Posts Tagged ‘war’

Che: Part One / Two

Che: Part One / Two

Tuesday, March 10th, 2009

Though this certainly isn’t a movie I’ll be returning to any time soon, like a lot of Steven Soderbergh’s less mainstream efforts, I find it pretty easy to admire. When the two parts here were merged from “The Argentine” and “Guerrilla” to simply “Che”, it of course became subject to my “if you use a definitive title, you better be definitive” rule – and I also wondered how the two parts would differ … would they differ, even, in tone and substance, eg, and should I review them as separate entities?

Well, I was pleasantly surprised. The work as a whole is pretty definitive. Benicio Del Toro is Che and I can forgive the length of the whole thing because it kind of turns it into an endurance test. You’re mentally exhausted by the end of watching both parts in succession as I did, and I believe you should be. The parts do feel very much like separate films but also work perfectly well watched as a whole. Clearly the biggest difference between the two parts is that one deals in success while the other deals in failure; the latter being much more subdued and with far less dialogue than the first part.

The ending is powerful, a POV view of Che’s very last moments on this plane of existence – one feels almost like the audience itself is being put out of its misery, so much does it feel as though we’ve followed each one of the hundreds of days accounted for in title cards. I’ll admit I know little of the history involved here, and one of the failings of the movie I found was that either it plain didn’t clearly enough explain the context or it never engaged me enough for me to pick up on it. This isn’t a front to back telling of Che’s life, focusing more in the separate films on his greatest triumph and his final failure. But there are nuggets of wisdom imparted in the dialogue, and it certainly left me wanting to know more. Technically I can’t fault it, and though it’s not entirely my cup of tea it shows that Soderbergh is still a guy who makes a movie pretty much exactly what it should be.



Island of the Damned aka Who Can Kill a Child?

Island of the Damned aka Who Can Kill a Child?

Thursday, March 5th, 2009

… aka Trapped, etc etc …

Well, I’m a big fan of evil movie children, so this was immediately right up my alley, hehe. This is one of those movies that gets around the “shoulda been under 90 minutes” problem I usually have with anything so genre as it is that runs over that magic figure by using its extra 30 minutes up front to introduce its main characters. For where the movie goes in the end, the opening is fiendishly slow but it makes the real bulk of the movie, from 30 minutes in when they leave the mainland, all the more gripping than it’d likely be without the set-up.

Will He, Won't He?

The thing I find most noteworthy about this is how genuinely on edge it put me. If I’d read a review of this that drew out how scary some of the smiling children are here I wouldn’t have believed it. But there’s something about some of those smiles, let’s call it the Hannibal Lector effect – remembering that moment when Clarice Starling first happened upon the genius cannibal, that simple smile with no real explanation behind it. Even on the most beautiful adolescent girl, the first of the island’s residents that we see, even as she seems to all intents and purposes to be perfectly harmless, it’s almost downright terrifying.

The second thing that makes this movie a cut above most of the genre is that it really goes all the way. I don’t know how to elaborate on that without spoiling it, but hey it’s been out for over 30 years so consider yourself warned, lol. There’s a moment at the end here where I really didn’t know where the movie was going to turn. I didn’t know where I wanted it to turn, even. But once the moment passed, I knew that I would’ve felt betrayed if it’d gone the other way. That didn’t stop the feeling of, “OMG he did it!” in my stomach though.

It borrows from plenty of movies – of course the title itself (the one I’ll always refer to it as, at least) recalls Children and Village of the Damned – and there are just a couple of scenes towards the end that attempt to explain away the childrens’ condition in a manner akin to those older movies, when really it works better when there’s no explanation. And if you’re coming here for gory visuals you might be disappointed by how fake they are. But this has bold intentions and takes no prisoners. I found myself right on the fence between seeing it as almost black comedy and a genuinely scary social commentary and I can imagine repeat viewings taking me to either extreme entirely. Definitely worth seeking out if you’re a fan of the genre, and worth taking time out for even if you’re not.



Defiance

Defiance

Tuesday, March 3rd, 2009

“But Jews do not fight.”
“These Jews do.”

A very late review of this and no notes to go on except the above quote. What I always like, expect, and usually get from Edward Zwick’s movies (okay, I’ve only seen Glory, Last Samurai, the slightly anomalous The Seige and Blood Diamond before this) – and I probably always say it in my reviews – is how he really gets the blood, sweat and tears of his stories onto the celluloid, and this one’s no exception. A lot of the reviews I read focussed on how it tells a story that’s not nearly as known as it should be, and that’s true – however, this in itself for me isn’t cause for a 2 hour feature. Where the power of Defiance comes from most for me is in that line above. How relieving to know that not all Jewish people of this time and situation just accepted what happened to them as “God’s will” or something the way it’s so often depicted.

Daniel Craig does the “not-Bond” thing far more convincingly than others have especially while still in the thick of that role, and Liev Schreiber and Jamie Bell are as good as ever too. The score is full of noodling violins that you’d expect from a story like this but it works, and the photography is pretty beautiful too.



Australia

Australia

Monday, February 9th, 2009

It’s funny, the first thing I’ve gotta say of this is, after all I’d heard and read from others about the movie, I genuinely expected it to be far more ridiculous than it ultimately struck me. As it turns out, this movie is just about exactly what I expected when it first began to be talked about, is it almost 2 years ago now? I also kind of expected it to be a lot longer than it was – is 2hrs 40 minutes really considered crazy long again now?

The section in between the whole cattle drive and the bombing is clearly the part that makes people feel the movie is overlong and I’d agree at least on that whole sequence. The movie feels so over once they get the bloody bulls on the big metal ship that it kind of reminded me of the act break in something like “Into the Woods” on stage. The children’s island mission party scene, then, is like the “I’m so happy you’re so happy” song that opens act 2 there. My mum commented on how the movie kept feeling like it was ending … I really can’t say I got this feeling enough to make it an issue. I really did just get swept up by this as much as I’d hoped months and months ago but genuinely never expected as the time came to sit down and actually watch it. Jackman might quite easily make it into my special little J’s list (Johnny, Josh, Joseph … you get the picture :-P ), Kidman is in least-annoying mode, the kid is beautiful, the music and visuals fantastic … I really simply can’t imagine how anybody thinks it could be better. Most of all, it’s far from ridiculous. It’s heightened, and old-fashioned – but that’s Luhrmann … that, I expected. The “Wizard of Oz” references complete the marvelousness.



Waltz With Bashir

Waltz With Bashir

Wednesday, January 28th, 2009

Not entirely sure what to say of this but seeing as it’s holding back other reviews I’ll just blast through and get it out of the way, lol. In short, I liked it. I’m not as wowed as others by the fact that animation can successfully cover a subject as bleak as war, because I’ve never been one to see animation and say, “oh it’s a cartoon, it must be for kids”. And of course, Richard Linklater made great use of this type of rotoscoping technique in Waking Life and A Scanner Darkly. But it’s clearly a story worth telling, and that they keep it down around the 90 minute mark without compromising any of its impact is very laudable. There are images and scenes here of the horror and chaos of war that instantly rank it up there with the best of them (for me, for the record, that would be Full Metal Jacket, Casualties of War, etc.).

I was initially surprised, then, that it wasn’t nominated for Best Animated Feature last week at the Oscar nominations, but I kind of understand that too. Casting aside any comment on whether rotoscoping really counts as animation, as technically it is kinda just “tracing”, it seems clear that Wall•E will triumph over anything else in this category and it would’ve just seemed wrong on the night for a robot love story to steal the gold from something heavier like this. And I must admit, I kind of am in the camp that looks at rotoscoping – even when it’s “adapted” here for more fantastical sequences – as something less impressive than fully hand-drawn or even the best of CG animation. This isn’t to look down on Waltz with Bashir as a whole – “true” animation or no, it is the perfect medium to tell this story and when the film switches to real footage at the end, it has all the more impact for the contrast it has with the hollow distance we have from what precedes it. Much of the film is about this distance, this, “how did you cope?” factor to the soldier’s story and the point at which is becomes “real”. It’s a haunting movie, certainly. Whether it’s so new anymore to point out that “war is hell” … I’ll just lay off that personal chain of thought for fear of offending anyone too much …



Zeitgeist / Zeitgeist Addendum

Zeitgeist / Zeitgeist Addendum

Wednesday, January 21st, 2009

“It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.” – Jiddu Krishnamurti, just one of the many great quotes these two documentaries are packed with.

This might not be a favourable comparison to some but – trust me I mean it well, I think – these reminded me a lot of What the Bleep do We Know? and its sequel Down the Rabbit Hole. I don’t have a lot to say about either, so I’m combining them into the one review.

Don’t let the lack of wordage here make you think I thought as little of them – there’s information in these four hours that make them certainly worth watching at least once by every man, woman and child on the planet. Many, as I did, will find a lot information they already had from other sources – for me personally, I’m a total liberal anyway so I gobble up information like this, I watch Colbert, the Daily Show, South Park, I listen to This American Life and Radio Lab, so a lot of what’s said here has already been “revealed” to me either in pure fact as here or just as part of a joke.

What has to be said about these documentaries, as often happens with these kinds of things, kind of hangs around that very word “documentary”. Like the What the Bleep films, the whole thing is just so one-sided and utopian (ahem … “weapons of mass creation,” I mean, come on …) you’d be a fool not to take them with a very large and healthy scoop of salt and skepticism. When, as here, they use footage of and quotes from Carl Sagan, the requirement for a baloney detection kit should be even more of a no-brainer. For if you watch movies like this, that basically tell you exactly what you want to hear – that your life sucks merely because of the failings of others and an evil superpower – and lap it up without question, you’re kind of playing into the core problem they’re addressing. I say this because I’ve read a lot of reviews that took the one-sided argument exactly that way.

One thing I found wrong with the first movie, which is perfectly – even exhaustively – methodical in putting forth its 9/11 argument, is that it gave no real thoughts regarding what exactly we’re supposed to do with all this information. Luckily, this is fixed in the Addendum which closes with a shopping list of ideas, kinda like those at the end of “The 11th Hour” or “An Inconvenient Truth,” or ways in which we might fix this. Many have pointed out that none of these ideas have really been thought much beyond the idea(l) stage. The fact remains though that however one-sided or idealistic these docs may be, if you’re gonna be one-sided and idealistic, there are worse things to be one-sided and idealistic about than what these movies are suggesting. They do manage to convince you that it’s possible. They’re more visually interesting than the average documentary to boot – the second one vastly improving on the first. And anything that includes footage from Network and lines from Carl Sagan – even if, as was the case in Frost/Nixon you may as well just watch the interview, you may as well just watch Network and read Sagan, LOL – really, I just can’t argue with.



War, Inc

War, Inc

Wednesday, June 11th, 2008

This will most certainly require a second viewing some time because I definitely think I like it but I couldn’t for the life of me tell you what it was all about. There’s something Wag the Dog-ish about it, something massively Grosse Pointe Blank ish about it too, and not just due to the presence of two Cusacks and Dan Aykroyd. Let it be said that any movie starring John and Joan pretty much has me at hello anyway. Hilary Duff is surprisingly watchable here too, I didn’t even recognise her at first. It’s very weird, very varied, and at times very funny. Like I say I can’t wait to see it again.



Grace is Gone

Grace is Gone

Thursday, May 15th, 2008

When I saw 1408 last year, I’d already been a fan of John Cusack I’m guessing since Grosse Pointe Blank 10 years previously – but it was still like having a veil lifted from my eyes as I realised, he wasn’t just cool, he was one of best actors I’d ever seen. It was only shortly after that that I heard the buzz around his performance here and that was it, I was sure he’d finally get an Oscar nomination.

Well, I wasn’t let down. Cusack’s performance here is completely overwhelming, everything that isn’t spoken playing off his face more eloquently and painfully than any words could muster. Clint Eastwood’s score is quietly brilliant too. Both, as I thought months ago before even seeing or hearing either, should’ve featured in this year’s Oscar nominations.

Though I hadn’t realised it, I think the reason my reviews have suffered a little lately is because I really badly needed a tearjerker like this to clear the system. The two girls who play Cusack’s daughters are amazing too – we almost seem to see them growing up on the screen before our eyes, so much do we come to know them and so well is it conveyed to us how important the days covered will be in their lives to come. They even get their ears pierced together midway. The ultimate effect of this is that when the moment comes that the movie is all about – dad finally finding the right time and the right words to tell his girls what has happened – even though we’re in possession of the facts from the start – it’s like finally we’re really being told too, and we take it just the same as the girls. It’s a beautiful, beautiful movie, and at 85 minutes it really proves they needn’t come much longer.