much as too ruin or bring down the movie. The only flaw of this film would have to be that it is 20 Minutes longer than it should have been. Finally, the effects from Superman Returns, were so amazing and astounding, that you will only get to see such magnificent entertainment from this film, if you see it in Theatres.