Dominatio Per Malum

Promise (2005) 5/10

Chen Kaige’s clunky and ridiculously over the top megaflop The Promise is one of those rare movies that is so obviously and risibly bad that it might actually be good.

I was actually quite shocked that Chen Kaige directed this crap. Was this the same person who directed Farewell My Concubine and The Emperor and the Assassin ? Did Wong Jing somehow shadow direct this, since it has all of Wong Jing’s hijinks and kitsch? I half suspect that Chen Kaige was on crack when he directed this. Or mabye, this was exactly what he wanted, a satire on big budget mega-epics by satrising the whole film. Whatever the intent, The Promise cannot by any measure be considered a good film. All the overwhelming bad press about the film is justified, and i don’t even know where to begin.

The script is an inscrutable mess, about some metaphysical thing called Wu Ji, or “The Promise”, whatever that means. No attempt is made to explain it, so the audience has to take it as it is. Put in a main protaganist(Jang Dong Kun) who runs like Flash Gordon, and Nicolas Tse as a vengeful dude with the most ridiculous looking finger-wand and you get a sense of how fucking unrealistic the whole thing is. The costumes, especially the red crimson armor looks awfully tacky, although the use of colors is one of the motiffs of the film. Dialogue is often cliched, and character development is non-existant. In fact, you could even market The Promise as a comedy, see that so many of the scenes are so ridiculous as to be laughable instead of attaining any dramatic weight.

The camp factor is so high that most of the actors don’t even bother to act credibly and for most parts go over the top. Jang Dong Kun as the slave puts his best Forest Gump impression, while Hiroyuki Sanada hams it up as the prideful general. Nicolas Tse looks positively like a doofus welding the dumbest looking prop in the film, while Cecelia Cheung does her bestest damsel in distress act. By the halfway mark, where Jang actually runs backwards in time, if you still haven’t stopped watching or laughed till you drop, it means that you have probably embraced the campiness of the whole film.

This is one film where it IS necessary to leave your logic and brain behind before watching. Otherwise it will be a most agonising expericence. The CGI is so-so. Some scenes looks positively mesmerising, whilst in other scenes, the CGI fails to meet the mark. Visually, the film is a feast, and amidst the crappy everything, there are little scenes of beauty such that you wonder if it is the work of a schizophrenic cinematographer, intermixing visual brilliance at one scene with crass nonsense. Emotionally, most audiences cease to care by the halfway mark, that is if they don’t laugh themselves to death. The action isn’t all that bad either, or maybe its because my standards have dropped after watching Jackie Chan’s The Myth.

Ultimately, while every single indicator reveals that The Promise is a stinker through and through, i somehow enjoyed this fluff well enough not to condemn it completely. It’s a totally over the top and absolutely trashy pieced of film making that ironically endures because of how godawful it is. Ed Wood would have been proud.

The CNY holiday gives me a brief respite to catch my breath and to finally jot down my thoughts on some recent viewings…

Heroic Duo (2003) 4/10

This derivative film has a lousy plot and rips off better movies like Silence of the Lambs. Watch only if desperate.

Hustle and Flow(2005) 5/10

It hustles, but it don’t flow. Your enjoyment of this film is directly proportional to how much you can stand rap/hip-hop. In my case, i wan’t impressed.

Almost Famous(2000) 8/10

Sharp, funny and incisive look at the 70s, as seen through the eyes of a young boy with a domineering mother. Add in a dysfunctional, middling rock band and the result is fresh and most enjoyable.

Princess Raccoon(2005) */10 Unrated

Zany, kitsch and totally wacky. I watched it only because of Zhang Ziyi. Its sorta like a musical. Anyway, Seijun Suzuki is messing with my head. I couldn’t finish the film, and i didn’t understand stretches of it. Actually i hated it. But i will grudgingly admit its visual artistry and that Ziyi looks great here. I’m not going to give a rating because i frankly don’t know what to think of it.

Brokeback Mountain (2005) 7/10

Brokeback Mountain is one of those films that just speaks to you. Yes, its the much talked about “gay cowboy movie”, but to call it that is akin to saying that Schindler’s List was “just a Holocaust movie”, or that 2001: A Space Odyssey is “just a sci-fi movie”. Amidst the scenic backdrop of Brokeback Mountain lies an achingly beautiful story, easily the best romance story of 2005, done with the attention to the the little nuances of human nature that Ang Lee is so adept at.

At its heart lies a simple story of love lost, two hearts forced apart by their own fears. It is a simple tale, with hardly any Oscar-bait moments, and yet the sum of these little parts are startling. Its the little movements that are telling: the gaze averted, the awkward silence, the stolen kiss. Subtle, and yet it says so much.

First, i’d just say that i absolutely loved the musical score. It has that right mix of melancholy. And yes, the cinematography and the sights of Brokeback make for a truly visual treat. But it is the acting that soars. A solid ensemble performance, every role was pitch perfect, especially the supporting roles. Anne Hathaway and Michelle Williams, as the wives of the two protagonists, make full use of their brief screen time. Their relationships with the men is telling in what it shows and what it does not show. One particularly memorable scene has Anne Hathaway Michelle Williams calling on Heath Ledger’s bluff. There is this sense of controlled anguish, juxtaposed with Ledger’s angry denial that makes the scene quietly explosive. Or another scene: Anne Hathaway Michelle Williams at the window, catching sight of the clandestine liasions of Gyllenhaal and Ledger, but averts her gaze and just keeps mum about it. Ang Lee could have chosen to let the character break into hysterics, as many lesser directors may be tempted to do, but he smartly avoids taking the easy way out and lets the tension speak for itself.

And i would be remiss if i did not mention the performances of Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal. We can probably see shades of ourselves in their characterization. Ledger’s reticence as a foil to Gyllenhaal’s exuberance, as well as that undercurrent of yearning that they perfectly capture. Both of them put in a fine performance, but i’d say the single best moment in the film for me was when Ledger finds that bloodied shirt and keeps it as a memento. To Ledger, it was a shirt; to the rest of us, it could be any trinket that we keep, perhaps to mourn a love lost, or a memory cherished. The feeling that they are living a false life, a parody of what they could have been is something that resonates as a theme in the whole movie. And that speaks out to the audience, who can relate to the feeling of conforming, of not doing things because they are afraid of disapproval. And that, precisely, is why Brokeback Mountain is such a good movie.

But, it is not a great movie. In a sense, Brokeback Mountain is a victim of its own hype. Those who watch it expecting some kind of carthartic experience, or some powerful message will leave sorely disappointed. Ang Lee takes his time with the characterization, sculpting the nuances and as a result, the film isn’t exactly compelling in the conventional sense. The movie does plod at times, and sometimes i feel that his method of using a fade to black to end every scene to be quite annoying- it would have been more effective just to cut to the next scene. Generally, i felt the second half of the film to be more enjoyable that the beginning, which inevitably suffers because time is spent on exposition and setting the backdrop of the film, while the second half manages to explore the interpersonal dynamics of the characters. I suspect that many who watch it based on awards hype will simply be bored. This is not a film for everyone, not because it is a film on homosexuality, but because it is a bona fide arthouse film. Those who expect stuff to happen will be bored by the pacing of the movie. Watching such “slow” movies is an acquired taste: if you didn’t like Broken Flowers or Sideways, then you should probably just skip this.

Some have called Brokeback Mountain Ang Lee’s greatest film. I think they need to watch more Ang Lee films. I’d say that Brokeback Mountain is one of Ang Lee’s lesser films. Relatively, of course. Ang Lee’s bad day is many other director’s good day. As one of the most talented asian directors, Ang Lee has always had that knack of making characters tick. His films are character, rather than plot driven, and those not familiar with his style may find Brokeback Mountain lacking in the plot department. At the end of the day, the main reason that Brokeback mountain wasn’t as engaging to me was because it isn’t quite as good as similar films which have tackled the subject. Just as sci fi adventures will always be measured against Star Wars, and mob films will inevitably draw comparison to The Godfather, the best film that has tackled the issue of homosexuality remains Wong Kar Wai’s 1997 film Happy Together. If Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger were good in Brokeback Mountain, i’d have to say that Tony Leung and Leslie Cheung were awesome in Happy Together. And as a romance, as a film about unfulfiled love, i’d have to point to Wong Kar Wai’s In The Mood For Love as the film to watch.

In the end, Ang Lee’s Brokeback Mountain is a flawed masterpiece, a solid mediation on unfulfiled love and supressed desires. It has its moments of brilliance, but it is done in by its agnonisingly slow pace.

My general mood on CNY eve when i was doing my memo.

Just in case i’m too busy in the leadup to CNY, which i’m inclined to believe so. So, try not to get to vexed by life and enjoy its little pleasures.

Nikos Kazantzakis, Zorba The Greek (Scribner, 1996) at 120:
“I remembered one morning when I discovered a cocoon in the bark of a tree, just as the butterfly was making a hole in its case and preparing to come out. I waited a while, but it was too long appearing and I was impatient. I bent over it and breathed on it to warm it. I warmed it as quickly as I could and the miracle began to happen before my eyes, faster than life. The case opened, the butterfly started slowly crawling out and I shall never forget my horror when I saw how its wings were folded back and crumpled; the wretched butterfly tried with its whole trembling body to unfold them. Bending over it, I tried to help it with my breath. In vain. It needed to be hatched out patiently and the unfolding of the wings should be a gradual process in the sun. Now it was too late. My breath had forced the butterfly to appear, all crumpled before its time. It struggled desperately and, a few seconds later, died in the palm of my hand. That little body is, I do believe, the greatest weight I have on my conscience. For I realize today that it is a mortal sin to violate the great laws of nature We should not hurry, we should not be impatient, but we should confidently obey the eternal rhythm.”

Channelnewsasia.com

Took’s appeal dismissed, death term upheld for Huang Na’s murder

That the death sentence is upheld comes as no surprise. What is interesting though, is that it was not a unanimous judgement. Now, i can probably count on one hand the total number of Court of Appeal Judgements that i have read which was not unanimous. So seeing dissenting Court of Appeal judgements is a rare thing indeed, and occurs only once in a very blue moon.

As for the clemency appeal, that is a forgone conclusion. There is like, only one case in memorable history that the President has ever excercised his right to grant clemency. You are more likely to strike lottery than succeed in a clemency appeal.

Anyways, back work. I am totally swamped by work and i expect this sorry state of affairs to last til CNY, which is when my deadline ends.

“He deserves death.”
“Deserves it! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be to eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the very wise cannot see all ends.” - Gandalf, to Frodo in LOTR

Hollywood Bitchslap - Hyperbole For Sale: How Earl Dittman And The Studios Have Destroyed Film Criticism

See also this.

There are reviews, and then there are reviews. Have you ever wondered how such risibly bad films like, um Cheaper By The Dozen 2 could even have a positive quote on its ad? Wonder no more.

The trick is not just to see what the quote is, but who is the critic making the quote. A quote by A.O Scott, Ebert, Roeper means something. You may not agree with their reviews but they at least have some quality control and don’t easily give lavish praise unless it is really good. On the other hand, a quote by Earl Dittman means that the film probably sucks. It probably means studios can’t get a gushing quote from a credible critic and instead rely on such hacks to cheat the uninformed movie goer. I mean, its pefectly fine to go against popular critical opinion and say that something was good. I myself enjoy my fair share of films labelled as rotten, such as Aeon Flux, Equilibrum, Melinda and Melinda etc. But i won’t go as far as to proclaim Aeon Flux as a “mastepiece” or call it an Oscar contender (C’mon, who are you kidding).

When a reviewer so blatantly gives such gushing praise so indiscriminately, it is akin to fraud. And for a public service anouncement, there is even a list here of critics whom you should read with a bagful of salt.

Google Resists U.S. Subpoena of Search Data - New York Times

Google has Gumption. Bravo!

Once again, instead of studying and doing my research project, i shall verily procrastinate and instead go off-topic. Given that we are in the middle of the TV season (US Tv season, that is. Watching Singaporean TV dramas qualifies as a cruel and unusual punishment), i present to you the mid season TV review. Sadly, because the good shows seem to get canned in the first season (Firefly, Jack & Bobby) i am only actively watching 3 TV series. Note: This is a Mid Season Review, and my opinions of the season may change after the whole season has ended.

Smallville Season 5

After the Disaster that was Season 4, Season 5 seems to be a huge improvement. Although nowhere near the peak of Season 3, the episodes thus far have been decent, and the recent christmas episode titled Lexmas was quite possibly the best Smallville episode in a very, very long time. Still i was quite disappointed that the episode after Lexmas did not build on its momentum and return to average levels. Overall Grade : B

Lost Season 2

In Season 1, Lost cruised with consistently solid episodes, until the last few episodes of the season, where it suddenly amped up the stakes and finished with an exhilarating finale. The first few episodes of Season 2 start with a bang, with each episode trying to outdo the previous. Although the past few episodes have sort of returned to normal pacing, Lost maintains its compelling edge and remains one of the few bastions of quality scriptwriting on TV, in the sea of increasingly bad reality TV. Overall Grade: A

Desperate Housewives Season 2

Still as darkly funny as ever, the lives of the women of Wisteria Lane continue to intrigue us. Having said that, some of the plotlines, espicially the subplot felt forced and Season 2, while continually solid seems a tad weaker than Season 1. Still, one of my favourite scenes is the prison bickering between Gabrielle and Carlos over several episodes, and their verbal cut-and-thrust is more deadly and exciting than an actual duel. Overall Grade: B+

Wallace & Gromit : Curse of the Were Rabbit (2005) 7/10

How can you not like a film with cute bunnies and even a sly nod to King Kong? Better than Chicken Run. Claymation certainly has its appealing side.

Good Night, And Good Luck (2005) 7/10

George Clooney’s second directorial effort is a clear improvement from Confessions of A Dangerous Mind. The acting and script is solid, although the Patricia Clarkson subplot seemed superfluous. David Strathairn deserves the accolades, but i’d say that the true star is Joseph McCarthy in all of his fire and brimstone fury. A smart move to film in black and white, the film is a compelling look at Murrow’s battle against McCarthy.

Temptress Moon (1996) 7/10

Despite the flak that this film has drawn, i’m going to be a dissenting voice and say that the overall experience has been good. Lush visuals, courtesy of Christopher Doyle and solid performances by Gong Li and Leslie Cheung. Yes, their roles are needlessly stereotypical and one-diemensional, but they handled it well given the constraints. Granted, this is not one of director Chen Kaige’s better works, and he is very much handicapped by poor scripting and a lack of plausibility.

82% of A*Star scholars had GPA of 3.8 and above - Jan 13, 2006

82% of A*Star scholars had GPA of 3.8 and above
I REFER to the letter by Dr Huang Shoou Chyuan, ‘Why top S’pore students aren’t world beaters’ (ST, Jan 10).
Contrary to his view, the vast majority of A*Star scholars are able to attain the high academic standards set.
Currently, A*Star has 141 National Science Scholarship (NSS) scholars pursuing their Bachelor of Science (BSc) studies at the best universities abroad.
One hundred and twenty-seven NSS BSc scholars sat for their examinations in Spring 2005 and 104, or 82 per cent, achieved Grade Point Average (GPA) scores of 3.8 and above, or 1st Class Honours; 47 among the 104 attained the maximum GPA scores of 4.0 or 1st Class Honours with grade A or equivalent in all subjects.
Twenty scholars, or 16 per cent, attained GPA scores from 3.6 to below 3.8, or 2nd Class Upper Honours. Only three scholars, or 2 per cent, attained GPA scores of below 3.6.
A*Star’s NSS, launched in July 2001, is the only scholarship programme in Singapore which funds a combined programme of overseas undergraduate (BSc) and graduate (PhD) studies.
The three-year NSS BSc scholarship funds the pursuit of undergraduate studies in Science and Engineering at an overseas university of the scholar’s choice from our select list of universities.
These select universities are top-tier institutions in specific biomedical science or engineering areas, and have attained their high ranking due to the excellent quality of their education.
Most overseas universities also require scholars to take humanities courses to broaden their education, in addition to advanced science or engineering courses necessary for graduate studies.
For example, Mr Vijay Chandrasekhar, from the NSS (BSc) 2002 batch, completed his studies in three years with GPA of 3.97 and graduated with a BSc in Electrical and Computer Engineering, a Minor in Economics and a Master of Science in Electrical and Computer Engineering from Carnegie Melon University. He is now back for his one-year research attachment and will proceed for his PhD studies in August/September.
Scholars who complete their BSc studies with a GPA of 3.8 and above will return home for a one-year research attachment, and are then considered for funded PhD programmes at top graduate schools abroad.
A*Star sets a high academic standard - 3.8 GPA and above - to ensure that our scholars get into the very best PhD programmes in top universities. Only those with excellent academic scores and specific interest in research will be funded fully for these top PhD programmes.
Scholars are also assessed on their interest and ability to undertake original research through an eight-week research attachment completed during their undergraduate studies, as well as through a one-year research internship at an A*Star research institute after their BSc studies.
Scholars who achieve a GPA score of above 3.6 but below 3.8 are individually reviewed by a Select Panel. They may be considered for PhD programmes locally, to benefit from closer support and supervision, under the A*Star Graduate Scholarship programme.
This programme is tenable at NUS and NTU, and through select joint local and overseas PhD programmes, such as the A*Star-Imperial College PhD Partnership (UK), the A*Star-University of Illinois PhD Partnership (US) and the A*Star-Karolinska Institut PhD Partnership (Sweden).
Thus, 98 per cent of our NSS-BSc scholars qualify for either overseas or local support for their PhD programmes. The 2 per cent who fail to attain a GPA of 3.6 will be offered administrative and executive positions at A*Star.
Investment in human capital is a long-term effort and high standards must be maintained.
Timothy Sebastian
Director
A*Star Graduate Academy

This letter is, i believe, a typical beauracratic response that could easily have been written by a machine. It has all the hallmarks of a beauracrat : The letter evades the pertinent points raised by Dr Huang, goes on and on in an almost vainglorious tone and trots out a phlethora of statistics to overwhelm the reader.

“There are three types of lies - lies, damn lies, and statistics“- attributed to various sources, among them Mark Twain and Benjamin Disraeli.

The response by Timothy Sebastian focuses on how most of the scholars are able to meet the 3.8 GPA requirement, and i have no doubt about the competancy of the scholars. Certainly i believe that most of them have the capability to do so. But Tim misses the point that Dr Huang raises.

It is not so much that scholars cannot make the 3.8 requirement, but the necessity of the 3.8 requirement that is questioned. There is the very vaild point raised that this obsession with specific grades that stifles creativity and passion. This, Dr Huang argues, prevents scholars from taking they subjects they really want, they subjects that best suit him in favour of subjects that they can score in. A perfectly pragmatic choice, when you consider that their scholarship is at stake. And in this debate about why Singapore students are among the top in academic grades in their schoolyears, but fail to be “world beaters” in their adulthood is precisely because of this macabre obsession with grades and perfect scores.

A* Star’s policy of 3.8 is in itself an artificial controll that prevents the scholars from taking challenging courses in favour of safer, managable courses: a policy that looks good on paper, but is ultimately counterproductive in the long run. In fact, this policy is deeply reflective of the Singaporean psyche regarding the obsession with A grades. To a certain extent, such pragmatism is also seen in the education system, where subjects that are perceived as being difficult to score (literature) or of little practical value (literature, philosophy, art etc) is sidelined in favour of “core” subjects like mathematics.

The requirement of a 3.8 GPA is a damocle’s sword that hangs over the heads of scholars when they choose modules to take. I do not dispute A* Star’s need to require accountability on the part of the scholars- they are after all using taxpayer’s money to pursue an education. We can’t have them flunking exams and getting kicked out. However, this must be tempered with the freedom to choose subjects that they really want and not be so constrained. Only then can we ever hope to start cultivating talents that can be stand on the world stage.

Less time to blog.

Thomas Mann, “The Magic Mountain” (1999, A. Knopf) at 487:

“Death is a great power. You take off your hat and tiptoe past his presence, rocking your way forward. He wears the ceremonial ruff of what has been, and you put on your austere black in his honour. Reason stands foolish before him, for reason is only virtue, but death is freedom and kicking over the traces, chaos and lust.”

Springtime In A Small Town (2002) 8/10

The original 1948 Springtime In A Small Town was named the best film in Chinese film history. It is to Chinese film what Citizen Kane is to the West. Director Tian Zhuangzhuang’s 2002 remake of the same name, based on the same script by Fei Mu may not be the as well remembered as the landmark film but is still a subtle tour de force boasting of excellent performances and restrained beauty. Slow moving yet powerfully mesmerising, Springtime In A Small Town may not appeal to everyone, but arthouse lovers will easily enjoy the subtle character study and find beauty in its subtlety. One of the best arthouse films from mainland china in recent years, alongside Kekexili and Peacock.

Talk Radio (1989) 6/10

There is only so much of this verbal barrage you can take before you get bored. Eric Bogosian is larger than life and an excellent choice as the obnoxious and witty talk radio host. However, the law of diminishing returns soon sets in and too much talk may be too much for 2 hours.

Nine Lives (2005) 6/10

The Sum is lesser than its parts. Most of the short stories are solid, with some real gems in there. But like a snack, it leaves you with an unsatisfying feel, and hungry for a feast.

Syriana (2005) 3/10

Halfway through Syriana, i was still wondering exactly what the plot is about. I was also wondering who half the people in the film are, what are their names and why are they in the scene. This review is so spot-on on everything that is wrong with Syriana that i’m going to quote it:

“Didactic and muddled to the point of incoherence, Stephen Gaghan’s Syriana is a two hour-plus lecture on the corruption of the American oil industry so wrapped up in its own Byzantine narrative logic that one quickly finds it near-impossible to make heads or tails of who’s who, who’s doing what and for what reason, and why any of it matters.”

Actually i do understand some of the plot, but the one about the conspiracy between Killen and Connex oil companies flew over my head. I know there is something fishy going on, but what? The remainder of the review will be spoilers, be warned.

SPOILERS

Ok, there are several distinct character arcs, which i will list out and try to anaylze just to make the film more comprehensible, in case you are as muddled as me. I’ve watched my share of confusing editing (21 Grams), multiple characters who seek to confuse you so that you can’t tell one apart from the other (Gosford Park), totally ambiguous endings (Donnie Darko) or just plain mindfucks (Mulholland Drive). Not surprisingly, i either like them intensely (21 Grams, Donnie Darko) or hated them (Gosford Park, Mulholland Drive). Syriana ranks with the best of them on the confusing meter. The setting jumps around, from Iran to Switzerland to USA. Some of the plotlines are digestible, namely the one about the young Pakistani youth who turns to extremism and the Matt Damon-Prince Nasir(Alexander Siddig), plot. Then there is the one i sorta understand, the George Clooney plot. And finally the one that flew over my head, the Bennett Holiday (Jeffrey Wright) plot that deals with the Killen-Connex Oil conspiracy.

First, we look at the young Pakistan guy who loses his job and turns to extremism plot. When we are first introduced to this character, the faint suspicion that this will eventually develop into a “suicide bomber” plotline emerged. True enough, by the halfway or so mark when we see the kid with the anti-West religious teacher and him getting a rocket launcher (or at least it looks like a rocket launcher), i could predict some melodramatic ending which ends with him on some suicide mission with the requisite slow-mo movements and emotional background music. Guess what, i was more or less right, although the manner in which the suicide occurs did surprise me. The question is, why did they have to ram the boat to the ship (or offshore platform)? Couldn’t they have um, fired the rocket launcher??? Anyway, i was not impressed by this plotline because (1) it was too predictable (2) the characters are given a superficial treatment. We see some of their problems (unemployment) but we do not really get to see the reason why they are indoctrinated into the extremist fold beyond a few shots that set up the situation.

The second plotline is more interesting and the most comprehensible: Matt Damon and Prince Nasir. Alright, the death of Damon’s son is tad too coincidental, like the whole pool is empty when the lights are on and Damon’s son is the first to get in??? Also, Damon’s character seems to be nothing more than a device for Nasir to spell out his democratic/progressive hopes. Damon is initially disdainful of Nasir but soon becomes sort of an advisor to Nasir, and this development is most contrived to say the least. Beyond a few scenes that attempt to convey Damon’s grief, he seems to be a mere plot device. Luckily, Nasir as a character has much charisma to spare. The articulate son, who competent but is not chosen as the successor because he lacks the support of the Americans. Indeed, if he had more screen time, Syriana may have been more enjoyable.

Then, there is a Clooney plotline, which is moderately understandable. Yes, Clooney looks different and he piles on the pounds and act totally unlike the suave Clooney we are used to. My second viewing (yes, i had to watch it a second time to start understanding his plotline) made things a whole lot clearer. At the beginning of the film, clooney sells two rocket launchers (i think) and one of it falls into someone else’s hands. The Law of Predictable Movies dictates that if some seemingly important things get misplaced, it will eventually turn up later and become an important plot device. This is the same Law that states that if there are some cool equipment/relic/weapon/magical stuff handed out/found/discovered (Narnia, LOTR), the abovementioned stuff will eventually be used in the course of the movie, no matter how lame it may look, often to defeat some foe or surmount some obstacle. And lest i forget, the two guys he sold to get killed in the car bomb explosion and after 2 viewings, i still don’t know why. Did Clooney kill them? (which explains why he was unperturbed when it exploded but not why he had to go through the charade of selling the goods.)

Anyway, there is some attempt in character development, some estranged relationship with his son and wife, which is only superficially dealt with. Then he is tasked to “deal” with Nasir, and attempts to hire someone to assasinate him, only to be double crossed and nearly killed. Of course, in the deus ex machina way, he is saved. Then, the CIA seems to distance itself from him and he gets royally screwed. Why? Because his assasination bid was foiled. Why was he double crossed? I’m not too sure. Why does Clooney later sneak into someone’s house (this i’m inferring) and then threaten the man in a cafe? I dunno, and the only thing there i remember is the phrase - “A Man is Innocent until investigated”, which has a nice ring to it. For yet more inexplicable reasons, he goes back to (?) Beirut [so many places and locales that i get confused], drives a car to see Prince Nasir (to warn him, i presume?) and gets killed by the biggest deus ex machina i have seen in a long time. All this while, we are wondering, why not use the telephone? Think about it- man flies to Beirut, drives around to presumably deliver a warning (i don’t really think he’s trying to assasinate Nasir) in an era when you could um, call him? Meanwhile we can all wonder why they didn’t press the button when Nasir’s car was stopped the first time they met a herd of goats, a contrivance which conveniently saves Matt Damon’s life.

Lastly we get Jeffrey Wright’s plot. Which confounded me on my first viewing. I didn’t know who was who, why they were doing or what. The first time Wright listens to the much talked about “Corruption” speech, i realise i don’t know who the character delivering the speech is and what his role is. It also took the second viewing to confirm my initial suspicion that the elderly black guy who smokes and drinks is indeed supposed to be Wright’s father (their relationship is spelt out in a slip of paper when Wright is asked to fetch him. I missed that on the first viewing). The convoluted plot, after 2 viewings i finally sorta understand.

Ultimately, Syriana is an ambitious film with several plotlines that are never sufficiently fleshed out to make an impact. The confusing plotlines, the underdeveloped characters, and the almost predictable ending coupled with some of the most egregious use of deus ex machinas i have seen in a long time makes it a bloated and largely boring film. In fact, if i have to watch it twice to understand the film, it doesn’t really reflect well on the directing.

Grizzly Man (2005) 8/10

Haunting, uncompromising and utterly mesmerizing, Grizzly Man is hands down the best documentary of 2005, if not the best documentary in the last 5 years. March of the Penguins is for wimps, Grizzly Man is the real deal.

While that 800 pound, CGI generated gorilla called Kong is ruling the box office, it is instead the bona fide Grizzly Bears of the Alaskan peninsula that deserves your time. The last time any documentary made it into my Top 100 lists was 2003’s Capturing the Friedmans, a film which has since been pushed off by the inculsion of better films. This is also probably the first time that a documentary has made it to my top 10 films of the year list, no easy feat considering the pedigree of this year’s crop of movies.

Grizzly Man is ostensibly a documentary about the Grizzly Bears of Alaska, but its main character is Timothy Treadwell, an enigmatic character. He seems to be purposeful, someone who has found his passion in life. He has that immense zeal, fanatical perhaps but one cannot deny the sense that he seems to truly be living each day. When he was with the bears, he is truly alive, in every sense of the word.

Yet, there is also a darker side. Through deeply personal monologues and interviews with those who knew him, Herzog reveals the eccentric side of Timothy. A side which is plagued by an alcoholic past and hints at the psychiatric problems of Timothy. While there is a certain admiration for his ideals, Herzog makes it clear that he does not necessarily approve of his ways.

There are moments of sheer beauty in Timothy’s footage, with the the knowledge of his death giving the film an almost tragic undercurrent. This is footage that no CGI could hope to replicate- sincere, raw and at time achingly beautiful. And the tension, yes tension whenever Tim comes to close contact with the bears. Unlike conventional films , this is unscripted and the danger is real. Just as you are overawed by the majesty of nature, you are likewise amazed by Tim’s foolhardiness. This, Tim admits as much, conceding that he does things that are akin to dicing with death, yet with a certain arrogance, or is it belief that he will be able to survive.

The friendship between Tim and the bears as well as a fox- is it truly an emotional bond or merely a madman’s illusions of grandeur?

The magic of the film is in Tim’s footage, and Herzog could have made it stronger if he scaled down on the amount of non-Tim footage. The scene with the coroner seemed over the top, while another one with the watch that Tim wore seems overtly manipulative.

Ultimately, Grizzly Man is a triumph, with its voyeuristic (and no doubt some will say exploitative) look at Treadwell and his life in the Alaskan wilderness.