Dominatio Per Malum

Backlog of reviews to clear. The Weekend is here.

Superman Returns (2006) 7/10

Brandon Routh is bland. So is Kate Bosworth. Kevin Spacey, on the other hand, overacts a tad. So even though the acting performance is nothing to shout about, and the plot strikes me as really dumb- “growing new land with kryptonic crystals!”, i still enjoyed it. Bryan Singer manages to make the film work inspite of a dumb premise and generally weaker cast (Routh will still be overshadowed by Reeves). Somehow, the sum is better than its parts. I don’t know why. It just works. So even if i have misgivings about the charater performances and plot, i nevertheless enjoyed it. Just like Pirates of the Caribbean 2.

What’s Eating Gilbert Grape (1993) 8/10

Gilbert Grape (Johnny Depp) lives in a family so dysfunctional, that it could give the Addams family a run for their money. With a severly obese mother and an intellectually retarded brother, Grape has alot of problems on his hands.

Its a brilliant film because of the performances of the cast. Johnny Depp shows the kind of leading man gravitas that would stand him in good stead in future, while Darlene Cates has a brave role as the mother who is very obese. But the standout is Leonardo DiCaprio, whose role as Arnie Grape is the soul of the film. This is doubtless DiCaprio’s career best performance.

The Break Up (2006) 7/10

Inspite of the generally negative reviews, The Break Up wasn’t so bad. Some have criticised the lack of chemistry between the leads as one of the failings. I agree that there isn’t much chemistry here, but in this case, it is a plus rather than a minus. Because of the lack of chemistry, the breakup becomes more believable. I believe one reason the movie has fared badly critically is because it has been marketed as a comedy, which it really isn’t. There are comic moments, granted, but this is more an anti-romance than comedy, so those who came in expecting a regular rom-com would not have their expectations met.

Granted, the film develops in a rather predictable, tit for tat trajectory, but still the film charms and i’m wont to give it a favourable rating.

Over The Hedge (2006) 6/10

Fun, but at times overly predictable, Over the Hedge has some wicked gags and excellent spoofs of, among other things, mission impossible. But not all the gags work, and the exposition in the beginning can be a tad tiresome. Overall, a decent effort.

Slither (2006) 6/10

A solid B-film that works in its campiness, cheesy plot and gags. Not really my kind of genre, but its always good to see Nathan Fillion (Serenity, Firefly) in a film. Anyways its a B film so you know what to expect. Its not gonna get any Oscar nominations, but works as escapist fiction. Add up to 2 addition points to the rating if you enjoy films in this genre.

Art Museum By The Zoo (1998) 6/10

An amiable and reasonably good Korean rom-com. It wasn’t great and it wasn’t bad. It was just ok.

Duelist (2005) 5/10

Two fighters face off in a dark corridor. One is entirely hidden in the shadows, the other in light. They battle, only its is more like a dance of swords than the fury of heated battle. Such is the visual beauty of director Lee Myung-se’s The Duelist, a film that simply looks great. There is sharp visual flair and beautiful, even breathtaking sequences done with attention to lighting, to color and to visial fluidity. In short, sheer visual beauty. Intricate costumes, memorable sequences and even the occasional manga inspired comic relief.

If you think it looks like a page taken out of a manga, translated in full technicolor to screen, then you’d be right. But one fatal flaw of the film is that, in pursuit of visual artistry, it has forgotten to tell a tale. Plot is superficial, the characters poorly developed. In the end, the plot is subserviant to the importance of looking good, which makes this a film that is good to look at but instantly forgettable. Imagine the visual beauty of a Hero, but rip away any semblence of a plot, and you might just end up with Duelist.

Factotum(2006) 4/10

A dreary and boring version of Leaving Las Vegas.

The Sixth Day(2000) 2/10

There is another film called The Sixth Sense. Watch that instead.

Lady In The Water (2006) 2/10

Proof that yes, M Night Shyamalan can make a film that is more incoherent and boring than The Village. I was struggling to keep awake, and for a film that constantly explains itself in its pseudo fantasy world, the plot is as nonsensical as plots go. So much so that i was rooting for the make believe monster to just kill the darn narf so that we can at least have the satisfaction of surprising the audience. Of course, the film ends in a throughly predictable manner.

Apple recalls 1.8 million batteries | CNET News.com

Apple joins Dell in public relations disaster.

Zhang Yimou’s Hero is showing this Sunday at Channel U on 9pm. If you have never watched this, you owe it to yourself to watch this. Really, it is that good. If you have watched it, then you do not need me to tell you why you should watch it again.

“You come to your new school, and like one comparing a new relationship to a previous one (with a good deal of baggage, like say a transcript), you constantly evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each. But the problem is, memory erases the flaws of the old, but throws into high relief the flaws of the new. I hate to compare my current school to my old law school, but I have to straight out say it–my old school was much nicer looking. Beautiful even. Modern, but nicely done in brick with nice touches like courtyards and towers. Perhaps a little lower in rank and prestige, but in architecture and layout–totally superior. Especially compared to my new law school.”-Law & Letters

Different context, same feeling. Going to the new school-cum-construction site, one gets the distinct feeling that this place is not ready. Maybe they should have waited till the end of the year to shift. The architechture for one, is jarring. Nestled amongst the quaint, colonial style relics of Federal, ETS and MM is Block B which sticks out like a sore thumb in the quadrangle. And if they don’t build a pathway between Block B and Federal, then there will be a mud path by the end of the year. Plus, the ‘new’ library feels claustophobic and is much smaller than the ‘old’ one.

Past the first week, and the readings are starting to pile up. Trying to read Glenn’s CLT text is like bashing your head against the wall. The material is dense, needlessly grandiloquent and numbingly boring. In fact, here is the first 3 sentences of Glenn’s text, quoted verbatim:

“The notion of tradition, after two or three centuries of neglect and opprobrium in the western world, has recently received renewed attention. This appears due in large measure to circumstances internal to western societies, notably that which a recent social science survey described as a ‘postmodern shift’ in the last twenty-five years from ‘rational-legal authority’ to ’self-expression’. Political and social theory has thus turned to tradition as a possible means of maintaining social coherence and identity in liberal, industrialized societies.”

Does this make any sense to you? It appears to me to be a mumbo-jumbo of words that sounds impressive but don’t actually mean anything. And its only taken from the Preface. Imagine reading 2 chapters of such writing. Your brain may melt by then. Mental Lobotomy would be preferred.

And other developments include the opening of a new law school at SMU. Now, as any economics student can tell you, increase in supply of workers will lead to decrease in wages, all other things being equal. That, however is a simplistic model of wages and assumes no change in demand, ceteris paribus. Given a current shortage of workers due to high barriers of entry, the lowering of barriers will move the labour market towards its natural equilibrium, rather than at its artificially high price level. This may also allow for an increase in demand, which had been previously stifled by lack of human resources. Nevertheless, at the end of the day, 90 additional grads from SMU will probably be lower than the natural attrition rate unless working hours become more humane.

Concurring Opinions: NewsFlash: Westlaw is Fallible!

This is… distressing, considering how much i use Westlaw.

Sophie Scholl: The Final Days (2005) 4/10

Nominated for the Best Foreign Film Oscar in 2006, Sophie Scholl tells the true story of a German student persecuted for distributing anti-Nazi phamphlets during WW2. What is remarkable about this film, is that the dialogue during the interrogation scenes are based on actual transcripts. Therefore much of the dialogue spoken by Sophie was indeed what the real life Sophie said in 1943. This attention to detail and realism is as much the film’s strength as is its weakness.

The major weakness is that, although faithful to historical detail, the film by its very realism moves at a painfully pedestrian pace. Nothing much actually happens here and given that the audience more or less knows of Sophie’s ‘guilt’ and final outcome (the film is titled THE FINAL DAYS after all), there is little suspense in the interrogation sequences. As a result, the film lacks the emotional resonance of Schindler’s List, or the hauntingly powerful central performance of The Pianist. Granted, Julia Jentsch gives a solid central performance as Sophie Scholl, but it is a performance that is good rather than great. And considering that the film literally rests on the shoulders of the lead actress, nothing less than greatness will satisfy. Virtually every frame has Sophie in it, no doubt a deliberate choice by the director, but a film that has such a dominating central role requires a performance that is phenomenal, and sadly, Julia Jentsch’s performance is not at that level yet.

Ultimately, while the realism of the film and the level of control in direction is commendable, it does not make for an enjoyable cinematic experience. More dreary than engaging, the script simply does not translate well to screen.

The Proposition(2006) 8/10

They don’t make films like this anymore. Not since Clint Eastwood’s 1992 western Unforgiven has there been any decent films of this genre. But The Proposition, a little known indie film from Australia is a brilliantly crafted tale of nilhilism, moral ambiguity and sheer beauty. Hauntingly bleak landscape and excellent cinematography all round. The cast is great here and its one of those westerns done right. Definately among the best of 2006.

Birdcage Inn(1998) 7/10

This is a Kim Ki Duk film, and that’s all that needs to be said. If you love Kim’s film, you will like it. If you hate Kim’s films, this will probably alienate you.

Sex, Lies and Videotape(1989) 7/10

This is Steven Soderberg’s first film and it won multiple awards and nominations when in 1989. An excellent debut film, it makes full use of the solid chemistry between the cast and crafts a funny and sometimes dark film. The screenplay is sharp and the dialogue witty. I can see this translated into a stage play and it’ll still work. Little wonder that it won a number of screenplay nominations. Overall, a solid and enjoyable film with a memorable performance by Andie Macdowell as a repressed housewife.

Ice Age 2: The Meltdown(2006) 5/10

Its kinda sad when Scrat, the furry acorn obsessed critter steals the show from the main cast. Scrat is funny. The rest of the plot is only occasionally engaging.

Pi (1998) 7/10

1998 Sundance Film Festival: Best Director (Darren Aronofsky)

Shot for only $60K, this low budget film was director Darren Aronofsky’s debut film with an audacious concept and avant garde direction. You will probably never see anything like this in your life.

In the fine line between genius and madness lies Max Cohen (played with searing intensity by Sean Gullette). Aronofsky’s Pi is a film about mathematics that isn’t boring. Its about the nature of life, about finding order in chaos. Its also an intensely cerebral experience that will leave the audience feeling cold, detached and yet strangely intrigued.

Shot entirely in grainy black and white, Pi hints of the brilliance of its director, Aronofsky and the use of techniques like quick cuts, sharp editing and of course, the Snorri-cam. The film is very arthouse, and very unconventional. The first time i watched it a few years ago, i wasn’t that impressed, because the central character of Max remains an enigma and the audience never bonds or connects with him. On my second viewing, i appreciated it much more. There are many ways to interpret the film, but seeing it as how one man’s obsession brings him closer to madness is the one i like. The Icarus allegory in the film is very apt: the very brilliance of Max’s character threatens to overwhelm him, and his attempt to find order in the chaos of numbers ironically threatens to turn his world into an upheaval.

While i didn’t quite like the ending, and felt that the film experience was too detached, Pi nevetheless remains a challenging and powerfully original piece of filmmaking that will provoke as much as it initiates conversations. This is what A Beautiful Mind wants to be.

“Aronofsky’s command over the viewer in “Pi” is uncomfortable but irresistibly seductive. He overtly manipulates every impression that comes off the screen.”- SPLICEDWIRE

“The film “Pi'’ is a study in madness and its partner, genius.”-Ebert

“Pi is a stark and hypnotic little black-and-white independent movie that has more brains in it than an entire summer of Hollywood junk. Yeah, I love the Hollywood junk too, but sometimes your brain needs a meal too”- Scott Weingberg

Dragon Tiger Gate(2006) 3/10

Dragon Tiger Gate is agonizingly bad, and its amazing how they managed to make an action film so boring.

Plot- Fail
Direction- Fail
Acting-Fail
Action- So-So
Dialogue- Cheesy
Cliche- Overloaded
Entertainment value- very little

Have you ever wondered why Superman has Kryptonite? Because it would be a really, really boring comic if Superman was indeed 100% invincible. Its like playing Diablo on cheat mode: there is no fun when you can’t be killed. That is essentially a major problem with Dragon Tiger Gate’s action scenes. Yes, the characters kick ass while looking cool and all, but in truth, its real boring because its totally exxagerated and none of the leads actually seem to be in danger of being beaten by a generic henchman. This can be seen in the opening, where there are 2 back to back action sequences taking place in restaurants. Despite all the fancy footwork, the action sequence is sterile and unimpressive, because none of the leads actually seem in danger and easily dispatch dozens of evil henchmen without breaking a sweat. Nice to look at, but absolutely zilch tension. Sha Po Lang has much better sequences than this, and SPL isn’t even that actionpacked. There are many 90s martial arts flicks with action sequence far better than Dragon Tiger Gate, which puts in one of the most boring action sequences in recent history. You know you are in major trouble when the final ‘big boss’ battle between Donnie Yen and the final villian who looks very dumb in a stupid costume generates no suspense and plenty of yawns.

And then, there’s the special effects, which range from passable, to corny. Lets just say that i’ve seen better special effects used in games than in the movie, and the ’special powers’ of the characters in the film look even more retro than KOF. Plus, many of the plot points are just numbingly dumb, and you wonder if the characters have ever heard of something called guns?

And as for cheesy, where do i begin? An early scene has an absolutely corny sequence between Nic Tse and some girl whose name i dunno on some bridge that screams cheesiness. Plus, early in the film, everyone is fighting for some stupid plaque called Luosha plaque. Yes, its dumb and some parts are actually funny when people fight over such lame stuff. And don’t even get me started on the flashback sequences which can only be described as lazy filmmaking. As for plot, it is paper thin and utterly pointless. I could have written a better plot. It feels mostly like the director is trying to condense alot of material into a short running time and the whole story feels rushed.

Characterwise, one-diemensional and boring. Everyone feels like a cardboard cutout, and the worse is the main villian, who simply looks ridiculous. The main villian has a fugly looking mask, and looks like a corny version of Jason Voorhees. And in one of the most mind-numbingly stupid sequences, after Donnie Yen gets injured, the main villian gives him an elixir of some sort so that he can be healed. With such acts of abject stupidity, is there any wonder why the main villian gets his ass kicked?

Other annoyances include the totally unsubtle Nokia product placement which is really annoying. Plus, most of the cast like Nic Tse and Shawn Yue pose more than act. And this seems to be some sort of vanity project for Donnie Yen who trys to look cool in like every other scene while trying to play a character in his 20s (wtf!).

There are some decent things in Dragon Tiger Gate, but these are few and far between. Yuen Wah has a small but welcome role as the master of Dragon Tiger Gate, and there is one point in the Jap restaurant fighting scene where the camera pans overhead and depicts several fights simultaneously. And, there are the occasionally amusing fight scenes. And that’s about all the positive things i can say.

In between mediocre but at least watchable fight scenes is boring filler sequences that just prep you for the next fight scene. When there is noone fighting, Dragon Tiger Gate gets boring very fast, although sometimes it is unintentionally funny because of all the corny dialogue, cheesy situations and faux heroism on display.

In short, skip this and go watch Donnie Yen in Iron Monkey (1992) instead. Dragon Tiger Gate is boring, kitschy and painfully amateurish.

Chasing Amy (1997) 7/10

I’m not much of a fan of director Kevin Smith’s film. Clerks just didn’t impress me. Still, Smith’s refreshing take on the rom-com genre is a sharp and witty. Ben Affleck hasn’t made a good film in a long time, and this is a reminder that once upon a time, when he often paired up with Matt Damon, he was once a promising film star. Now, having his name appear on any film credits is often a touch of death. Excellent dialogue, solid cast and enjoyable film.

Brick (2006) 6/10

Joseph Gordon Levitt is one of the most promising young actors around. With a solid turn in Mysterious Skins and now in Brick, i believe he may well be the Johnny Depp of the next generation, and his willingness to take arthouse projects over mainstream films earns major brownie points in my book. Brick is an ambitious debut film by director Rian Johnson which transplants the film noir genre into a high school setting. Its not as easy as it seems, and while some parts work, the overall effect is uneven. Still, it gets points for style as well as yet another solid lead performance by Joseph Gordon Levitt. It loses points for a sometimes confusing plot, especially early in the film where alot of names are thrown around without proper explaination. Also, unless you are very confortable with American accent and speech, some of the words are spoken too fast, and the audience might not catch some of the subtleties and nuances of the dialogue. This is one film in need of English subtitles since alot of the dialogue can be hard to follow.

The Devil Wears Prada(2006) 6/10

The story and plotline is predictable, and some of the situations exxagerated, but this film still makes for a passable comedy. The main reason to watch it is for Merly Streep who plays the boss from hell with much relish and aplomb. Anne Hathaway puts in a decent performance, although she does get overshadowed by Streep at times. A fine supporting cast rounds out this film, which is watchable but unremarkable.

Amistad(1997) 5/10

There are some fine moments in this film, such as Anthony Hopkin’s extended monologue, as well as excellent flashback sequences, but that is not enough to save this staid and unengaging film. The historical background is interesting enough, but putting much of the meat into courtroom drama makes it seem more detached than usual.

Plus, there are some embarrasingly manipulative moments than weaken rather than enhance the film by their sheer corniness, like the ‘Give me Free’ speech in the courtroom. Spielberg is clearly capable of making brilliant yet serious films, as seen in Munich and Schindler’s List, but this is one of those times that he has dropped the ball. One problem with the film is that most of the black slaves are simply voiceless and characterless, and is represented only by one person, viz Djimon Hounsou. This prevents the audience form connecting with the characters. Also, it was disppointing to see the strongest cast members, namely Anthony Hopkins and Morgan Freeman given so little screen time. What a waste of talent! In addition, at more than 2 hrs 30 mins, the film gets draggy at times and is clearly would benefit from better editing. Ultimately, Amistad is an ambitious film that doesn’t quite reach its lofty goals. This is one of the weaker Spielberg films.

Anger Management(2003) 4/10

Good for a few laughs, but once the novelty of the plot wears off, it begins to feel tiresome. Its nice to see Jack Nicholson overact a tad, but again, there is only so much of seeing Nicholson acting looney that you can take. As for Adam Sandler, he basically reprises the role of the loser character that he takes on in every other movie. If you’ve seen one Adam Sandler role, you’ve seen it all. Other than that, the fragmented plot starts to take a clear nosedive towards the end with a lame ending.

Hard Candy (2006) 8/10

Ellen Page had a small supporting role in X3 as the character who could pass through walls. Even then, she had a certain kind of charisma that allowed her to stand out in a film that had way too many characters. With Hard Candy, Page gets a starring role and establishes herself as an actress to watch with a superb performance that is nothing short of a tour de force. The last time an actress so young made such an impact in movie was when Natalie Portman starred in Leon (1994).

In many ways, the directorial debut of David Slade echoes Roman Polanski’s Death and the Maiden (another one of my favourite films) in terms of structure, and there is even a reference to Polanski in the film, although i’m not sure if that was as a homage or sideswipe to Polanski. In terms of plot, Hard Candy is certainly a refreshing take, with hints of Tape, Sympathy For Lady Vengeance and Death and the Maiden fused into a compact and remarkable whole.

The impressive chemistry between Ellen Page and Patrick Wilson (again, prior to the film, i was totally unfamiliar with Wilson) makes for an explosive cocktail of mental games. The shifting dynamics of power, the unpredictability of Page’s character Haley makes Hard Candy an intense and brilliliant drama. Also notable is the mise en scenes, filmed in vivid colors that make for a compelling backdrop in which this tale of predator and prey takes place. Granted, the revenge motiff of this film, sort of like a teenage version of Sympathy For Lady Vengeance make seem to oversimplify the issue of paedophilia, but nevertheless as a film i would say that i works more often than it does not.

No doubt, as David Slade’s debut film, there are clearly rough edges. About 2/3 into the film, after a particularly squirm-worthy scene for all male audiences, the films narrative starts to crumble a tad, and the ending is no doubt anticlimatic for those expecting more. The entire premise of the script is also quite flaky and Page’s character seems way too omnipotent.

This still leaves the first 2/3 of cinematic brilliance, headlined by Ellen Page’s superlative performance. Only 17 when the film was shot, Ellen Page is phenomenal, and puts in a mesmerizing performance worthy of an Oscar nom at the very least. Equal bits sassy, naive and all things sweet and saccharine, Page can just as easily morph from girly to vindictive dominatrix. It’s a performance that establishes Page as an actress to watch- clearly she has the talent to go far. Patrick Wilson obviously isn’t quite at Page’s level, but nevertheless should be commended for a fine performance. There are times where the audience is almost sympathetic towards him. Both performances literally lift the film above its exploitative premise into an engrossing and riveting film experience.

Essentially this is a film where there are for most intents and purposes only 2 characters onscreen for 95% of the time. It is a very talky film- there is alot of dialogue. It is also disturbing, controversial and, at least for the men, squirmish. There are no big name, no sex, no explosions, no CGI. And yet its one of the best films on the cineplex now. Provocative, nilhilistic, and with a lead performance that is nothing short of Oscar worthy, Hard Candy is the 2nd best film of 2006 i’ve seen so far (the best film thus far being V for Vendetta). So run, not walk to catch the sensational performance of Ellen Page, and the nearly flawless first half. Its well worth your time.

“”Hard Candy” is a psychological thriller as chilling as a cold, serrated blade to the jugular. Combining the unpredictable character dynamics of “Sleuth,” the high-stakes physical menace of “Misery” and the corrosive sexual politics of “Oleanna,” the film is a perfectly cut jewel of tension.”- Colin Covert

“To watch Hard Candy is, at moments, to be very afraid, but the scariest thing about it is the fury of Page’s talent.”- Entertainment Weekly

“Hard Candy heavily relies on the strength of its two actors, since the entire film comprises these two slowly and relentlessly stripping one another bare. And it’s a boon that both stars are quite stellar. Page is fantastic, managing to be both vulnerable and vicious – often simultaneously. And Wilson never defaults to merely playing the victim; he always has more secrets and shame festering under his surface.”- FilmCritic.com

Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003) 8/10

The original Pirates of the Caribbean is a swashbuckling good ride, filled with the right mix of wit, comedy and action that will satisfy even the jaded moviegoer. Johnny Depp’s take on the pirate Jack Sparrow will easily rank alongside Edwards Scissorshands as one of Depp’s best roles and one of the most memorable characters in cinematic history. The pace is fast and fluid, and while the plot isn’t earthshattering, there is that sense of fun and adventure. The entire cast performs spendidly, although Orlando Bloom seems perpetually overshadowed by Depp. Special mention must go to Geoffrey Rush’s delightful take on Barbarosssa. Overall, a fun film for all that singlehandedly reinvigorates the Pirates genre.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest (2006) 7/10

The sequel to the 2003 sleeper hit is bloated and nonsensical at times, but there are enough moment of briliance to make it an enjoyable ride nonetheless. As some have rightfully criticised, Dead Man’s Chest feels like a 2hr plus trailer for the final Pirates film. Characters go from point A to point B and get into all sorts of hijinks before going to point C and repeating it all again. It also doesn’t help that there seems to be way too many characters in this film. The plot, which was never the original Pirate’s strong point, now becomes more and more incredulous.

But still, this film is a solid experience because of Johnny Depp as Jack Sparrow. Simply put, this film soars whenever he is onscreen. In fact, i was hoping to see more of Depp onscreen because he is the one that makes it tick. Orlando Bloom once again proves to be the weakest link in the Depp-Knightly-Bloom chain, and he seems awfully bland. I enjoyed Keira’s Knightly expanded role here which expands her scope to beyond the damsel in distress role she essentially played in Pirates 1, including the memorable scene between Depp and Knightly towards the end which will certainly rank as the highlight of the film.

The film feels overlong and bloated at times. However there are excellent moments, and slick directing which does make up for the draggy bits. The scene in the cannibal island where Sparrow is taken captive is absolutely unnecessary and yet uterly delightful and funny. It’s also one of the better parts of the film. Other moments, like the extended swordfight scene also impress.

However, there are downers as well. The extened kraken vs Black Pearl battle scene felt repetitive, mostly because the kraken was just some tentacles and did not impress at all. The slimy crew of the Flying Dutchman look more ridiculous than fearsome, even though the character of Davy Jones is well potrayed. But beyond Davy Jones, the rest of the crew just look dumb.

Overall, Pirates 2 is an energetic and fastpaced film that skimps on the plot but is saved by yet another brilliant performance by Johnny Depp as Jack Sparrow.