Monday, July 18, 2011

"La règle du jeu (The Rules of the Game)" (1939)



-one of the first instances of 'hyperlink cinema'

-extraordinarily written and devised; but also executed, which of course is most important

-if its Renoir, its got to be well shot- which it was

-acting was so very natural and human-based; nothing overboard or unrealistic- actors are humans too you know....

-Christine represented the prize everyone longed for but its interesting who she ends up with

-for 1939 it was rather raunchy with the many affairs going on and how the characters were SO bourgeoisie that some didnt even care


"Umberto D." (1952)



-Vittorio de Sica truly is a master of exploring the human condition; "Ladri di Biciclette" (1948) is done in a very similar way- instead of a dog there is a young boy

-moving performance from Carlo Battisti who plays Umberto- he carries and introduces himself as if he own Italy himself and he should; he must present an image of success at all times

-i think the dog Flike represents our possessions. even though we try to leave them, they don't want to leave us- it is a truly beautiful companionship although an inordinate one

-there are many heart wrenching and heartwarming scenes; many surprised me and moved me

-Maria, the servant of the flat, represents our friends who are trapped themselves but do everything in their power to help us

-the owner Antonia represents any higher power in any society that is corrupt and cruel

-there is a world within "Umberto D."

-last scene shows truths in our relationships; we really cant just leave each other, we have to keep holding on




Academy Awards, USA
YearResultAwardCategory/Recipient(s)
1957 NominatedOscarBest Writing, Motion Picture Story
Cesare Zavattini

Saturday, July 16, 2011

"Ran" (1985)



-impeccably shot and pristine direction

-breathtaking art direction and costume design

-Tatsuya Nakadai playing Lord Hidetora delivers an incredibly powerful performance that really tied the movie up

-the locations for the palaces and ruins were eye candy making this one of the most visually dazzling films of all time

-for me, "Yojimbo" and "Sanjuro" were still better, even "Rashomon" was. this was still visually his most impressive work




Academy Awards, USA
YearResultAwardCategory/Recipient(s)
1986 WonOscarBest Costume Design
Emi Wada
NominatedOscarBest Art Direction-Set Decoration
Yoshirô Muraki
Shinobu Muraki
Best Cinematography
Takao Saitô
Shôji Ueda
Asakazu Nakai
Best Director
Akira Kurosawa

"Les vacances de Monsieur Hulot (M. Hulot's Holiday)" (1953)



-a funny and warm French comedy

-it works as a silent film; Jacques Tati's (writer, director and M. Hulot) comedic moments are as funny and work as Chaplin, Keaton and Lloyd tricks. ironically there is very little necessary dialogue like "La Ballon Rouge" of 1956

-excellent character development. we get to know all the characters as Hulot gets to know them

-the music is wonderfully present providing a cozy and warm feeling a throughout the film




Academy Awards, USA
YearResultAwardCategory/Recipient(s)
1956 NominatedOscarBest Writing, Story and Screenplay
Jacques Tati
Henri Marquet

"Le charme discret de la bourgeoisie (The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie)" (1972)



-revolutionary surrealist filmmaking from the master of surrealism himself Louis Buñuel

-i have never seen something, other than 'Obscure Object', so ingeniously constructed and conformed. so different and unique with an idea that could only be thought of by a true surrealist

-they never eat a single bite of food until one breaks

-like "Inception" but obviously better, there are dreams inside of dreams inside of dreams inside of dreams inside of dreams inside of dreams....

-the cinematography and color pallet were astonishingly beautiful; just in these two pictures you can feel the warmth that only Almodovar or Fellini can emit

-shocking and surprising masterpeice that resonates in our minds a long time after viewing




Academy Awards, USA
YearResultAwardCategory/Recipient(s)
1973 WonOscarBest Foreign Language Film
France
NominatedOscarBest Writing, Story and Screenplay Based on Factual Material or Material Not Previously Published or Produced
Luis Buñuel (screenplay/story)
Jean-Claude Carrière (collaboration)

"Sideways" (2004)



-one of the best written films of the past 10 years

-organic performances; for some of thee actors its the best they will ever do (not Giamatti)

-it is shot and scored in this feel-good semblance but there are scenes that are quite disconcerting- it is reallyy about reaching a boring and lost time in our lives; but there is something, yes that costs money, but there is something that makes it all worth living and working through. for Giamatti's and Virginia Madsen's characters its wine

-so its not really a film about wine- you dont need to even know what wine is to understand the film

-there are scenes of great pain and of great passion; the ending is....




Academy Awards, USA
YearResultAwardCategory/Recipient(s)
2005 WonOscarBest Writing, Adapted Screenplay
Alexander Payne
Jim Taylor
NominatedOscarBest Achievement in Directing
Alexander Payne
Best Motion Picture of the Year
Michael London
Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role
Thomas Haden Church
Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role
Virginia Madsen

"Akmareul boatda (I Saw the Devil)" (2010)



-one of the best revenge films since the "Kill Bill" series; raw and gut-wrenching violent

-excellent character development; we could feel every emotion of even the smallest character who doesn't even speak; which obviously means the performances were pitch-perfect

-cinematography was visually stunning; it had this floating feeling and we got a real sense for the action- loved the long takes

-yes the violence was excessive but like a Tarantino film: it works!

-the title is expertly misleading- who is the devil: the serial killing psychopath or the ruthless-revenge seeking lover- and the ending is a perfect realization of who is who


 

"La passion de Jeanne d'Arc (The Passion of Joan of Arc)" (1928)



-an absolutely revolutionary film; deeply moving

-i saw the film with no sound or music because it was not accompanied with any- for good reason. it was too emotional and music would have only been a distraction

-cinematography was some of the best EVER. some shots looked as if they were bouncing according to what the characters were saying; some were upside down shots and they way some shots utilized Maria Falconetti's (Joan of Arc) face was extrodinary

-moving performance from Falconetti; one of the first strong female performances

"Being There" (1979)



-Wonderfully unconventional dramedy

-Peter sellers gives such a moving performance i dont like that he didnt win the Oscar (he says it was over the whole 'end credits dispute' because it broke his character; i, for one, agree)

-i think it was symbolic of those we can and cant trust; who is being candid and who is being jovial; in this case we cant tell the difference

-location was near my hometown and served its purpose excellently

-last shot was beautifully executed; it makes us ask ourself- was he really there, or was he just there- if you know what i mean




Academy Awards, USA
YearResultAwardCategory/Recipient(s)
1980 WonOscarBest Actor in a Supporting Role
Melvyn Douglas
Melvyn Douglas was not present at the awards ceremony. Co-presenter Liza Minnelli accepted the award on his behalf.
NominatedOscarBest Actor in a Leading Role
Peter Sellers

Friday, July 15, 2011

"La Jetée" (1962)



-strikingly beautiful and original

-every photo was gorgeously taken and thought through

-story was ingenious; great twist ending (obviously inspiring "12 Monkeys")

-music was nothing short of haunting (whole film really)

-interesting as a love story and sci-fi at the same time

"Au Revoir Les Enfants" (1987)



-one of the final moments in this beatiful film

-i would have never guessed Louis Malle directed this one; his films are usually darker

-it is deeply affecting and daringly written

-coming of age is and often explored subject; ive never seen it surrounding the Holocaust except for "The Boy in the Striped Pajamas"

-cinematography was beatiful; colors were dim and dark- fitting for the time and subject

-friendship was wonderfully explored, and broken; shows that there are really no bounadries between race or religion




Academy Awards, USA
YearResultAwardCategory/Recipient(s)
1988 NominatedOscarBest Foreign Language Film
France
Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen
Louis Malle

"Kakushi-toride no san-akunin (The Hidden Fortress)" (1958)



-exceptional action dramedy from Kurosawa

-Toshirô Mifune delivers a strong but unusually humane performance; he has come a long way from "Rashomon" of 1950

-Usual splendid cinematogrphy; smooth and atention-holding

-great but unique story from Kurosawa; not ronin samurai helping the poor

"Ansiktet (The Magician)" (1958)



-Of course well shot; dark and smooth showing every facet of the faces.

-Ingrid Thulin, Max von Sydow and Gunnar Bjornstrand give their usual thrilling and provacative performances. interesting to see how they all morph from character to character; Gunnar playing a father in "Through a Glass Darkly" and a mad man in this.

-Sydow has his usual stunning 'tortured man' perfromance


"Bonnie and Clyde" (1967)



-first film with graphic violence; but unlike todays film has wonderful storytelling and a compelling adventure

-very well acted: Faye Dunaway was her usual enthralling, spunky and wild. she was looking for adventure and got it.

-Warren Beatty was wild and wacky as well. he had little heart and when something went wrong he would get incredibly fiery. he was annoyingly nervous when it came to robbing banks

-Hackman, Pollard and Parsons were perfect. Gene Wilder makes a funny appearence which i really enjoyed.

-very well shot; i loved the opening sequence with Dunaway. loved the shots within the car bofore and after robberies- and of course the last scene.




Academy Awards, USA
YearResultAwardCategory/Recipient(s)
1968 WonOscarBest Actress in a Supporting Role
Estelle Parsons
Best Cinematography
Burnett Guffey
NominatedOscarBest Actor in a Leading Role
Warren Beatty
Best Actor in a Supporting Role
Gene Hackman
Best Actor in a Supporting Role
Michael J. Pollard
Best Actress in a Leading Role
Faye Dunaway
Best Costume Design
Theadora Van Runkle
Best Director
Arthur Penn
Best Picture
Warren Beatty
Best Writing, Story and Screenplay - Written Directly for the Screen
David Newman
Robert Benton

"The Last Picture Show" (1971)
















-A true American classic. a beautiful film. simple and beautiful. there is no real message or lesson that we experience in the film. most who are watching have already experienced this: loss of innocence. this film, like "American Graffiti", has a very nostalgic feeling. this is a boring Texas town in the 50's. nothing has happened and nothing really does happen. it's not like the town will experience something that will change it forever. it has happened through prior generations; death, growing up and relationships. that is the genious of it all. we can tell that this has happened before. the characters for the most part are one deminsional and monochramatic. for some, that changes.

-characters find out about social barriers and become more adventurous and for some, thatbecomes dangerous.

-ending is incredibly poigant and true; a painful film to watch, but again, real




Academy Awards, USA
YearResultAwardCategory/Recipient(s)
1972 WonOscarBest Actor in a Supporting Role
Ben Johnson
Best Actress in a Supporting Role
Cloris Leachman
NominatedOscarBest Actor in a Supporting Role
Jeff Bridges
Best Actress in a Supporting Role
Ellen Burstyn
Best Cinematography
Robert Surtees
Best Director
Peter Bogdanovich
Best Picture
Stephen J. Friedman
Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium
Larry McMurtry
Peter Bogdanovich


"Jules et Jim" (1962)



-Really a wonderful film. the french strike again with their expert story telling. a wanton woman going back and forth between man to man because she cant make up her mind. she's unhappy and always will be. nothing man can create will satisfy her. this is a smart and truely innovative film. we see expert writing style and human emotion. Truffaut is one of the greatest directors ever. his forthwright style is captivating; as is this film. the acting is as incredible as the plot.

-natural storytelling; very relatable and and shockingly candid

"The Earrings of Madame de..." (1953)



-a gracefull masterpeice from visual master Max Ophuls

-excellent long takes and tracking shots

-costume design was brilliant. perfect for all characters

-locations were beatufully constructed

-unorthodox story; very complex and deals with coincidence, chance and consequence

-wonderful chain reaction story

-profound performance by Danielle Darrieux





Academy Awards, USA
YearResultAwardCategory/Recipient(s)
1955 NominatedOscarBest Costume Design, Black-and-White
Georges Annenkov
Rosine Delamare

"Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" (1958)



-great familial drama

-well acted from the three leads (Burl Ives, Elizabeth Taylor and Paul Newman)

-wonderfully shot with great colors

-loved how it took place in one location

-Newman was exceptional and my faorite of his performances; great last scene when he poured out the truth about 'Big Daddy'

-Taylor was perfectly cast; sexy, vibrant and strong willed

-truthfully human and raw; Tennessee Williams wrote a wonderful play

-my favorte next to "Glass Menagerie"




Academy Awards, USA
YearResultAwardCategory/Recipient(s)
1959 NominatedOscarBest Actor in a Leading Role
Paul Newman
Best Actress in a Leading Role
Elizabeth Taylor
Best Cinematography, Color
William H. Daniels
Best Director
Richard Brooks
Best Picture
Lawrence Weingarten
Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium
Richard Brooks
James Poe

Ok

alright i havent posted anything in a while because of my persistent film watching i will opst eveything i \ve seen and some notes i liked about them...this will take a while

Sunday, June 19, 2011

"The Tree of Life" (2011)




I swear to you I will never have another experince like this again. Where do i begin. I saw it 3 hours ago and i am in such shock that i dont know where my thoghts are going. everyone should see it first of. to hell with PG-13 rating. take you four year olds and up. there is nothing bad about it. it is a bit bamboozling though. some wont get it which is understandable. from the first 30 mins i did not know where it was going. i though 'does he really know what the hell is going on'?- yea he does. he knows more that what is going on. he knows what was going on an why. which is an interesting concept. its not about time periods or people or places. its about inner human emotion and or spirit. which is vague, but Malick can stretch it out to make in 2 hrs and 10 mins. obviously the first thing that comes to mind is Kubrick's masterpeice 2001: Space Odyssey which i will see tonight. The visuals for the film cannot be asaigned a name as it was in 2001. they were more than encapsulating, breathtaking, stunning, audacious, existential and pretty. you thought the abomonation called "Avatar" was visually good but youve got another thing coming. it must win an Oscar for Cinematography and i hope, Best Picture. It's not a film to be dove into because it's all there. its not like "The Sweet Hereafter" where you have to study it's every move to see what the hell is going on. It's very self exlanitory which is refeshing for someone who enjoys surrealism or metaphorical film. We see a boy who loses his innocence- right, been there done that- but wait. we are going to study the loss through existential visuals and questioning. we are going to go to the beginning, then progress foward through evolution and teachings about humanity, where we began. then we can closely watch the steps to loosing innocence. the tree itself has very little part in the film. the title is just something Malick had to give the film. in fact, the film doesnt even have opening credits. that's not important. as ive said before, the make a great film, it must have a great opening shot and closing shot. well this is an exception. the first thing we see is not a shot but, well youll have to see it. we see it several times throught the film. it is a motif as are opened gates, mountains, waterfalls, molecules etc. the last thing we see is the first thing. but before that, the last actual shot is a bridge; not what i would have used but the entire film is one incredible shot so it doesnt have that much of an affect. I applaud Malick's artistic approach to a familiar topic. It felt like the first time I read the short story 'The Scarlet Ibis" which I will make a movie of. I wil not describe it because i want everyone to read it. this feels like a film i would ave made; visually and emotionally succinct. I will never have an experince like this again.

"If I shall be any good later on, then I am some good now; for corn is corn, even if people from the city take it for grass at first."

-Vincent van Gogh

Saturday, June 4, 2011

"A Woman Under the Influence" (1974)



Like Mike Nichols masterful debut ,"Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" this is not an easy film to watch. it is a harrowing classic. it is one that should not be missed. or maybe it should for some. it is like 'Virginia Woolf' with and extra ten minutes making it even more excruciatingly painful. the way it is presented is, like Ebert said, unrealistic. but that does NOT make it a bad film; in fact it's a really good one. there may not be people really like this. everything goes wrong for the most part which is a rare thing to happen in life. again its not a bad film. the strength of the film is obviously the acting; especially that of Gena Rowlands. everyone is on target. the film is more like taking all of the messed up people in the world and inserting them into this town. but it works. "Magnolia" is the same way too. the performance out of Gena Rowlands is like nothing i have ever seen before. its shockingly painful and disturbing. she does not have a mental disorder and she doesnt cut her wrists or abuse anyone. what does that leave: her performance. im not sure where the hell it came from but she knew what she was doing. while watching the film, you get the same feeling during "Persona" or "Mullholand Dr." is this really happening? i actually thought at the end Cassavetes would turn it around and make it all a dream or Rowlands' character was a ghost or illusion. it was a bit eerie. i was too stunned to figure out if there was a mesage behind the story. there was nothing really to learn from. dont marry a crazy-ass woman?- i dont think so. this is one ill have to see again.





Academy Awards, USA
YearResultAwardCategory/Recipient(s)
1975 NominatedOscarBest Actress in a Leading Role
Gena Rowlands
Best Director
John Cassavetes

New List

http://www.imdb.com/list/qsUwdR7mTc0/

My Favorite Films of the Past 20 Years

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

Time to Change a Bit

Ok well as many bloggers know, it takes a lot of effort to write a review and well you dont get paid for it. what im trying to say is writing a 3 paragraph dissertation on every film i see is a waste of my time. so unless i think a film is 'worth' 3P's i will write one. the others will just be points of the film i enjoyed.

Sunday, May 15, 2011

"Magnolia" (1999)


I know its in spanish but i like the poster. i will translate: Frank- he wants to convince Earl- he wants time Stanley- he wants a friend Claudia- she wants to change Linda- she wants help Donnie- he wants to give everything Jimmy- he wants to be forgiven Jim- he wants love

It's not going to stop, so just give up. this really is one of the greatest films of our time. Another film that explores a subject with deep thought. human emotion. this review will sound much akin to that of my earlier review of "The Sweet Hereafter". that is because they both intamitly explore the human mind and what happened in our childhood that lead us to the point in which we are today. this film forces us to feel; like "Requiem for a Dream". it's epic length makes it even more emotionally brutal. we sit down and forced to see lives of real people. i can tell you that this has happened to everyone in the world. one day in which we and our families and friends have that one god-awful day. and most of us may not even know much of what else happens. like Linda Partridge had no idea what Stanley Spector was going through. we are all dealing with our own inner conflicts so we are blinded from everything else. we need help and some characters in the film are helpers, while others need help. we see this everyday. it is a mad world out there, and this film shows that it's really not. those who are considered 'mad' just need some help, some more than others. but we all need help each other if we are going to survive on this earth. again this film shows the importance of that. by the curtain call of the film, not everything is fixed and not everything is resolved. but that's just life right? we see a series of interconnected characters dealing with conflicts on a day that they may never forget or one that they will learn from or forget; it might just be a reagular day. but we all have these days, maybe not to this extent or maybe even worse. i have met people very much like these people. this is a very important subject and film. but instead of giving a sermon about all of this, PTA inserted into this one film.

The plot is quite complex. the setting is one rainy day in California, yes it rain though most of the film which i think is vital to the movement. let's start with the character the director, P.T. Anderson, started with. Melora Walters plays Claudia. a dog-tired drug addict who picks up guys on a regular basis goes home and usually never sees them again. her father is Jimmy played by Philip Baker Hall. they are definatly estranged and you can probably guess why. he is the host for a long running game show called 'What Do Kids Know?'. he also has cancer. which he has not told his wife Rose (Melinda Dillon) about. he has cheated on her many times. the head of the game show is also dying of cancer but he is in his final moments. this is Jason Robards in his last film role as Earl Partridge. his nurse is Philip Seymour Hoffman playing Phil. Earl's wife is played verociously by the trophy-wife-on-outside-bitch-on-inside type, Julianne Moore who is an addict and is lost in confusion and anger and expresses it in the harshest and most explicit terms possible. reminds me of Sharon Stone's only good performnce in Scorsese's "Casino". Earl also has a son, Frank with his first wife, Lily. he is played by Tom Cruise in one of the greatest performances of our time. he has never and will never do something as good. Frank, well, his profession is to tell men how to get inside of a woman's pants. he is misogynistic and sexist, but for reasons we will discover throught the film. Stanley Spector plays a genious 12yearold contestant on the game show who is emotionally abused by his father (Michael Bowen) who knows that his son can score some money. i realate him to Howard Beale from "Network" (one of the main inspirations on the film); his talents are exploited for money. Stanley has much more potential in life thn this, and he knows it. William H. Macy plays Donnie who won a bunch of many on the game show in the late 60's. his parents took the money as well. he know works a shitty job as head salesman at some electronics store. he is fired but he needs money for his braces. yes, his teeth are fine, but he is in love with a male-bartender who has braces as well. this is one of the most deeply sadening sections of the film. i take that back, they all are really. John C. Reily plays Jim Kurring who is a nice police officer, devoted to God and doesent curse; one of the few characters. he is the laughing stock throughout the station. he is called to check out a disturbence- this is Claudia. we have now made the circle. below i have posted a charct to help you a bit. we filnd everything there is to know about the characters because of the way it's presented. through interviews or convertions etc. amazingly crafted. the end of the film is one of the most amazing feats i have ever seen. it's like seeing the traking shot of Orson Welles' "Touch of Evil" for the first time. all of the emotions from the day come down. So now then.

This is not an easy film. it is very raw. but why not be. i think if it was not raw it would feel uncomfortable. i think we can get closer to a film if is is more forthright and candid. many, including my mother, could not stomach it. the acting from everyone including extras was nothing short of astonishing. Moore should have won the Oscar. she was so fierce. it was a disturbing performance. Macy was the same way i felt. lost and deeply depressed. both of their characters were in search for one brief touch of happiness (not the movie). it is a disturbing search though. Robards has this incredible and moving speech toward the middle about regret. this was an excellent note for Robards to end on. Hoffman was trying to help him and Linda in all of this mess. Jeremy Blackman who played Stanley was brilliant. he was very deep and i could feel his characters need to escape from the clutches of his father. Bowen was excellent as well. Hall was beatiful and executed it expertly. Reily is one of those actors who can whip out an incredible performance: this is absolutly one of those. Walters was very powerful and i would have liked to see her career progress some more. now Cruise is NOT my favorite actor. all of his performances are about the same. this is the only good one. he is exceptionally moving and powerful. every scene including one of his last scenes with his father, generates enough energy to keep the film from being a bore. this is a 3 hour film. it feels like two shakes of a lambs tail. this is because of th performances. there is not one dull scene because everything is constantly progressing and we see people real people, dealing with what most of us have to deal with. so the helpers were Reily and Hoffman. the innocent was Blackman. Cruise, Robards, Moore, Walters, Macy all needed help. it's not even for a reason... the screeplay is without doubt one of the greatset ever and should have won the Osacar although nominated. Anderson decided to brilliantly screen "Network" and "Ordinary People" to the crew before filming. this really comes through. in "Network", there is not dull moment. they are so true and smart and tht keeps our attention. very few films can explore psychology as deftly as this one. this film shoud have swept the Oscars but was only nominated for three. the height of emotion is off the charts. it may have seemed absurd and improbable but you have to look beyond. something like this 40 years ago never would have been thought possible.  But it Did Happen.


File:Magnolia Character Relationships.svg





Academy Awards, USA
YearResultAwardCategory/Recipient(s)
2000 NominatedOscarBest Actor in a Supporting Role
Tom Cruise
Best Music, Original Song
Aimee Mann
For the song "Save Me".
Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen
Paul Thomas Anderson

Saturday, May 14, 2011

"The Sweet Hereafter" (1997)


One of the most powerful images in film history but I won't tell you why...

Beyond the surface of things. we dont look there much. we dont get to see a world in which subtly happens in our lives. it has never been dissected. this is beyond filmmaking. it is a life. what happens? we see people and human nature, intuition, motivation and WHY shit happens. intead of lackadaisically saying shit happens it explains it to us. this film does not ask or present questions but answers them. it does not preach a message, but makes us think. these are not film-qualities. these are ways in whic humans think, which makes it so hard to watch. we dont have to ask why. everything is answered. or is it? what is behind our lies? it shows us that. why do we do the things we do? it shows us that as well. this is a one of a kind expirience. kids should see it. forget the nudity and language because that's not what it is about. revenge and vengence; lies and deception. i think each individual person could pick something different up from the film so this is obviously from my standpoint. i'm not sure what more you could get out of the film but then again, i'm not everyone. the film is not ominous or ambiguous. there is no twist or scare. but the way in which it moves is heart-wrenching. i dont know if i have seen a more human film. "American Beauty","In the Bedroom" and "To Kill a Mockingbird" come very close though. i love films about people, and what they do. to me we are the most fascinating things on earth. their could be more fascinating things on other planets but that is another tirade. seeing films about people is an escape. now if you saw "Sex in the City" or "Fool's Gold", you escape but not to a real place. "The Sweet Hereafter" is a place. we can go anywhere within it. it's just a matter of what mind you are in.

The plot is almost unesscesary. its a distraction- a damn good distraction but there's more to everything. we see a small cozy church-goin town where no one is a stranger. yes, like in any town, there is lying. one woman is cheating on her husband with another man whose wife died. yes they are all rather religious except the Ottos who adopted their Indian son Bear. they are looked at as the town freaks but are definatly not mistreated; that would be going against thier religion. there is the young girl having the inscestious relationship with her father. she aspires to be a singer but the forthcoming storm will change her life; and everyone else's. a tradgic school bus accident, and many chidren are killed. those in the front of the bus, were severly injured, but lived to tell the tale. the driver of the bus has had this job for years. everyone knows and trusts her. the girl who wanted to become a singer lost the use of her legs and the driver broke her neck. this is a devestating loss, but an opportunity for laywer Mitchell Stevens (Ian Holm). he is a tourtered, divorced man whose daughter is a drug addict wh has been in and out of rehab many times. she calls often for money which she gets, and spends it on drugs. he sells himself to about everyone in the town except for those who have lied, and dont want to have those lies uncovered. one man might have even caused the accident by not checking the bus correctly. he is also the one having the affair. he DEFINATLY does not want anything to do with the lawyer. this town has been a pretty clean one. well, i should say they seemed clean on the surface and to each other. but nobody was ever brave enough to do anything. well, now is the chance for some of them; to get back at those who they hate. now this plot may seem predictable, which it's not, or elemetry. but looking beyond is key. you dont have to be a psychologist to get it. you have to have blood pumping through your veins.

Now i can see how some would not get it and accuse it of nothing happening. but that person would have to be pretty flat. this is not a blase film; children may not get it, not yet. but that is no excuse to avoid it. it is a cinematic, modern-day masterpeice. i dont think much out of the 90's can get any deeper than this. the fim is about people. we lie. not one human being ever to live the earth has has ever not lied. it is human nature; a defense mechanism. we also lie to avenge or get revenge. this happens multiple times; it's just the backdrop is the plot line. we laern "fear is contagious" and when we get scared or angry, we will do anything to cause pain to those who caused us this anger or fear. again, this happens. for me it took a first viewing to notice this. it is not hard. Humans are the most fascinating organisms and what better organism to play a human than other humans. Ian Holm gives a harrowing performance as the grieving father trying to make some more money. he does NOT get attached to the town or people. he acts like he cares for them but that is really bullshit. it's part of his job. another lie. what we will do for money. that's what makes the film human. i feel close to the film because it's what we see everyday. now if this were made in the 40's or 50's this film would be considered a revelation. greater than "Casablanca" or "Citizen Kane". but now, no. it was a greaatly missed sleeper. underrated not by critics, who loved it, but audience. on RT (critics) it has a 100%. on metacritic (again, critics) a 90/100 (which is very good) but on IMDb, which is controlled by the people, a 7.8/10. i dont know where it went with the people. even the AMPAS didnt get it. it was nominated for two Oscars though. everyone should see it before they die. it will feel surreal to be watching something so human. The lies and deceit hidden beneath the surface of this film is enough to overflow our government; and it doesn't even take place in the US.















Academy Awards, USA
YearResultAwardCategory/Recipient(s)
1998 NominatedOscarBest Director
Atom Egoyan
Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material from Another Medium
Atom Egoyan

Sunday, May 8, 2011

"Do the Right Thing" (1989)



The bright and colorful side of racism. this is a dark film, but unlike Cint Eastwood films, the film uses strong and vibrant imagery; like Hitchcock. we see a real movie, about real people. the modern-day masterpeice "Crash" explored racism as well but that was a bit more explicit. this film explores the whole damn thing in that it shows us how it all starts. it is one hot day in Brooklyn, and things are about to get hotter. we know that much but how do we get there is what we are shown. that's what makes it so insightful. we all, or most of us, know this world. we see it in our schools, workplaces, homes. and maybe not racism but biases, bigotry, prejudices and so on. i see it in high school. no, msybe it is not as bad as it was in D.W. Griffith's silent masterpeice "The Birth of a Nation" but it is still pretty horrible. the characters are colorful and some warm. it is iin New York but were not introduced to the whole state; just this one tight section or blacks, a family of Italians and Koreans. it seems that not many problems have occured before, but it is still a heated town; even in the winter. but it's not like the writer/director is biased; in fact he's not at all. we see an equal side of the people as opposed to one side more thn the other. we can't side with anyone. i'm Italian but let me be the first to tell you i was not always siding with the Italians. so that's the way it's set up. some walked out in disbelief, others shocked, others prejudice broken, others begun new prejudices. yes i read some reviews that said that this film made "[them] hate black people". but it's all about descision making, which does not exactly include us doing the right thing.

There really is no main character. Spike Lee, the writer/director, plays Mookie. and this character is not presented as the righteous doing median between everyone who gives a sililoquy at the end about how racism is bad and we should all love each other (aka Marvin Gaye). that is what i thought the character would be but i was wrong. Sal (Danny Aiello) is the long time Italian pizzaria owner. he and his two sons(Richard Edson and John Turturro) run it together. Mookie is the delivery man for them. Sal is not just accepted by everyone but cared for. those people "grew up" on his pizza. Mookie has a hispanic girlfriend (Rosie Perez), Tina and a son with her. Like Fellini's vibrant masterpeice "Amarcord" of 1973, there are many interesting charcters. the drunk called 'Da Mayor', the white guy, the Koreans, the crazy ass guy trying to start trouble, the mentally disasbled guy, the wise old widow, the radio guy, the boom-box (Public Enemy) guy and so on. each character is vital to the ebb and flow of the film. nobody is unnecesary which is an interesting approach. Everyone has known everyone forever. things are about to change. it is an extremely hot day. but nevertheless, a normal one. pizzas are made and delivered, fire hydrants are opened, ice cream trucks come, racist comments are made, race is disscussed but this is all normal. but it's about to heat up a little more. something happens. someone gets angry. no they get pissed off. and then the conclusion. we know it's coming, it's all about presentaion though. people get tired and say things they may not mean; or maybe they do. but that's not the point. these things happen everyday- in one for or another.

This is an extremely well-done film. one of the best of the 80's which sometimes doesn't say much. in my opinion, and a lot of others, the 80's was the worst decade for film EVER. it is real and truthful. it is not predictable. again we know what's going to happen, but how. it starts at the beginning. the film "Crash" just jumped right into the racism. here, we rewind and see how it all goes down. then the ending is more understandable. if we just saw the ending, we would come out racist. The performances were powerful. Aiello was the best and got the Oscar nomination. i could feel for the character, not his race, but character. he was bold, and seemed righteous and good at descision making. Turturro's character was extremy racist and there are many disturbing scenes with him talking to his father. his father loves the people because he watched the kids grow up and has known everyone. but his sonis sick of it all. we see this and the other side of things which really evens everything out. the cinematography was beautiful and i loved the long takes and traking shots. it was sucha colorful film, and that's what i take from it. Lee was talented in about every aspect of the film. writer, director, actor all fabulous. Everyone was just so natural. it was belivable. the screenplay was nominated for the Academy Award and on WGA's 101 Best Screenplay list at #93. it made the film. it was a perfect screenply: funny, tradgic. dangerous, current and insightful. the actors did not over-intellectualize about their characters so nothing was contrived. that is one of the best things about the film. we learn how far our actions and what we say go and what people will do after years of prejudice. most of them did the things they did because they've always wanted to; and now's unfortunatly their chance.

















Academy Awards, USA
YearResultAwardCategory/Recipient(s)
1990 NominatedOscarBest Actor in a Supporting Role
Danny Aiello
Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen
Spike Lee