Dominatio Per Malum

Dear Zachary (2008) 8/10

This doesn’t happen often, but by the end of Dear Zachary, you will feel as if you know Andrew Bagby as a friend. As a documentary, Dear Zachary is an intimate, poignant potrayal of one man’s life, and a father’s final letter to his son. It is a beautifully crafted eulogy by a friend all the more endearing because you can sense then sincerity and love behind this film. The film starts as a thoughtful ode to a dearly departed friend, but then changes in tone into something all together different. In truth, the less you know about the Bagbys, the better. This is a film best experienced cold, with no knowledge about the topic.

The film does suffer from one fatal flaw, which is that its does not even pretend to be an objective account and completely demonises certain characters while painting others as paragons of virtue. But it is a story that needed to be told, because it is a tale recounted with passion, anger and love. To make it objective would simply have blunted the power of the film as a visceral, moving experience. Nevertheless, i urge you as viewers to keep an open mind and to always consider the other side’s perspective.

By the end of the film, you would have been enraged, moved and inspired by the film. Despite having somewhat amateurish production values, Dear Zachary impresses because it is a labor of love, made to honor the memory of a dearly departed friend. As a film, Dear Zachary is one of the most powerful film experiences i have had and a definite shoo-in for 10 top best films of 2008. A heartbreaking movie.

“Dear Zachary will break your heart—but don’t even consider missing it.”- Cathleen Rountree

Frost/Nixon (2008) 8/10

What happens when an unstoppable object meets an immovable force? You get cinematic greatness. Frost/Nixon is a film that, distilled to its essence is about 2 men talking. Yet the film is a gripping, intense drama, a sort of intellectual boxing that at the end leaves you feeling exhausted yet exhilarated.

And the centerpiece, the core of the film is Frank Langella who is mesmerizing in a pitch perfect portrayal of Richard Nixon. As a subject matter, Nixon has that mystique, the white knight who has fallen from grace. When Nixon won re-election in 1972, he won by one of the biggest landslides ever, but in 2 years he would have the infamy of being the only president to be forced to resign. Langella gives a compelling rendition of a man of such complexity and nuance and he even manages to make the Nixon somewhat sympathetic. But there is a hubris, a strong sense of pride that is Nixon’s ultimate flaw and Langella gives a masterly portrayal. Director Ron Howard has assembled a talented, top notch cast and he uses close-ups to give the actors, especially Langella the chance to shine. The film itself should be compulsory viewing for acting class because Langella’s performance is exquisite. It is the expression, the downtrodden look of defeat, or is it regret that haunts you long after the film ends. Even though my personal favorite this year to win Best Actor is Mickey Rourke for his devastating performance in The Wrestler, Langella is a very, very close second simply for his masterful tour de force.

And acting as his foil is the excellent Michael Sheen whom i remember well from THE QUEEN. This time, although his role as David Frost gets more screen time it is clear that Langella is the star. But rather than be overshadowed by Langella, the two bounce off each other very well and Sheen’s flamboyant and playboy persona is the perfect foil to Langella’s slick and polished Nixon. The final result feels like an intellectual joust, the equivalent of watching Rocky but with far greater dramatic intensity. This is an intellectual battle between two very keen minds, recreating a pivotal moment of American history and it is a credit to the taut writing and fine direction that such a talky film proves engaging even though most people already know the conclusion. As the film progresses, the audience roots for Michel Sheen’s David Frost to tease out the final note of contrition from a disgraced president. And you almost feel as if you are there, in 1977 watching history unfold. For both Frost and Nixon, they have something to gain and everything to lose. Frost stakes his career and personal wealth on this and for Nixon it is his last shot at redemption. Watching the unstoppable force meet the immovable force proves to be one of the most enjoyable hours of movie watching i have spent.

Frost/Nixon is one of the best films of the year and a personal favourite. A splendid cast headlined by two spellbinding performances makes this a must watch. This is an intelligent and thoughtful film. The great tragedy is that this is the sort of film that audiences avoid. But if you give it a chance, you may be pleasantly surprised.

“The stage play-turned-big screen Oscar contender has all the right moves, zipping along from scene to scene with rare pep until building to a furious climax. And remember, this isn’t a movie about alien invasions or pirate ghosts. It’s a movie about two guys talking. No special effects, no Ben Stiller cameos. “- Mike Ward

“The result is involving, engrossing cinema – more thrilling, in fact, than Howard’s “The Da Vinci Code” – filmmaking of a type rarely seen anymore and sorely missed.”- Kenneth Turan

The Wrestler (2008) 8/10

For those who have fallen, The Wrestler is a film for you. You don’t have to be a wrestling fan to love it, and i am certainly no fan of wrestling. But as someone who loves film, I dare say that i love The Wrestler to bits. Its not the best film of the year (that honor goes to The Dark Knight), but the Wrestler is firmly perched at second place. In many ways, it is a comeback, a sort of redemption for both Mickey Rourke and director Darren Aronofsky.

I am a big fan of Darren Aronofsky’s work, and i am probably very biased in favour of him. Nevertheless, his last film, the wildly ambitious effort The Fountain not only took ages to put to screen but it also flopped. Personally i enjoyed the Fountain, but as a die-hard fan, i admit that The Fountain was abit of a disappointment. So when his latest film the Wrestler won the Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival, it bought alot of buzz to this indie flick. Naturally i was psyched and when i finally managed to watch The Wrestler, it brings a certain electric thrill to watch the work of a master. I have said it before and i’ll say it again: I believe that Darren Aronofsky is one of the brightest young directors alive, and in years to come, he will be in the pantheon of great directors of our age. What strikes you, if you have been following Aronofsky’s career, is how little directorial flourish he brings to the film which seems mostly shot in verite style. This is truly the first film that he lets the script and the actor tell the story. Aronofsky is restrained and steps backs to let the strength of the material stand on its own. Not that it is entirely bereft of style. One thing i noticed was how in the early shots, the camera always followed Rourke from the back, but by the end of the film, the camera almost always shoots Rourke from the front: a subtle reflection of the journey Rourke has taken so far. In many ways it is a maturation of his craft and it hints of greater things to come from this director. Aronofsky has yet to make a “bad” film and even when he doesn’t quite succeed (The Fountain), the end result is still a cut above the rest. With the Wrestler, Darren Aronofsky has made his comeback and showed that his is no one trick pony with Requiem For A Dream (his magnum opus). I eagerly look forward to his next cinematic effort, and i sure hope he gets some Oscar love.

But it is for Mickey Rourke that i reserve my greatest praise. In many ways, the life of his character Randy “The Ram” Robinson mirrors his own life. Once, a long time ago, Rourke was a rising Hollywood star in the 80s. But he screwed it up and has since been languishing in obscurity ever since. Rourke has landed the perfect role, one that feels as if it was written for him. The term “once in a lifetime performance” probably sums up Rourke’s performance, who brings with it a powerful physicality and emotional vulnerability. Sticks and stones may break your bones, but it is his isolation that truly wounds the Ram. Mickey truly deserves his Best Actor win at the Golden Globes and i hope that he wins Best Actor come Oscar season.

The film is supported by excellent supporting roles by Marisa Tomei, who looks fantastic and Evan Rachel Wood, another young rising star who has picked some truly excellent starring roles in recent years (she was really good in King of California). The script may follow a fairly predictable trajectory, but this is no Rocky. The excellent cast and tight script elevates this above your standard melodrama and the film proves to be a moving and engaging film experience. It has been a long time coming, but i’m glad to say that Mickey Rourke and Darren Aronofsky are back, and they are at the top of their game. One final note: the theme song by Bruce Springsteen, which has already won best song at the Golden Globes, is one of my favorite songs and its lyrics are beautifully poignant. So, if you can, give the Wrestler a chance. The Wrestler is a film about a wounded soul, and for those of us who have a chip on our shoulders, it resonates and moves in a way film is meant to.

“Rourke works his way into the soul of “The Ram” as if he has known this character his entire life. He probably has.”- Philadelphia Inquirer

“I cared as deeply about Randy the Ram as any movie character I’ve seen this year. I cared about Mickey Rourke, too. The way this role and this film unfold, that almost amounts to the same thing. ” Roger Ebert

Since Cinematical decided to rewind with a best of 2006, i was reminded that i had yet to weight in on the best films of 2006. Thus you have the top 26 films of 2006 as rated by me. 26, because there were 26 movies deserving of mention. If you want to read my review of the films, you can always use the search function on the right.

1. V For Vendetta
2. Paprika
3. United 93
4. Volver
5. Letters from Iwo Jima
6. Hard Candy
7. The Queen
8. The Bridge
9. Stranger Than Fiction
10. After The Wedding
11. Babel
12. Little Children
13. Pan’s Labyrinth
14. The Painted Veil
15. The Lives of Others
16. Idiocracy
17. Isabella
18. The Last King Of Scotland
19. Road To Guantanamo
20. Little Miss Sunshine
21. Notes on a Scandal
22. Dreamgirls
23. Banquet
24. Exiled
25. The Departed
26. The Proposition

The Dark Knight (2008) 10/10

With the Dark Knight smashing all box office records, you don’t need me to tell you that you should really catch this movie. Chances are, you have already watched it. But for those of you who need a little prodding, here’s why you should catch the Dark Knight: its the best movie you are going to watch this year, and possibly one of the best movies you will ever watch in your life.

In the earlier Batman Begins, director Christopher Nolan had to reboot the failed franchise after the disastrously campy BATMAN AND ROBIN(1997), and the 2005 movie had to spend time on exposition and background. With that out of the way, Nolan’s DARK KNIGHT jumps straight into the story, and the director weaves a compelling, haunting tale of morality and heroism. The film starts with a slickly crafted bank heist sequence that is tightly edited and brilliantly shot and then goes off alternating between adrenaline rushing action and serious drama. It is so rare that a film manages to be both critically acclaimed and blockbuster material but the Dark Knight transcends the divide between arthouse and mainstream, and escapes the confines of a superhero movie. Here, Nolan builds upon the dark, gritty and realistic version of Gotham City of Batman Begins and adds layers of moral complexity. The film itself plays so much like a gangland drama, and comparisons have been made about how Nolan’s DARK KNIGHT is the comic book equivalent of a Scorceses or Mann film. But a better comparison would be how Nolan has taken elements from serious drama like THE DEPARTED or HEAT and places it in a big-budget Hollywood vehicle that manages to please both lovers of serious drama and the action loving masses. It is a difficult balancing act, especially with a long runtime of 2 1/2 hrs, but Nolan creates a modern masterpiece that at once feels too long and too short. Too long because parts of the first half feels like padding, with a superfluous jaunt into HK and less important exposition. Too short because we just can’t get enough of Heath Ledger in his brilliant, magnetic performance as the Joker and because i wish some of the excellent supporting characters like Aaron Eckhart’s Harvey Dent or Michael Caine’s Alfred could have been given more screen time.

Heath Ledger deserves a paragraph unto himself. As the biggest selling point of the Dark Knight, Ledger’s performance is a cinematic tour de force that is as haunting as it is tragically memorable. For the longest time, Jack Nicholson’s Joker in BATMAN(1989) had been the definitive Joker, but Ledger’s interpretation of the Joker blows away all expectations. It is a mesmerizing, hypnotic and utterly unforgettable performance that has generated Oscar buzz for a posthumous Oscar. And rightly so, because Ledger proves that a superhero film can boast of the sort of dramatic performances normally found only in serious “drama” type films. It is a bravura performance of a lifetime and not only does Ledger deserve at least an Oscar nomination, he should probably win it. Ledger first won critical acclaim with his performance in BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN, and THE DARK KNIGHT was to have been his stepping stone as an A-list actor but his premature death cast a somber undertone to the his performance here. There is a tragic resonance to Ledger’s intense performance because he doesn’t so much act as Joker as he becomes the Joker. As the charismatic and chaotic Joker, it is equal bits unnerving and riveting to see how much Ledger gets behind the skin of the character and walks out of Jack Nicholson’s shadow. Ledger creates the best villain ever and a definitive Joker who will probably never be topped.

But Ledger’s performance should not take away the shine from the rest of the stellar cast. Christopher Nolan picked a first-rate cast with standout performances from one of the best supporting casts in comic book history. Morgan Freeman, Gary Oldman and Michael Caine are top actors in their own right who bring much welcome screen presence. The role of Rachel Dawes (played by Maggie Gyllenhaal) grows from being a damsel in distress role to a central plot element and without spoiling too much information is excellently played by Gyllenhaal given her limited screen time. And as the righteous district attorney Harvey Dent, Aaron Eckhart’s performance will probably be overshadowed by Ledger’s overweening screen presence but still Eckhart deserves praise for playing a fine line between good and bad and evolving from the White Knight into something else altogether.

And Christian Bale has grown well into his role as Batman. One quibble though is that i still don’t quite like the gravelly voice Bale uses while in Batman mode but whether as the playboy Bruce Wayne or the conflicted role of Batman he handles it well. In my original critique of Batman Begins, one of the key issues was the need for balance between the hero and the villian’s screen time. In the earlier films, from Batman all the way to Batman and Robin, the villian has taken center stage at the expense of the hero such that Bruce Wayne feels like an afterthought. This was most evident in Tim Burton’s BATMAN RETURNS when the film was packed with no less than 3 antagonists and Batman himself seemed like a supporting character than a main lead. Batman Begins, as an origin story, lacked a strong villian counterpoint which put it just shy of mastepiece status. But in Batman Begins, we not only see the moral dilemma that Bale’s Batman faces, but he faces a truly classic adversary in Ledger’s maniacal performance. In short, The Dark Knight manages the fine balance between Batman and the villains and even though Ledger’s performance is show-stealing, it is not to the extent of overshadowing the performance of Bale and the excellent supporting cast.

As for action, the film really goes guns ablazing from the very first scene with some really cool toys by Batman. The Batbike alone deserves a special mention for being totally awesome. Nolan handles the big set action sequences with better flair compared to his first outing and crafts some truly impressive car sequences that will more than satisfy the pop-corn loving crowd. Although his fist-fight sequences are a slight improvement over Batman Begins, i feel it still has too much of those jerky Bourne-esque feel such that you can’t really tell who is punching who. Nolan is more adept at crafting personal drama than shooting top notch fistfights so here is probably the one main quibble in the action department.

In terms of cinematography, the film looks great. In a dark, depressing but still good looking kinda way. The night shots are especially beautiful and i love it when Nolan chooses an overhead, eye in the sky perspective over Gotham City. Some critics have picked on the lack of effort in dressing Gotham City. Instead of creating a dark metropolis, Nolan has simply taken Chicago as a template with little dressing, and compared to both Tim Burton’s gothic visuals and Nolan’s Batman Begins, the Dark Knight’s Gotham City is a tad too normal. For example, the building used as Wayne Towers looks terrible in comparison to the version used in Batman Begins. But Nolan’s choice of not dressing up Chicago also works to his advantage. In creating his dark morality tale the familiarity of the locales adds a sense of faux-realism to the film. The Dark Knight is as much a political allegory of the world that has changed since 9/11 as it is escapist entertainment.

While the action entertains and thrills, it is the moral undertones and the blurring of black and white into a murky grey that lies at the soul of the film. The Dark Knight asks a question about what is right and what is wrong and what society’s limits are. It is these elements that elevate it from being just a great and enjoyable superhero movie such as Spiderman or Iron Man into another level altogether, the level which sees film not just as entertainment but as art. And as an artwork, The Dark Knight is a masterpiece that blends smart, intelligent drama with summer popcorn entertainment. As a bonus, those who watched Batman Begins will even see some subtle thematic links between both films. For example the ending scene of Batman Begins has a dialogue between Batman and Jim Gordon that is replicated with some modification near the end of The Dark Knight, sort of an Easter Egg for faithful fans.

Certainly, the movie has its flaws: the first half has some excess baggage, i wish Joker’s origin was more developed, more screen time for both Aaron Eckhart and Heath Ledger, less blurry fistfights but considering the final product, these are slight quibbles. The Dark Knight has earned its place in the pantheon of great films and hopefully a few Oscar nominations come awards time. At the very least, it is probably the first superhero film with a decent chance of snagging an acting Oscar and possibly even a nomination for either Best Picture or Best Director (though odds are the Academy won’t give the Oscar to a superhero flick).

The Dark Knight is not your regular superhero movie. You are likely to stagger out of a screening depressed and gloomy because the film itself is the antithesis of a feel good blockbuster happy flick like Kungfu Panda. It has more in common with classic morality tales than escapist fiction. The Dark Knight poses a question of morality, heroism and the value of society itself. It shows us the uncanny similarity of Batman and Joker, that they may just be the flip side of the same coin. As the 2 opposing forces collide, something’s gotta give and one wonders if, as Harvey Dent says: “You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.”

This is a film that is basically 2 and a half hours of gloom, dread and morbidity. But its imagery, themes and Heath Ledger’s riveting performance will haunt you long after you have finished watching. This is the best superhero movie ever, and it is probably the best film of 2008.

“Watching “The Dark Knight” is like gazing into a mirror on a waning moon night: chilling and mesmerizing. “- Denver Post

“Christopher Nolan’s “The Dark Knight” is a haunted film that leaps beyond its origins and becomes an engrossing tragedy.”- Ebert

Into The Wild (2007) 9/10

In 1992, Chris McCandless gives his life savings to charity, burns all of his identification, and begins hitchhiking across America, his ultimate goal being Alaska. This is the story of his life, an ode to nature and a powerful, almost heartbreaking tale of a young life wasted. We sense his yearning and can almost understand his rationality of abandoning civilization. Director Sean Penn obviously has a somewhat sympathetic view towards his subject matter. But there is also an underlying current of how irresponsible he is to desert his family, and how utterly foolish he is to embark of his journey to Alaska without proper equipment. McCandless is the ultimate conflicted hero, one whom we admire his unblemished idealism even as we deprecate his folly. But the film is as much about the process as it is the end point. Emile Hirsch puts in a strong performance in his portrayal of Chris, and he is supported by an excellent supporting cast. In many respects, it reminds me of Grizzly Man, Warner Herzog’s excellent documentary about a character who similarly yearned the solitude of nature. Into the Wild is the sort of movie that, unless it wins some major awards, has little popular appeal. People won’t pay to watch it, and it lacks the sort of edgy appeal to turn into a cult classic. It is a firmly arthouse film that few people will ever notice, but that is a great pity because Into The Wild represents filmmaking at its best.

More than anything, this is a film where the supporting characters, even if they have only a short screen time, make a big impression. The scene with Hal Holbrook ranks as one of the strongest scenes of the year- a powerful and touching scene that is just one of the many little touches that make this film a deeply personal and humanistic experience. As a director, Sean Penn has certainly matured and displays remarkable craft. He wisely refrains from too much directorial tricks and lets the strong script speak for itself. Into the Wild is a tour de force and has a firm spot in my top 10 of 2007.

“Emile Hirsch gives an intense and mesmerizing performance that lights up this drama and keeps it reverberating in our minds long after we have left the theater.”- Brussat

“But this is a serious, personal movie about what it is to be human, and what happens when we admire nature more than humanity: does it make us less than human, or do we fulfil and even transcend our humanity?”- Bradshaw

Gone Baby Gone (2007) 8/10

Gone Baby Gone was directed by Ben Affleck. Yes, that Ben Affleck who starred in the critically ravaged Gigli and a host of duds like Pearl Harbour, etc. Of course Affleck did have some good movies in the past, especially during those days where he collaborated with Matt Damon in Good Will Hunting. But Affleck has clearly been losing his edge as a bankable star and this time he moves to the director’s seat in his first time as a director. And he is pretty darn good as a director, if Gone Baby Gone is any indication. There has already been precedent- Sofia Coppola’s disastrous attempt at acting in Godfather 3 would lead her to the director’s chair behind successes like Lost In Translation. Ben Affleck is really good as a director and i was suprised by how enjoyable this film was. The script itself is based on Dennis Lehane’s novel (who also wrote Mystic River), so the story itself is solid.

Ben chose his brother Casey Affleck to star in this movie, and directors who choose to cast their family members usually screw up especially if it is a major role. Again, Godfather 3 is the cautionary example. Thankfully, Casey Affleck can act, and his surprisingly youthful looks suit the role very well. Casey plays Patrick Kenzie, a PI hired to find a missing girl who unravels more that he can handle.

Much of the film is an engaging tale which tells of the kidnap of a child and the efforts to find her. There are twists and turns in the film, and they aren’t particularly groundbreaking twists, but the movie does take a surprising turn in the last act which transforms this film from a police procedural to a heart-breaking drama. It poses a moral and ethical question to the viewers at the end which i didn’t expect and it is the final act that brings this drama up a whole notch. This is a morally murky film that will challenge viewers and make them think. I know it certainly made me think, and the closest analogy to this film would probably be Clint Eastwood’s Million Dollar Baby which is similar in structure. Its one of my favorite films of the year, and a movie that not only engages and entertains you but also makes you think. For the record, i would probably have decided differently from Patrick Kenzie’s character. But is that the right choice? Can there ever be a right choice? This is a film that will spark moral discussions, and i can’t say that of many films.

“The result is a superior police procedural, and something more — a study in devious human nature.”- Roger Ebert

“For all the rough-and-tumble action sequences, skillfully choreographed by Affleck, Gone Baby Gone is a thinking man’s crime film, whose deeply etched characters and brilliant plotting have a near-Shakespearean power.”- FilmJournal

Juno (2007) 8/10

To quote the title character Juno, this film is stupendous. Razor sharp wit and dialogue from Diablo Cody paired with an assured directorial effort by Jason Reitman makes Juno the little indie film that could. Touted as this year’s breakaway hit, Juno is smart, sassy and utterly enjoyable. And this compliment applies to both the film and the eponymous lead character, played with gusto and aplomb by the incredibly talented Ellen Page. Proving that her memorable performance in Hard Candy was no fluke, Ellen Page is simply mesmerizing as Juno and carries the whole film on her own shoulders. I cannot imagine anyone else giving such a pitch perfect performance. Such is Page’s charisma and screen presence that it is almost impossible to hate Juno. Its just not possible. Juno is a film that will just melt hearts and charm everyone. Page is surrounded by a solid and impeccable supporting cast, including yet another high profile role by the geeky yet strangely likable Michael Cera, following his performance earlier in Superbad. But lets be clear: the script, the directing and the supporting cast is excellent but it is Ellen Page that propels this film from being merely good to another level altogether. Ellen Page probably won’t win any acting accolades for Juno- not because of merit but because of the sheer unlikelihood that Oscars will give a Best Actress nod to someone so young. But she is clearly destined for greatness and if she keeps up her smart film choices, she is definitely Best Actress calibre.

This is a year where unexpected pregnancies spawned a subgenre of films by itself, with the triumvirate of Knocked Up, Waitress and Juno which were all critically acclaimed and which i enjoyed immensely. Juno proves to be the best of the bunch, with Roger Ebert naming it the best film of 2007. I won’t go that far, but certainty Juno has a firm spot in my top 10 list of this year. Juno is a movie with a heart, and its one you won’t regret watching.

“Juno is the kind of the film where a viewer almost needs to look for a reason to dislike it for it not to work. It’s charming without being saccharine. It’s funny without being rude or dishonest. It’s smart without being smart-assed. And it’s got enough heart to keep the comedic elements in check.”- James Berardinelli

“Jason Reitman’s “Juno” is just about the best movie of the year. It is very smart, very funny and very touching; it begins with the pacing of a screwball comedy and ends as a portrait of characters we have come to love.”- Roger Ebert

No Country For Old Men (2007) 9/10

I was disappointed by the ending, which i felt was too abrupt, and possibly too verbose. But everything before the finale was pure cinematic magic so i’m willing to overlook this. I have never been much of a fan of the works of directors Joel and Ethan Coen, or the Coen Brothers as they are popularly known. However, their latest work is a veritable tour de force, at once darkly humorous, thrilling and simply pitch perfect. In a year filled with a deluge of good movies, No Country for Old Man is a near-perfect movie, the kind that will be labeled a masterpiece and studied by film students for years to come. Based on the novel by Cormac McCarthy, the film showcases the Coens at the peak of their filmmaking mastery. Definately a Best Picture contender.

The acting is great, as one would expect from the likes of Tommy Lee Jones and Josh Brolin. But it is Javier Bardem, a Spanish actor who first captured my attention in the excellent The Sea Inside, who steals the show. Bardem’s character - Anton Chigurh- is like a ghost, a phantom who lays out a path of destruction. Yes, it is quite possibly the most badass character ever on film.

It is the little scenes that makes this such an enjoyable movie. One memorable scene has Javier Bardem asking a shop owner to call a coin filp. The dialogue is so masterful, the tension so thick that you end up mesmerized. This is filmmaking at its best, and the Coen Brothers have truly made a remarkable film.

The film sucks you in, and it never lets go, until maybe the last 15 mins or so where the Coens seem to falter. Lets just say that the somewhat disappointing ending is the only reason this film did not get a perfect 10. The rest of the film is just riveting. And although 2007 has a bumper crop of top films like Once, Eastern Promises and Atonement, i have to say that No Country For Old Men is now firmly on top of my Best of 2007 list. It is the best film of the year (so far), and whatever happens, it is bound to be remembered as a masterpiece. See it.

‘”NO Country for Old Men” is the first movie I’ve seen in a very long while that deserves to be called a masterpiece.”- NY Post

“Let’s just say it’s all amazing. “No Country for Old Men” is exactly the kind of challenge film buffs will love if you’re sick of the by the numbers, multiplex drivel. And if you aren’t yet sick of that crap, “No Country for Old Men” will still keep you enthralled for two hours.”- Film Threat

After the Wedding (2006) 8/10

Nominated for the best foreign language film in the 2007 Oscars, After the Wedding is a classic melodrama from Denmark which works because of a brilliant cast and excellent directing. Director Susanne Bier emerges as an immensely talented female director who knows how to lift the script beyond its cliched confines. Under a lesser director, this film could easily be a soppy, predictable melodrama, the kind you often see on TV. But under Bier’s masterful direction, she crafts characters who are compelling, flawed and utterly fascinating. And major credit goes to its fine ensemble cast. Its rare to find a ensemble cast where there is literally no weak link and every cast member pulls their weight, but i was simply charmed by the memorable performance by the cast. Mads Mikkelsen , looking like a Dannish version of Viggo Mortenson plays the character Jacob and has mastered the art of looking coolly aloof. Stine Fischer Christensen, Sidse Babett Knudsen and Rolf Lassgård are foreign names to me. But they are incredibly talented and give this film much of its dramatic weight. After the Wedding (Efter brylluppet) may be a melodrama, but its melodrama of the finest kind.

“AFTER THE WEDDING’S anguished portrait of family, charity, and mortality peels back layers in the characters that defy their easy categorization.”- Pfeiffer

“This is a cast from paradise.”- Tony Medley

Once (2007) 9/10

Directed by John Carney, ONCE is a labor of love that has more heart than the last few musicals i’ve watched. This is the film that MUSIC & LYRICS wants to be. Unfortunately, being a small arthouse flick, most people won’t have even heard of it. It is a beautiful and enchanting film, and one of the best films of the year. It is also technically a musical, but the movie doesn’t have any dancing. Its about people, and music. So much so that the film does not even bother to name its 2 leads. They are simply credited as “guy” and “girl” when the credits roll. But the performances are great: Glenn Hansard and Marketa Irglova display great chemistry and give solid performances. They are not professional actors, so their acting may be a tad rough, but this gives it a sense of raw honesty that many other films lack. Most importantly, unlike other musicals, the leads sing their own songs and play their instruments. Within its short running time, its chock filled with songs, and let me add that the soundtrack is smashing. The director blends the music into the film seamlessly, and avoids the artificiality of most other musicals which break into an unnatural song and dance; here the music flows with the plot. Winner of the Audience Award at both the 2007 Sundance Film Festival and Dublin International Film Festival, Once is an arthouse gem that deserves a look. Its also my favorite musical (and i generally don’t like musicals, but Once gets my hearty recommendation). From the verite, documentary look to the endearing performances by the leads, Once is one of the best films of 2007. You don’t need big budgets to make a good movie.

“However, beneath its deceptively modest exterior, the film conveys such acute feelings of hurt, longing and hope that it emerges as “big” in the way that counts most—as a singular emotional experience that lingers sweetly in heart and mind long after the closing credits.”- Metromix

Somersault (2004) 8/10

Australian Film Institute (2004)

Best Sound

There are very few female directors who are famous, and even fewer are at the top of the league. However, Cate Shortland who directed Somersault, displays remarkable talent in this impressive Australian Indie film. Along with LANTANA and THE PROPOSITION, Somersault is one of the best Australian films i’ve seem. In fact, its probably the best Australian film ever made. This article gives you an idea of how big a deal Somersault was in 2004. Somersault was nominated for 15 awards by the Australian Film Institute (Australia’s equivalent of the Oscars), and won 13 awards in the end. The only 2 awards that it didn’t win was for Best Supporting Actress and Best Supporting Actor and that was because it had received 2 Best Supporting Actress and Best Supporting Actor nominations each. Therefore, it was prevented from winning all 15 awards by impossibility, and swept every single award it could could possibly win.

I could talk about the beautiful cinematography, the excellent script, the nuanced direction or the uniformly excellent cast. But the film is about Abbie Cornish, who plays the main character with aching vulnerability and beguiling innocence. Like a force of nature, she steals every scene she is in and puts in one of the best leading performances ever. It is a performance that is worthy of an Oscar statuette, if only the Oscars were more discerning about their nominations. The characters have depth and while not necessarily good, are beautiful in their flawed imperfections.

One of the best films i have ever watched.

“Cate Shortland’s “Somersault,” which won the Australian Film Institute Award for best picture and actress, eerily evokes the marooned feeling between childhood and adulthood. Dreamy and creepy, tender and terrifying, “Somersault” is a frank and visceral film that at the same time exudes an unexpected innocence.”- LA Times

Zodiac (2007) 8/10

One of the best films of 2007. Although it may be a slow-burn kind of film that eschews explosions for depth, Zodiac is a compelling and finely crafted tale that brings you into the world of the mysterious Zodiac Killer, whose crime remains unsolved even today.

Quite possibly director David Fincher’s most low key and subdued work, it is also his most patient effort as Fincher takes pains to outline the chronology of events. This explains the overindulgent running time of more than 2 and a half hours, as well as the inevitable problem that some parts feel a tad draggy. However, this does not detract from the fact that Zodiac is a masterfully directed and well acted film that is compelling, enjoyable and intelligent. Fincher refrains from using much of the cinematic flourishes he is known for and rightly so, but i love his cinematographic touches when he does decide to use them. Excellent aerial shots of the city which i absolutely love. Plus the cast is fantastic , with the likes of Jake Gyllenhaal, Mark Ruffalo and Robert Downey Jr giving solid performances.

The only reason why it loses points is because the latter part of the film feels draggy and some attempts by Fincher to create a sense of peril to the life of Gyllenhaal’s character doesn’t really work. Also, since the case is unsolved, it leaves the ending sort of hanging, which does not make for a satisfying tale.

But even then, strong production values and excellent casting makes Zodiac a worthy addition to Fincher’s already impressive resume. Not only is it one of the best films of 2007, it may also be one of the best police procedural and serial killer films ever made. Highly recommended.
“Low-key but all the more compelling for it, “Zodiac” is the first must-see movie of 2007.” -CNN

“Though all of a piece visually, Zodiac becomes a deliberate melding of multiple cinematic personalities: It’s a suspenseful thriller, a police procedural and a newspaper movie. And this time, Fincher seems adamant about not letting technique overwhelm what amounts to one of the most detailed crime movies ever.”- Robert Denerstein