Dominatio Per Malum

Love Letter (1995) 8/10

19th Japanese Academy Awards
• Winner - Newcomer of the Year (Takashi Kashiwabara)
• Winner - Newcomer of the Year (Miki Sakai)
• Winner - Most Popular Performer (Etsushi Toyokawa

1996 Blue Ribbon Awards
• Winner - Best Actress (Miho Nakayama)
1996 Kinema Junpo Awards
• Winner - Reader’s Choice Award for Best Film
17th Yokohama Film Festival
• Winner - Best Film
• Winner - Best Director [tie] (Shunji Iwai)
• Winner - Best Actress (Miho Nakayama)
• Winner - Best Actor (Etsushi Toyokawa)
• Winner - Best Cinematography (Noboru Shinoda)
• Winner - Best New Talent (Miki Sakai)
1995 Hochi Film Awards
• Winner - Best Actress (Miho Nakayama)
• Winner - Best Supporting Actor (Etsushi Tokoyawa)

One of those transcendant romantic films that will charm even the stone hearted. Mihi Nakayama has a dual role acting as 2 seperate characters, and it is a remarkable performance that is worthy of all the accolades she has won. Love Letter feels like Il Mare without the metaphysical time travelling stuff but just a really solid script and near flawless acting. Director Shunji Iwai has crafted a beautiful modern masterpiece.

The Wind That Shakes The Barley(2006) 7/10

2006 Cannes Film Festival: Palm D’Or

A powerful and wrenching historical drama that presents the british as sadistic and tyrranic occupiers of Ireland. This film boasts of some truly brilliant moments, but also sags at times with slow pacing and hard to understand dialogue. Even if you are a fluent English speaker, you may want to watch it with subtitles because the thick Irish accent makes it hard to understand what the characters are saying. The beginning of the film is also hampered by slow pace and and painfully superficial caricature of the british as evil aggressors. But what lifts it is the last one third of the film, when Irish fight Irish as the people are split between accepting a less than satisfactory truce or fighting for true liberty.

Cillian Murphy gives a solid performance as Damien, a doctor turned freedom fighter. Even as in its based in the 1920s, the stories of the past nevertheless hold true today. A sobering film that almosts feels like Braveheart set in 1920.

The Untold Story(1993) 6/10

1993 Hong Kong Film Award: Best Actor (Anthony Wong)

This is the film that will make you swear off pork buns forever. HK thespian Anthony Wong in the role that showed that he can act, does a Hannibal Lector in easily the most intense performance of his life. Based on a true story, which gives what would otherwise be B-grade exploitation fodder a true sense of dread, watching The Untold Story is a depressing and utterly unsettling experience. While i accept the artistic merits of the film, as well as Wong’s superb performance, this is not the film that you want to watch to unwind. Strictly not for kids. Heck, this is a film where kids get killed. Whilst not the most gruesome and hard to stomach film i’ve seen (that honor goes to the japanese film Audition), its still fairly grisly by HK standards, especially a 1993 film. Ultimately, while it is worth watching for Wong’s performance, lets just say that you should never watch it after dinner.

Family Man(2000) 6/10

Nicholas Cage is one of my favourite actors, and he certainly puts commendable effort here, but it is Tea Leoni who clearly steals the show. The entire premise is totally predictable and generally unremarkable. You can see the ending a mile away and it is only through sheer charisma of Cage and especially the radiant Tea Leoni that the film fares better than its cliched premise. Watch it for the performances.

Hitchhiker’s Guide To The Galaxy(2005) 6/10

DON’T PANIC! While alot of the humor and snarkiness of the book is lost in translation, Hitchhiker’s Guide is still a decent, albeit unremarkable adaptation of a most awesome book. The opening sequence is most excellent, but the film sags alot in the middle and the end will just leave you scratching your head. You probably need to be a fan of the novel to enjoy it and fully understand it, but even a non-fan like me can find it reasonably enjoyable though not fantastic.

Tristram Shandy(2005) 5/10

A snarky and irrelevant comedy. Parts of it are funny, other parts are just draggy.

Tony Takitani(2005) 4/10

Watching this is like watching paint dry. I’ll give it credit for directing and camera angle, but that still doesn’t change the fact that this is boring like hell.

Batman Returns (1992) 7/10

Dark, gothic and very brooding, Tim Burton’s followup to his original masterpiece doesn’t quite match up to the first batman, but has its moments of brilliance too.

Of especial note is Michelle Pfeiffer who purrs and sizzles in one of her most memorable roles as Catwoman. She is so good that Halle Berry, in a subsequent film Catwoman simply gets overshadowed because Pfeiffer has set the standard. Danny Devito also has a welcome role as a tragic villian. Burton’s potrayal of the Penguin as a freak born of tragedy, and the almost farcical manner Penguin gets nominated as mayor is so over the top as to be enjoyable. In addition, Christopher Walken also puts in a commendable performance as the power hungry Max Shreck.

The problem is that in a film titled Batman Returns, Batman is ironically the weakest link. Michael Keaton is almost totally overshadowed by the villians and they steal nearly every scene. Batman doesn’t really make an impression here (although the batmobile is still swell). The film could have been titled Penguin and Catwoman, seeing the passive role of Batman in this film. In addtiton to being bland, Keaton himself doesn’t really have much screen time to make an impression. Although the same problem happened in the original Batman, at least Keaton only had to deal with one superb performance by Jack Nicholson. Now, Keaton has no less than 3 adveraries, all of whom are more interesting than him. Which perhaps is one of the reasons i consider Batman Begins to be the best of the Batman films because it finally returns focus back to the main character.

Isabella (2006) 8/10

Before acting in Isabella (the movie), Isabella Leong’s (the actress) biggest claim to fame was having the leading role in Bug Me Not!, a HK film so utterly wretched and painfully bad that one could consider it the Gigli of the East. She also had supporting roles is several other films, but most of the time she never distinguishes herself. But all is redeemed with Isabella (the movie) where Isabella Leong not only proves she can act, but very nearly steals the show from Chapman To.

Speaking of Chapman To, this hugely underrated actor proves that, with roles in Isabella and the most excellent Moonlight In Tokyo, that he is deserving of more leading roles. Often relegated to supporting cast or comic relief, its great to see Chapman To take on more substantial roles which better display his capablities. With Isabella (the movie), both Isabella Leong and Chapman To, in addition to displaying great chemistry, put in memorable performances.

Beautifully filmed, with the rustic allure of pre-handhover Macau as its backdrop, the film at times even displays hints of Wong Kar Wai. Directed competantly by Edmond Pang, who has made a couple of solid films like Men Running in Black and Beyond our Ken, Isabella is a funny, poignant and beautifully shot film. In a year where HK films are actually putting a strong performance, with titles such as Election 2 and Dog Bite Dog, Isabella ranks as possibly the best HK film of 2006 thus far. And the year isn’t even over yet.

The plotline for Isabella is simple, even predictable but the film just works simply because of the unlikely pairing of Chapman To and Isabella Leong, an almost beauty and the beast pairing that works remarkably well. Leong is a revelation because she displays impressive range and proves her acting mettle. If she continues on this streak, she might well be among the next generation of top leading ladies.

Overall, Isabella is that kind of rare gem that i didn’t expect to enjoy so much and yet charms with effortless ease.

Paradise Now (2005) 8/10

Paradise Now tells the story of the last 48hours of the lives of 2 Palestinian men, before they embark upon a suicide mission. It is a thoughtful and sobering look behind people who are so easily classified as radicals or fundamentalists. It would make for an excellent triple bill alongside Munich and United 93. Like them, Paradise Now is a film that will neither engender sympathy or anger for the protaganists but will instead prod the viewer to relect upon the larger inequities of life.

I would write more, but nothing quite replaces the experience of watching it. The arresting visual look at Palestine, together with the rubble that lines the streets is certainly one of the highlights of the film. In this world where black and white has faded into a muted grey, who can tell what is right or wrong anymore?

“Paradise Now is a tough film because of what it attempts to do. It’s a rare thing for a movie to present events of the Arab/Israeli struggle from the Palestinian side, where terrorists are viewed as “martyrs” and “freedom fighters” instead of killers.”- Berardinelli

The Escapist - Secret Sauce

How Blizzard became the most awesome gaming company around.

Z (1969) 6/10

1969 Canne Film Festival:
Best Actor (Jean-Louis Trintignant)
Jury Prize


1969 Academy Awards:
Best Film Editing
Best Foreign Language Film (Algeria)

To appreciate Z, one must understand the socio-political context this was based upon. No doubt, in 1969, it would have been a socially relevant commentary, but in 2006, it feels dated and some of the scenes are unintentionally funny. This detracts from the core strength of the film.

As a political film, Z is successful in its depiction of a troubled era. As a thriller, its actually fairly bland by today’s standards. It might even work as a comedy, with some unintentionally comic moments (at least, i think the director wasn’t aiming for humor). The film is remarkable for its depiction of the civil law process, which for most parts is reasonably accurate. It is also a stirring look at corruption and a decaying system.

I’m cutting Z quite a bit of slack here considering that it is a 1969 film, but it does have some glaring weakness. Irene Papas, who plays the widow of an assasinated senator, has several cringe-worthy scenes of bad acting. Plus, there are some inexplicable and confusing flashbacks which confuses the audience. And there is the whole corniness of the issue. I mean, the assasination comes about by a bumbling attempt that involves a lorry, drunk driving and a club. Have they ever heard of guns? Plus the supposed goons are like probably the dumbest villians ever. Imagine this: a guy involved in an assasination attempt actually asks to have his name featured on the paper. Or another sequence narrated by Christopher Null:

And a horde of absolutely idiotic conspirators don’t help the cover-up, either. Example (paraphrased) — Crook: “Today’s paper has an incriminating picture of me so I came to the hospital to yell at the witness!” Judge: “Today’s paper wasn’t delivered. Who told you to lie?” Crook: “Oooooooh no! I am caught!”

One side effect of these caricatures of bumbling goons is that the film is often filled with comic moments. These moments of brevity help make the film more interesting, even though they ironically detract from the deeper political message.

Ultimately, Z is a watchable and solid film, although judging by the many awards it won, i was somewhat disappointed by the final product.

Every week, without fail, i learn something new at prop tutorial, which has absolutely nothing to do with law.

For example, i now know that ‘ten‘, as in tendril means ‘to hold’. So a tenant simply means ‘one who holds’.

“ius accrescendi inter mercatores locum non habet” means “the right of survivorship has no place among merchants”, a reference to the presumption in equity that partners do not hold the partnership property as joint tenants.

Today, i learnt that the longest running ‘temporary law’ that is anything but temporary was enacted during the napoleanic era. That law was the ‘income tax’, which was introduced as a temporary measure to help fight napolean. Apparently, we’re still fighting.

Financial Times : “IMF and World Bank rebuke Singapore“

“The International Monetary Fund and World Bank on Friday issued an unprecedented rebuke to Singapore over a ban on accredited activists invited to attend the annual meetings of the two financial institutions next week.

The IMF/World Bank suggested that Singapore had violated the terms of its agreement to host the event by blocking the entry of 19 civil society representatives, who allegedly posed a security threat.”

BBC: Singapore rapped over protest ban

In an interview with BBC World Business Report, Mr Wolfowitz said Singapore had made a “bad” decision when it blocked activists that had been invited to the event.

“I hope Singapore’s authorities will change their minds and allow the people in that we have accredited as originally agreed,” he added.

He added that was important for the organisation to hold a “strong dialogue” with such groups.

“We may not always agree with what they have to say, but it is very important to have that discussion,” Mr Wolfowitz said.

New York Times: Singapore’s Barring of Some Activists Prompts a Protest

The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, two organizations that repeatedly praise the role of “civil society” activist groups in poor countries, have protested a decision by Singapore to bar representatives of several such groups at their meeting with the leaders of poor countries next week.

The action by Singapore was taken out of fear of protests and violence, according to the Singapore police. But several of those barred were invited by both the World Bank and International Monetary Fund to attend the meetings as part of a general effort in recent years to reach out to nongovernment organizations.

“We believe that all individuals who have been accredited to the annual meetings should be allowed to attend,” the two organizations said Friday. “We strongly urge the Singapore government to act swiftly and reverse their decision on entry and access to the meetings for these representatives.”

This is embarrasing, really. But what is utterly galling is the appalling quality of local press in reporting. It even has the cheek to headline it as

Police firm on banning undesirable groups from IMF/World Bank meetings

All these from Channelnewsasia.

And in all likelihood the national propaganda mouthpiece /140th press will be conspicuously silent on the World Bank criticisms. I mean, its the World Bank, the very guests we are welcoming who are criticising us for our anal-retentiveness. And yet the local media plays down/ omits theses criticisms.

Sometimes, the sound of silence echoes the loudest.

Edit: The press does at least acknowledge the flak Singapore has received in today’s papers, although this is at least a day late.

On The Edge (2006) 8/10

Hk cinema seems to be on a roll lately with two consecutive movies that are good. This hasn’t happened since, well Love Battlefield and One Nite In Mongkok in 2004.

A solidly crafted cop drama about what happens when an undecover cop completes his mission and reverts to regular police life. Solid supporting cast including welcome roles by Rain Lee, Anthony Wong and Francis Wong. Nick Cheung also puts in a decent performance, but after seeing Tony Leung play essentially the same role in Infernal Affairs, i can’t help but feel that Nick just pales in comparison. Clearly, he lacks Tony’s gravitas. If Tony Leung played Nick’s character, i could see this film being rated several notched higher.

Overall this is a compelling character study and an enjoyable film.

Dog Bite Dog (2006) 8/10

Stark, visceral and utterly nilhilistic, Dog Bite Dog will be remembered as the film that Edison Chen finally sheds his pretty boy image in a performance that’s quite good, actually. Now if only it was 15 mins shorter.

Taut pacing and excellent control of mood and tension marks director Soi Cheang’s newest offering. Having made a good impression with 2004’s Love Battlefield, Soi once again scores with his gritty take on the darker side of human nature. Beautifully shot in sombre, dark colors with the hongkong cityscape playing an excellent backdrop, Dog Bite Dog feels like One Nite In Mongkok meets Unleashed. In any case, its certainly more visceral and frenetic than either films and in this bloodsoaked film, everyone has a dark ugly side. For those who expect all their films to have a happy ending, this is clearly not the film for you.

Edison Chen sheds off his Gen X Cops days, with a psychotic and seriously wacked performance that might just nab him a nomination at the HK film awards later. Even if he doesn’t win any trophys or nominations, this is definately his best performance to date. Its also great to see Sam Lee, oft relegated to sidekick or supporting status given such a meaty role. He matches Edison Chen notch for notch and at times look even more crazed than Chen.

In a bleak, redemptionless world where the police is corrupt and violent, our anti-hero is Edison Chen, a violent and merciless killer chased by an equally crazed cop played by Sam Lee. The cat and mouse game, plus the inclusion of newcomer Pei Pei as Edison Chen’s humanising factor, makes for a compelling and gritty urban thriller that for most parts, soars.

However, Soi Cheang inexplicably drops the ball in the ending, which is utterly superfluous and needlessly over the top. This is a film that should have ended 15mins earlier, but the director decides to suddenly shift the locale to another place. What had once worked as a taut urban cat and mouse thriller with muted colors suddenly gets a sharp change in mood which really threatened to spoil the film. The film was unfolding within a compacted time period, when the time frame suddenly shifts to a few months later towards the ending. This is absolutely unnecessary and detracts from the film. If the director cut the last part of the film and ended it earlier, Dog Bite Dog will probably be in my Top 100 films list. As it is, the weak ending preventing me from rating this more favourably. Nevertheless, at a time where the HK films are often of dubious quality, Dog Bite Dog is a solid film and an excellent antidote to those who have watched too many saccharine rom-coms.

yax-645 The case of Iwuchukwu Amara Tochi

The case of Iwuchukwu Amara Tochi (see [2005] SGHC 233 and [2006] 2 SLR 503) is a sad story of how fucked up the singapore legal system is. There is little doubt that Tochi is prima facie guilty of trafficking. But i really doubt that Tochi is deserving of the death penalty.

Some dubious logic from the CA decision (at para. 6) :

“It will be gleaned from these cases that the true principle is that, ultimately, a failure to inspect may strongly disincline a court from believing an “absence of knowledge” defence. Therefore, to say, as in this case, that the first appellant thought it was chocolates was another way of saying he did not know that he was carrying drugs. Given the evidence, including the evidence that the first appellant did not inspect the articles when he could have done so (the turning of the blind eye), the court was entitled to find that the presumption had not been rebutted.”

It seems to to me that the court has already conceded that Tochi did not have objective knowledge of the drugs, but somehow through imputed subjective knowledge, concluded that he should have known of the existence of the drugs. And he expects this of a poor and naive 18 year old African kid who is probably not very street savvy. More importantly, the Court of Appeal accepted the findings of fact from the High Court, and only considered the case of issues of law. But what the case actually turns on is knowledge of the nature of the drugs and only a finding of fact that Toshi did not know of the drugs could have saved him. In short, he was already a dead man walking when he lost the High Court case.

In other words, a miscarriage of justice.

United 93 (2006) 8/10

Its been almost 5 years, but the imagery of the burning towers still remain etched in one’s mind. Paul Greengrass’s film inevitably provokes the question of whether it is too soon for a movie on 9/11. But United 93 proves to be a film worthy of tackling the subject, and the direction of the film is subtle and yet wrenchingly powerful. United 93 is devastatingly visceral and deeply moving. Its one of the best films of ‘06.

Its very rare that for a film in which you already know what will happen and where you already know the ending, remains gripping and mesmerizing. The sense of unease and the powerful foreshadowing begins early in the film, with what is really just a typical day on Sept. 11 2001 unfolds like any other. People go on upon their daily chores, unware of the upcoming tragedy.

Filmed in documentary, cinéma vérité style, director Greengrass does away with overt stylistic devices in favour of a realistic depiction of the actual events. There is no posturing, no deliberate shots of the twin towers, which a lesser director might be tempted to do. Greengrass depicts the day as it is; there is no underlying moral, no Fahrenheit 911 kind of slant inherent. The hijackers are just ordinary folks, as are the passengers. There is no demonising. There is no excessive heroism attributed, no flashy “lets roll” sequence when the passengers decide to revolt. They are just regular folks, scared but wanting to do what’s right.

It is impossible not to be moved when the passengers relay their last messages via the airplane phones. It is especially poignant to know that these are probably what the actual passengers said on that day. Further enhancing the realism is that many of the cast members on the air traffic control stations as well as the members of the FAA and military are played by their real life counterparts who did experience 9/11.

It is in particular impressive that Greengrass manages to maintain tension in the control room. There is alot of talking, as confusion reigns in the early hours of 9/11. It was particularly frustrating to see how the military was handicapped by misinformation and the lack of authority to engage the hijacked planes.

Some may quibble about the lack of characterisation of the plane’s passengers, such that we know very little about them. In another film, this would have been a valid criticism but here, it is infact a plus. We know as much about the passengers as if we were just someone on board- which is to say very little apart from small snippets of info, which futhers the docudrama feel of United 93. The film puts us into the flight cabin of United 93 and there is a sense of immediacy to the film.

Ultimately, United 93 is a deeply moving, and superbly directed film that is relentlessly gripping despite the audience knowing in advance what will happen. The film brings back the horror, the shock and the devastating loss of 9/11 in a sobering manner that is nothing short of masterful. This is a film that could easily have been tacky, commercialised or didactic like Pearl Harbor or Fahrenheit 911, but isn’t. A beautiful ode to heroism and one of the year’s best.

“But the film doesn’t depict the terrorists as villains. It has no need to. Like everyone else in the movie they are people of ordinary appearance, going about their business. “United 93″ is incomparably more powerful because it depicts all of its characters as people trapped in an inexorable progress toward tragedy.” -Ebert

“United 93 is palpably tense and uncomfortable to watch but nonetheless compelling. The film also is terrifyingly suspenseful, especially since we know the outcome. But it’s not the denouement that keeps us transfixed. It is the exploration of events that lead to it that shatter our emotions and mesmerize us.”- USATODAY.

“At no point during United 93 does it feel like you’re watching a movie. It feels like you’re there.”- Philadelphia Weekly.

United 93 Trailers here.

Hero (2002) 9/10

It is no exxageration to say that Hero is quite possibly the most beautiful movie ever filmed. Lensed by Christopher Doyle, directed by Zhang Yimou and featuring an all star cast, Hero is a captivating film where style overshadows substance. And i mean it in a good way.

Hero is simply gorgeous. Color-coded scenes, mesmerizing mise en scenes and some truly ravishing imagery. It also features one of the best actions sequences in a long time, including a memorable joust between Donnie Yen and Jet Li.

Structually, the Rashamon narrative is beautifully composed, and it even comes with a compelling political message. Whether or not you agree with the implicit message (I don’t), you are perhaps left to ponder what exactly is the meaning of Hero. Is the Greater Good truly worth the sacrifice of people? Is there even a greater good or merely some nefarious concept? It has a controversial underlying message that provokes you to ponder, though such a message is not readily apparent at the outset.

Actingwise, Donnie Yen and Jet Li give great physical action sequences, although their acting is merely passable. But when you have Chen Daoming, Tony Leung, Maggie Cheung and Zhang Ziyi shoring up the acting lineup, how can you possibly fail? Even Zhang, who seems to have the most superfluous role, dazzles in every scene she is in.

The only little points i can nitpick is perhaps the artificality of some sequences, like the battle in the mind rubbish, or how the CGI created arrows are unrealistic. Or how the plot is fairly distant, in that at the end of it there does not really seem to have been a substantial plot.

But all there are minor quibbles to what is really one of the most visually sumptuous and mesmerizing film to come out from Asia.