Dominatio Per Malum

So, i recently watched 2 classic Chow Yun Fat movies. They don’t make movies like they used to.

City on Fire (1987) 6/10

Long before Infernal Affairs, Chow Yun Fat played the conflicted undercover agent with his charismatic comedic wit. Although the film feels dated and the plotline is fairly predictable, with cartoonish villians, it is still a guilty pleasure. Notable for the “brotherhood” bond between good guy Chow Yun Fat and bad guy Danny Lee, which would be reversed in The Killer, where Danny Lee plays the good cop trying to capture Chow Yun Fat the assasin.

The Killer (1989) 7/10

Chow Yun Fat as the assassin with the kind heart, Danny Lee as the good guy catching the bad guy and Sally Yeh as token female flower vase? All these and more, replete with gratuitous shots of white pigeons that has been the trademark of John Woo. Its predictable and a tad tacky, but the bromantic film is classic 80s HK and a whole lot of fun. This was back when John Woo was actually a good director.

Hello Schoolgirl (2008) 8/10

Based on a comic book, Hello Schoolgirl is a surprisingly well crafted tale that engages because of excellent lead performances. Notwithstanding its comic book roots, director Ryoo Jang-Ha creates a believable spring autumn romance that is layered and compelling. Special mention goes to Yoo Ji-Tae, played a middle aged bachelor falling in love with Lee Yeon-Hee, played the schoolgirl. What would have been semi-creepy a premise turns out to be a hardwarming and compelling love story, made possible only because of the outstanding performances of both leads. Now that is the “A” plot. Unfortunately, the “B” plot follows the only occasionally interesting romantic overtures between another spring autumn romance. This time a younger male played by Kang In pursues an older woman played by Chae Jeong-An which fails because it lacks the palpable chemistry which the “A” plot has. Thus the main value of the weaker “B” plot is similar as a foil to the main story. Luckily the main plotline holds up very well and single handedly makes Hello Schoolgirl a compelling experience.

Entre Les Murs [The Class] (2008) 8/10

I had expected a typical film about an inspiring teacher who changes his pupils. You know, the sort of predictable plotline that films like the Choir follow. But this was quite a different experience. Filmed in a faux documentary style, the Class offers no final redemption, no inspirational teacher defying the odds. What amazes me is the realism of the film and how it offers a peek into the racially diverse world of French schools. The characters that inhabit the film are as achingly real as they are flawed. One of the best films ever made which was nominated for the 2009 Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film and won the Golden Palm in the 2008 Cannes Film Festival.

“The Class confirms and extends Cantet’s status as one of the masters of European social cinema. It’s a hugely important film that shows how the real frontlines of class and race in this continent don’t involve riot shields or rock-hurling marchers, but are played out every day in our city schools as a series of sometimes attritional encounters.”- Sukhdev Sandhu

Inglourious Basterds (2009) 8/10

Inglourious Basterds marks a return to form for Quentin Tarantino after the lacklustre Death Proof. It is one of the more accessible Tarantino films and Basterds contains many of Tarantino’s favourite themes and stylistic influences. It should come as no surprise that Basterds is a loquacious film. Those who watched Basterds because of its marketing might well be under the impression that it was a WW2 action film, seeing how Brad Pitt is used prominently in its promotion. In truth, Brad Pitt doesn’t really have that much screen time, and there are few action sequences. Instead, in true Tarantino fashion, the film is one long talkfest chock full of black humor, obscure references and non sequiturs. In other words, its bloody brilliant.

The film is full of Tarantino’s little stylistic flourishes, from its excellent soundtrack, the use of chapters to bookend each segment and its generous use of gore. It is almost amazing how, at the end of the film, you realise that you have spent the better part of two hours watching characters just chatting. Granted, the dialogue sometimes feels meandering and lacking in focus, but when it is good, it is golden. At its best, the dialogue zings and sizzles and Tarantino expertly manages to craft tension from the most mundane of conversations.

The ensemble cast is excellent, none more so than Christoph Waltz, one of the most menacing SS officers ever put on screen. He completely steals the scene in two major sequences, the first being the excellent opening scene of the film and the second being a chance meeting with Shosanna Dreyfus (Mélanie Laurent).

At every turn, Tarantino surprises and even thrills the audience. Even the boldly ahistorical ending will likely polarize audiences. This is a film in which i honestly could not have predicted how the scene would have played out. It is a testament to Tarantino’s craft that Basterds, which is closest in form to Pulp Fiction, is an enjoyable, sometimes over the top film that appeals the film lover rather than to studio expectations of more skin and more explosions. One final praise needs to be given to the cinematographer who cloaks the film in beautiful vibrant colors with the color red taking especial prominence. I loved the way the film turned out and i can unreservedly proclaim Basterds to be one of the best films of 2009. Watch it.

Ashes of Time Redux (1994) 7/10

The first time i watched Wong Kar Wai’s 1994 masterpiece, i thought it was beautiful but plodding, poetic but pretentious. Rewatching the “Redux” version a few years later, i am once again impressed by the visual beauty of WKW’s creation. This time, i understand the film better, and perhaps it may be attributable to better editing in the Redux version. Not that the story makes any sense because it still doesn’t. But like a poem, and indeed most WKW films, it is more important to appreciate the feel and mood than to make sense of what it all means. Beautifully languid and possibly even zen, Ashes of Time is the only time wuxia flicks and existential will appear on the same sentence. Like a bottle of wine, Ashes of Time is a film that ages better with time and as you grow older you better understand the existential angst that underlies the film. The themes of memory, unrequited love and lost chances play out in a hazy, poetic canvas. What does it all mean? Is there a point to this film? Well, with Wong Kar Wai, the experience is more important than the destination.

City of Life and Death (2009) 7/10

Director Lu Chuan who is easily one of the more exciting directors from China, follows up his excellent Kekexili (2004) with a sobering and powerful take on The Nanking Massacre. The City of Life and Death (known as Nanking! Nanking in its chinese title) would seem like the sort of film that would lend well to easy moralising especially since it is a Mainland Chinese film. But to his credit, Lu Chuan is a far more nuanced director and doesn’t take the easy cinematic short cut of caricatured villians and saintly good guys. The solid black and white cinematography is beautifully shot, but i question the need to use black and white when a color version would be better. Using black and white for a WW2 film almost seems like aping Schindler’s List and unless you can use it to great effect, it seems like an unnecessary gesture. It is not that B&W doesn’t work for the film, but rather that i think color would have been better.

Still Lu Chuan crafts a great ensemble tale, with no one character being a plot device and each contributing to the tale in their own way. This is good because these supporting actors really shine when given the spotlight, with chinese actor Wei Fan making a memorable impression as Mr Tang. However, the disadvantage is that stars like Ye Liu don’t have much screen time for character development. The cast is uniformly solid, but i felt that the Japanese lead Hideo Nakaizumi as Kadokawa is too one dimensionally nice for my liking.

While City of Life and Death isn’t quite Schindler’s List, it is however an excellent retelling of the Naking Massacre seen through the eyes of both the Chinese and Japanese. And considering how the film strives to be balanced rather than jingoistically patriotic, the film is truly another feather in the cap of Lu Chuan who delivers a powerful and compelling movie experience and history lesson all wrapped in one.

District 9 (2009) 7/10

District 9 could have been a great film, but instead settles for merely being a good film. Its premise is intriguing and a refreshing twist on sci fi conventions. See, aliens are broadly categories into nice (ET) or monstrous (Alien trilogy, War of the Worlds etc). In District 9, Aliens are an insectoid race which while possessing strength and agility is generally dumb. Sort of like Zombies. This is itself an unusual take on sci fi to present them as largely stupid, mindless beings which can barely fend for themselves. Of course, this is explained by the aliens being worker aliens with the hive mind being somehow destroyed leaving the remnants to fend for themselves.

The exposition which sets out these details in the first act is masterfully done and the film weaves social commentary in a pseudo documentary fashion that deliberately parallels apartheid and the various concentration camps and gulags that we have created. But the film takes a dramatic shift in tone in its second act, turning its focus exclusively on one character and the film becomes a sort of The Fly meets The Fugitive. This shift is unfortunate, because the film becomes predictable and the film abandons the compelling social commentary it built in the first act. The film is somewhat redeemed in its action packed final act which while predictable at least provides brainless popcorn entertainment. Still one cannot help but lament that if the film continued and went along the compelling premise it constructed in the first act, District 9 could well have become a great film. Nevertheless it is still a far better summertime choice than GI Joe or Transformers 2.

In The Loop (2009) 8/10

In the Loop is what The Office wants to be. Sharp, sardonic and an absolute blast to watch, the film skewers the political process and shows politicians for what they truly are: screwups who are trying desperately not to blow the whole world up. Malcolm Tucker (Peter Capaldi) puts in a mesmerizing and commanding performance in an expletive filled performance. It is a virtuoso display of foul-mouthed eloquence the likes of which has been rarely seen. A sharp, witty and engaging dialogue which has one of the highest laughs per minute of any film i have watched and a brilliantly absurdist plot makes this one of the best films of the year and an excellent showcase of Brit humor.

The Piano (1993) 6/10

I did not particularly enjoy the film. I found the plot trite and predictable and the characters aloof and distant. But the performances, that is another thing. The film features some fantastic acting and Holly Hunter puts in one of her best performance ever, for which she was rewarded with a Best Actress Oscar, and deservedly so. But it is the young Anna Paquin who deserves a special mention for her tour de force performance that arguably ranks as one of the finest performances ever by a child actor (alongside Haley Joel Osment for The Sixth Sense). At the young age of 11, Paquin won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar for her role as the precocious daughter in The Piano and it is a thoroughly deserving win. While i did not like the film very much, Paquin manages to steal almost every scene she is in, even alongside veterans like Holly Hunter, Harvey Keitel or Sam Neil. Although much attention was given to Hunter for her strong performance, it is in fact Paquin that lights up the film.

This is one of the films where i wasn’t impressed by the plot, but is saved by an excellent cast and phenomenal acting by both Hunter and Paquin. The male characters fare much more poorly and seem to be set up as one dimensional plot points, but given the restrictions of the role, Harvey Keitel and Sam Neil give passable performances. While this is probably too artsy for the mainstream, cinetastes will do well to seek out this film, if only for the memorable performances of both Hunter and Paquin.

Due to Life, i won’t have the time nor energy to watch movies, much less review them. So, this blog won’t be updated very much. From time to time, if i am very free and it strikes my fancy, i might write something down. Otherwise, this blog is for all intents and purposes semi-dead.

Still, here are some of the films which i recently watched. I may not even bother to write anything about it so just look at the numerical rating.

Australia (2008) 6/10

Way too long and overindulgent. But entertaining nonetheless.

The Girlfriend Experience (2009) 6/10

Stephen Soderberg follows up his epic, 2 part film Che with a small, arthouse flick that uses Sasha Grey as stunt casting. But Ms Grey is surprisingly good in the lead role and the film’s disjointed time-line whilst mildly annoying at first actually enhances the film. While the film looks great, and Sasha Grey provides the requisite eye candy, the film feels distant and the main character remains a cipher, whose motivations and personality never rise to the surface.

Speedy Scandal (2008) 8/10

Despite a totally hackneyed and predictable plot, the film was one of the top grossing Korean films of 2008. And understandably so because it is a great crowd-pleaser and is highly entertaining. Cha Tae-hyun may be repeating the same performance he did in My Sassy Girl but he is so pitch perfect as the comical battered male that you just don’t care that he is recycling his persona. It may not be art, but it sure is entertaining.

Push (2009) 5/10

It has a nice soundtrack. That’s the most positive thing i can say about this film.

Coraline (2009) 8/10

Easily one of the best films of the year and definitely in the running for best animated film (currently only Pixar’s Up seems to be its only challenger) Coraline is a dark, intelligently crafted tale that will win the hearts of adults. Its not really kid friendly and i can best describe it as Pan’s Labyrinth turned into an animated film. Visually, top marks. Its a smart and beautifully rendered film that deserves to be seen.

Yes Man(2008) 3/10

Just Say No to this.

Stage Beauty (2004) 7/10

Claire Danes is good but it is Billy Crudup who gives a phenomenal performance.

JCVD (2008) 8/10

Jean Claude Van Damme in his best film ever. Surprisingly, JCVD is an affectionate, entertaining movie that actually gives Van Damme the opportunity to show off his acting chops. Just as the Wrestler gave Mickey Rourke a new start, JCVD equally gives Van Damme the best film he has ever made. Unfortunately, noone seems to have noticed, but JCVD is well worth taking a look, if only for an amazing extended soliloquy given by Van Damme which is as honest as it is heartbreaking.

Franklyn (2008) 4/10

Bold concept, interesting visuals. But I can’t fucking understand the damn film!

Romeo + Juliet (1996) 3/10

Never ever ever ever let your cast speak in iambic pentameters. The characters speak in Shakespearean dialogue, which unless you are studying R&J as part of Lit class means that the average viewer can’t catch the dialogue. Not even a winsome pairing of Claire Danes and Leonardo DiCaprio could save this overwrought mess.

Suspect X (2008) 5/10

Retarded plot.

Still Walking (2008) 6/10

Very Arthouse and incredibly slow but if you have the patience, Hirokazu Kore-eda weaves an intriguing tale that explores family dynamics. I was a tad disappointed with this because his earlier film Nobody Knows was one of my all time favourite films.

Last Chance Harvey (2008) 6/10

Annie Hall (1977) 6/10

Overrated.

Two Lovers (2008) 5/10

It’s a good thing that Joaquin Phoenix wants to quit acting, because he is not a particularly good actor.

Star Trek (2009) 8/10

This was really (and perhaps unexpectedly) good. I liked it more than Watchmen because the film is tight and moves along with quick, snappy pacing whereas Watchmen tended to get bogged down by weak and superfluous scenes. Despite a fairly predictable plot, Star Trek thrives because its characters are compelling, especially the juxtaposition between Spock’s logic and Kirk’s emotions. All in all its great summer entertainment and my #1 fav film of the year so far.

Revolutionary Road(2008) 8/10

Revolutionary Road is the movie Kate Winslet should have won best actress for, instead of The Reader. As a tale of suburban disenchantment, Revolutionary Road makes the desperate housewives of wisteria lane look childish by comparison. Revolutionary Road is the stronger movie because the story, based on the celebrated novel of the same name is quietly powerful. And it’s ace is the winning combination of Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio in their first onscreen pairing since Titanic. Both of them have matured in terms of acting and they share an incredible chemistry that gives the film a powerful momentum. They seem to feed off each other’s energy and both gives superlative performances. Also of note is Michael Shannon in an Oscar nominated supporting performance that nearly steals the show from the talented leads. Perhaps the only demerit is that the film feels a tad too Oscar-bait. Nevertheless for one of the strongest performance of the year, and possibly one of the best on-screen couples, Revolutionary Road is well worth your time. If anything, the very idea of the film, that we live boring soulless lives because we are too afraid to change resonates deeply. The anomie that Dicaprio’s character feels as he toils in a job he hates but needs is a mirror to people’s lives. It places starkly idealism personified by Winslet’s character and pragmatism personified by DiCaprio. And in one beautifully set up argument between DiCaprio and Winslet, the director masterfully uses lighting to great effect with half of DiCaprio’s face shrouded in darkness while Winslet’s character is fully illuminated throughout the entire scene. It provides a powerful juxtaposition, all the more engaging because of the talent and chemistry between the leads.


“This film is so good it is devastating. A lot of people believe their parents didn’t understand them. What if they didn’t understand themselves?”- Roger Ebert.

Gran Torino (2008) 9/10

Gran Torino is really, really good, a definite inclusion in my top 10 of 2008. Clint Eastwood shows he’s still got what it takes to craft a compelling tale as he turns in a pitch perfect performance as a cantankerous, racist war veteran. Yes, the plot is formulaic and to a certain extent predictable and even manipulative. But Eastwood is so damn good it doesn’t even matter. I think that this is Eastwood’s finest film, even better than Unforgiven.

And yes, this film will make you wish you owned a Gran Torino. Watch it, you won’t regret this.

The Reader (2008) 7/10

Kate Winslet deserves to win an Oscar. In fact it is long overdue, and as one of the finest actresses of our generation, its about time she got to hoist the golden statuette. The question is, did she deserve to win the Best Actress Trophy for the Reader? The answer is a maybe. It was a year with relatively weak crop of Best Actress Nominees. I mean, even Angelina Jolie could get nominated for Changeling, so the quality that year wasn’t that great. My personal pick would have been Meryl Streep for Doubt, but then Streep has already won before. So by that count, it was about time Winslet won. Winslet did not win for her strongest film, and there is talk that her performance that same year in Revolutionary Road should have been nominated instead. Whatever the case, Winslet is good in The Reader.

In addition to looking fantastic in the film, Winslet has that screen charisma that steals the show when she is onscreen. It is the sort of screen magnetism that few actors and actresses possess. Which is why David Kross, who plays her onscreen beau, is overshadowed by her in every scene they share together. They lack chemistry and their liaison feels as artificial and distant as Kross’s character. In is only when Ralph Fiennes steps into the picture that the male lead is given dramatic weight. Fienne’s single scene with Winslet is as poignant as it is heartbreaking and that forms the emotional fulcrum that gives this film its power.

The Reader is a film about guilt that pits law against morality and asks you to judge if the character on trial is right or wrong. It offers no easy answer and whilst films like this get labeled Oscar Bait films (which is partly accurate), this does not detract from the central strength of the film, as well as the moral questions that it asks. Winslet and Fiennes, both adept thespians, put in strong performances that makes this film worth seeing. Part romance, part historical eulogy and part moral dilemma, the Reader invites you to reassess your moral compass.

“Based on the German novel by Bernhard Schlink, The Reader is all about secrets and lies and the possibility that monstrous actions are not a function of something called Evil, but something messier, stranger and more common to all. This is chilling stuff, and The Reader works in the end because this idea clings to you like a bad dream.”- Galvin

Watchmen (2009) 8/10

Watchmen is visually striking, and looks fantastic. The source material, one of the most famous graphic novels ever written gives the film its intellectual heft with its dark portrayal of deeply flawed heroes. It starts with a brilliant, near flawless opening sequence that evokes the feel of the comic and with the soundtrack of “The Times are A-Changin” neatly summarize so much of the history of an alternate reality world. It is the 1980s, Nixon is still President, America won Vietnam and is locked in a nuclear arms race with the Soviet Union.

But there is also so much that is wrong with the Watchmen that makes it such a great pity. It had the potential to be a great film, but settled to be only a good film. The labyrinthe plot was manageable even for a non-Watchmen fan like me. The voice over by Rorshach is jarring and could have been better done. Words that feel lyrical when read lose much of their power when spoken aloud.

The single biggest weakness of the film is its casting. Most of the leading characters are plain boring one dimensional cutouts. Therein lies the irony of Watchmen, whilst trying to break away from the typical mould of superheroes as paradigms of virtue, the film makes the mistake of creating simplistic one dimensional versions of these flawed heroes. Only Rorshach (Jackie Earl Haley) and the Comedian (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) bring their characters to life and make these believable characters. The rest of the cast fare much worse. Dr. Manhattan (Billy Crudup) is actually a very interesting character whose detachment to life could make for a compelling and nuanced character. Unfortunately, for a demi-god, Dr Manhattan seems like a puerile, insecure entity that makes several mistakes in the film. For someone of such supposedly great powers, he seems really dumb. And yes, i know that the scene of Dr Manhattan leading US troops to Vietnam is most probably taken from the comic but he looks really dumb as a blue Sentinel like figure blasting random Vietcongs.

The Nite Owl (Patrick Wilson) is such a plain vanilla character that if we deleted him from the movie, noone will probably care. Same for Silk Spectre II (Malin Akerman), who at least works as eye candy. Unfortunately she has zero chemistry with the rest of her love interests and simply plays a flower vase role. Ozymandias (Matthew Goode) has so little screen time that he doesn’t even get a flashback to tell his life story unlike the rest of the cast.

The difference between a good film and a great film lies in the cast. The Dark Knight was a great film and starred top notch actors who could emote and convey anger, sorrow, pain and doubt. Between Michael Caine, Gary Oldman, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart, Morgan Freeman and Christian Bale, The Dark Knight had an A-list cast of talents. The Watchmen seems to have spent all its budget on fancy effects because the cast with the exception of the Comedian and Rorshach put in bland performances and none of the characters feel particularly compelling.

The storyline is also affected by the need to cram everything into a movie and the film can be divided into 3 acts: Act 1 : Comedian is killed, cue flash backs; Act 2: Each of the major characters get a flashback to tell their past stories and histories; Act 3 OMIGOSH we actually have a plot to resolve so we conveniently put in a bad guy and the heroes through simple coincidences solve the mystery and go confront evil bad guy. Oh and by the way we also insert groovy Mars sequence since we still have money left over for CGI and the comic has it.

To be fair, the ending actually packs a punch and puts forth a moral question which actually makes it far better than a standard superhero movie. Plus as a bonus Dr Manhattan actually starts acting like a demigod in the last act instead of a bumbling doofus he has been for much of the film’s running time. Unfortunately, the “intellectual ending” has already been done in The Dark Knight, so it feels like a bit of deja vu.

There is also a lack of a good villian to balance the film. Every great superhero film has an equally great adversary to deal with. This is also why Heath Ledger’s joker is so damn fantastic. The villain in this film feels like an afterthought and the film suffers considerably because of this.

So to recap the GOOD POINTS: great visuals, nice CGI, strong source material, excellent 80s soundtrack, actually understandable even if you are not a watchman fan, Rorshach, the Comedian. The BAD: lousy acting by the rest of the cast, crammed plotline, unnecessarily long scenes (Mars sequence and any scene involving Silk Spectre 2 trying to be romantic), hardly any plot development for villain.

But even the uninspired casting cannot rob the strength of the original source material. The story that Alan Moore tells is a powerful tale and even when unnaturally compressed into its less than three hour running time the film still has its moments of brilliance.

Despite writing alot of negative stuff about the Watchmen, it is actually a very good film that is enjoyable and worth your time. However, this is precisely its problem: it is only a good film, when it could have been a great film. If i hadn’t watched The Dark Knight and seen what Nolan did with a superhero movie, i might have been more charitable. As it stands, while Watchmen is an entertaining flick and one of the better 2009 movies, it fails to realise its potential.