tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-26666751724987116692024-03-13T03:22:44.951+01:00ImpressionsThoughts on movies, books and comicsDariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.comBlogger66125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-63126223251318804702016-05-25T23:22:00.001+02:002016-05-25T23:22:52.845+02:00Cleansing bath<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<i>Baden Baden</i></div>
★★★★★★★★☆☆<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<i><br />
</i></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
In her feature film debut writer/director Rachel Lang portraits young, reckless and aimless Ana, a 26 year old girl who steals a car from the company she works for to go to her grandmother in Strasbourg for a summer of big changes and decisions. <i>Baden Baden</i> unfolds its story as a series of many funny and some sad vignettes tied together by Ana's redecorating of her grandmother's bathroom, which stands as a metaphor for rebuilding her own life.<o:p></o:p><br />
<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
As aimless as Ana is, Lang's work is nothing like it. She tells the story with remarkable assuredness and great skill, something rarely found in the first-time director. Impressive cinematography (Fiona Braillon), great editing (Sophie Vercruysse) and excellent choice of music (Rachel Lang) are all of great significance in creating the film's unique atmosphere, and of course, it doesn't hurt that leading lady Salome Richard, herself a newcomer, shines as Ana, buying our sympathies from the very first scene.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<i>Baden Baden</i> mixes comedy, tragedy and simple ordinary life in the best ways possible and, although it probably isn't poised to make an impact on the history of film, it definitely makes an impact on the viewers. It is a film that shouldn't be missed.<br />
<br /></div>
Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-11275803654830162692015-07-31T00:18:00.000+02:002015-08-01T12:54:32.295+02:00Is this love that I'm feelin'?<i>The Lobster</i><br />
★★★★★★★★☆☆<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
Greek director Yorgos Lanthimos has made a name for himself with strange, absurd films, so it's not unexpected that <i>The Lobster</i> falls in the same category. The story is set in a dystopian world where all single people get sent to some sort of hotel where they have a limited number of days to find a partner or they'll be transformed in an animal of their choosing.<br />
<br />
<br />
<a name='more'></a><br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
The methods the staff at the hotel use to convince people it's better to be with someone, although shown with deadpan humour, are very disturbing and unexpectedly effective. For instance, when people arrive at the hotel one of their hands is tied up behind their backs to show them that „everything is easier in pair“. But there's also a way to extend your stay and remain single. The nearby forest is a hiding place for a group of runaways from the hotel who the residents go out to hunt once in a while. For each successful capture they get their stay extended. It's a pretty straightforward representation of society's fight against diversity and those who don't adhere to rules, but Lanthimos doesn't stay there.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
In the second half of the film, when the focus moves from the hotel to the forest, we get even more rigorous rules and brutal demonstration of intolerance for those who don't follow them. It's one of director's ironical twists, but also a disturbing example of illogical and revengeful human nature. Those who were forced to find a partner formed a community in which it is forbidden to have a partner, or even just flirt. Main character proves to be an constant exception and keeps breaking the rules wherever he is and whatever they are (which brings to question whether there's any possibility for him to have a happy ending), symbolizing in that way a fight for individuality inside an oppressive system.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
I've wrote more about its messages and themes (although I've mentioned but a few) than about the film itself because I find them more interesting. That's not to say that the film isn't good, on the contrary. It's a film with great acting, haunting music, bleak, washed up cinematography (which perfectly suits its themes) and many standout scenes. It's just that the philosophy behind it is more impressive than what goes on on the surface. <i>The Lobster</i> is more than meets the eye, all the way to its questioning, if not engrossing, ending.<br />
<br /></div>
Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-46832005565950855272013-04-05T13:15:00.003+02:002013-04-05T13:15:37.554+02:002 Become 1<em>Ursula K. Le Guin - The Left Hand of Darkness</em><br />
★★★★★★★☆☆☆<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>In the world Le Guin created everything is informed by a principle of duality. There are complementing nations of Karhide and Orgoreyn sharing a continent, both male and female are residing in each individual, there are even lines of a poem evidencing it: "Light is the left hand of darkness and darkness the right hand of light. Two are one, life and death, lying together like lovers in kemmer, like hands joined together, like the end and the way." This principle is disturbed by Genly Ai.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Ai is an odd thing in a world where everything has a pair. His journey with Estraven over the Ice at first seems to finally integrate him in the strange world and make another duality example, but it can't be so. If we look at Ai as one half (male) we must look at Estraven as a whole (male and female) and if we see Ai as a complete person we must see Estraven as two. It is evident that perfect, balanced duality between the two cannot be accomplished regardless of the love and friendship they have grown. Estraven is aware of that and, being a distraction for Ai who is in constant kemmer, decides to let himself be killed to ensure Ai can complete his mission.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Arrival of the Star Ship marked not just the completion of the mission but restoration of the principle of duality. Ai wasn't a lone stranger anymore. There were now twelve of them, men and women. Could we assume there were six of each sex? It certainly seems plausible. But just as everything was set in balance Ai disturbed it again, seeing his own people as strangers and taking comfort with Gethenians.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>In the world Le Guin created everything is informed by a principle of duality, and so is the existence of the principle itself.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-19753440784162475272013-03-29T10:55:00.003+01:002013-03-29T10:55:28.253+01:00Land of the Free, Home of the Brave<em>Ray Bradbury - The Martian Chronicles</em><br />
★★★★★★★★★★<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Bradbury's <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Martian Chronicles</i> is a tale of conquest drawing many parallels with the invasion of America. Just as Europeans came to America and imposed their rules and customs nearly exterminating the natives in the process, so the humans came to Mars and did the same. The parallel is most obvious in "—And the Moon Be Still as Bright" where Spender talks of Cortes' destruction of the Aztec Empire and Cheroke shows empathy for the Martians because of his Cherokee ancestry.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>"The Shore" describes the beginning of colonization. "The first wave carried with it men accustomed to spaces and coldness and being alone... Everyone knew who the first women would be." Reading these words it's easy to imagine some Wild West frontier town populated by men and women of dubious moral. In the stories like the "Interim" and "The Martian" towns grow more akin to those of Bradbury's time, showing the human community on Mars evolving just like its older counterpart in America. But Bradbury doesn't stop there. He presents a future of the colonizers and it isn't bright.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>People came to Mars for various reasons but they all looked at it as a chance for a better life. Just as they did coming to America not so long ago, and even still do. Interesting thing is that the Mars invaders are exclusively Americans, which indicates they are the descendants of those who made the similar invasion few hundred years ago and further strengthens the idea of Mars representing America.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Unfortunately, as Bradbury shows at the end of "The Naming of Names", the land of opportunity soon becomes bereft of it. Those who want to rule others catch up those who want to rule just themselves. But the ending of the <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Chronicles</i> bears a spark of hope as the humans are given a second chance. It is what Bradbury wanted for America, a new start.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-65269794999657513632013-03-25T21:48:00.001+01:002013-03-25T21:48:06.038+01:00Convergence of the Sexes<em>Charlotte Perkins Gilman - Herland</em><br />
★★★★★★★☆☆☆<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>There's an obvious feminist aspect to <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Herland</i>, but it's just a frame for more universal ideas. The depiction of perfect society consisting only of women clearly strives to show they are no less capable than men, but rather than emphasizing female characteristics, Gilman creates a society in which they are toned down and concentrates on common human qualities. Terry's rant makes it evident: "They've neither the vices of men, nor the virtues of women — they're neuters!"</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Terry's words show that gender is irrelevant. An all-male society could have conveyed the message just as well, for Gilman doesn't just talk of equality but of eliminating the prominent qualities of each gender. Even motherhood, the most female thing of all, is approached in strictly rational manner. To bear a child is the highest honor for women of Herland solely because it preserves the society, there's no selfish element involved. Accordingly, from its very birth the child's nurturing and education are put in the hands of the most capable individuals whether or not its mother is amongst them.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Treatment of children is just one of many still controversial ideas which Gilman proposes. Amongst else, she defines "feminine charms" as "mere reflected masculinity" and discusses the futility and impracticality of burying the dead, but also reveals why we perceive those ideas as controversial – they are in conflict with our traditions. And here lies the most intriguing idea of all, one so blasphemous in our world that I do not dare say it, so I'll use Gilman's words instead.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
"Have you no respect for the past? For what was thought and believed by your foremothers?"</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
"Why, no," she said. "Why should we? They are all gone. They knew less than we do. If we are not beyond them, we are unworthy of them — and unworthy of the children who must go beyond us."</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-36029164314475160432013-03-25T21:32:00.004+01:002013-03-25T21:32:37.125+01:00Power of Quantity<em>H.G. Wells - The Invisible Man</em><br />
★★★★★★★★☆☆<br />
<em>H.G. Wells - The Country of the Blind</em>
<br />
★★★★★★★★★☆<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>There is a great struggle between the individual and the society presented in <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Invisible Man</i> and <i>The Country of the Blind</i>. Both feature a lone man with a remarkable distinction from the others which, at first seeming advantageous, soon turns out to be the source of his doom.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>As it happens, in both stories this outcast can see others but cannot be seen by them, the titles of the stories explaining why it is so. The connection between the stories is further increased by the words of the Invisible Man: "I felt as a seeing man might do, with padded feet and noiseless clothes, in a city of the blind." Of course, Nunez didn't have those advantages, but neither did Griffin, as he was about to learn. Although the causes for their invisibility to others were different, they led to same effects. Griffin furiously worked on a way to get himself visible again and Nunez agreed to get blinded, all in order to fit into their surroundings. The pressure of the society, however indirect may be, leaves its mark on human mind. But these were not ordinary individuals, and in the end they nevertheless made their stand against the community.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>It is interesting to note that Wells doesn't choose sides, in both stories he shows understanding for individual as well as society. Nevertheless his message is clear: one cannot overcome many. Those unwilling or unable to adapt to majority are bound to live as outcasts or meet an even worse fate. In that way both Griffin and Nunez were "blind" for they couldn't see it. Wells shows us that any characteristic of the individual is not important per se, we are determined by those who surrounds us and valued only in comparison to others.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-76261545387883496522013-03-25T21:21:00.002+01:002013-03-25T21:21:09.680+01:00The Beauty of Creation<em>Nathaniel Hawthorne -
The Artist of the Beautiful</em>
<br />
★★★★★★★★☆☆<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>All of Hawthorne's and Poe's short stories but one have death as one of the main motifs. The exception is Hawthorne's <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Artist of the Beautiful</i>. While the other stories talk about transience this one celebrates eternity.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>At first it seems like Owen Warland, the main character of the story, is just another character driven by ambition to outdone nature, but his goal is different. While Aylmer in <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Birthmark</i> or Rappaccini in <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Rappaccini's Daughter</i> try to intervene in nature, Owen admires it, as can be seen from his walks through woods and fields, and tries to reproduce it through art. The appearance of art further distinguishes the story as the others are focused on science. There is a fundamental difference between the two. While the essence of science is change, art symbolizes permanence. It's no wonder then that Owen is unhappy with his job, the watches that surround him represent the passage of time while he is trying to capture it in a work of art.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>That Owen's work turns out to be a butterfly isn't accidental. Ancient Greek word for butterfly is "psyche" which also means "soul" and the animal serves as an illustration of it's immortality. That the butterfly represents Owen's soul is obvious from his own words, but there's more to it. Through that metaphor Hawthorne tells us how an artist leaves a peace of soul in each of his works thus making both his art and himself immortal. The adult butterfly represents the highest and most beautiful stage in its life cycle, so in the story it also serves to show art as highest and most beautiful human achievement.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Hawthorne teaches us that the right way to beauty and immortality is through artistic creation, not defying nature but embracing it as an inspiration. It's the only road to a happy ending.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-2139219419409684452013-03-01T23:30:00.003+01:002013-03-01T23:31:49.995+01:00The curse of ambition<i>Mary Shelley - Frankenstein</i><br />
★★★★★★☆☆☆☆<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>One of the most interesting things in Shelley's novel is a parallel she creates between Victor Frankenstein and his creation. Both of them are highly intelligent beings with a great thirst for knowledge as well as an extraordinary eloquence, moved by the beauty of nature and human kindness and led, at first, only by good and noble thoughts. They also both end up in misery, wanting for themselves nothing but the death of one another. The parallels point to a special connection between the two, similar to that between God and man. However, while God created (man) in his own image, Frankenstein hasn't, as the "daemon" laments: "...but my form is a filthy type of yours, more horrid from its very resemblance."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>There is boldness in Victor's undertaking, but he is just human and thus bound to be fallible. Through his tragic story Shelley shows us our limitations and warns us of the danger of trying to prove ourselves almighty. She condemns the headless ambition of man and his thirst for knowledge showing how virtue can exist without those through a story of simple but noble sailor. Instead, as is visible in her beautiful descriptions of nature, she yearns for a peaceful life in balance with it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Apparent is the critique of the society which tried to tame the nature to prove its superiority. It's most visible in the words Frankenstein speaks on his deathbed: "Seek happiness in tranquility, and avoid ambition, even if it be only the apparently innocent one of distinguishing yourself in science and discoveries." Yet he hasn't lived his life like that. Carried by unreasonable ambition to his downfall, which made him a wretch living only on thoughts of revenge, Frankenstein was, and still is, a warning to us all. Thus the parallels with the monster don't surprise, as well as people believing it is called Frankenstein...for it is.<br />
<br /></div>
Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-17486446425269943332013-02-22T01:40:00.000+01:002013-03-01T23:31:31.094+01:00The simplicity of greatness<i>Lincoln</i><br />
★★★★★★★★☆☆<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>I don't know many details about Abraham Lincoln's presidency so I came into <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Lincoln</i> unburdened by historical facts. There were some expectations though, considering the director is Steven Spielberg, and they ended up completely fulfilled. The film begins in the midst of the Civil War and follows Lincoln's attempt to bring an end to it, as well as to slavery, and the difficulties he faced doing it, ending with his death after the assassination at Ford's Theatre.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The real focus of the film is on Lincoln's battle with slavery. While most of the other politicians just wanted the war to end, he postponed the peace arrangements, risking their failure, in order to get the thirteenth amendment (which abolishes slavery) passed by the United States House of Representatives (also known as the House). It is in itself a controversial decision and the means which he used in doing all of that are even more so. He stalled the Confederacy negotiators, made some members of his party lie about their beliefs and even bought votes from Democrats promising them better positions. It was interesting to see the most loved American president doing things for which anyone would be condemned today. The other unusual and refreshing thing to see was portrayal of the Lincoln as an ordinary man. Although (as I later learned) he came from a poor family and was mostly self-educated, it was surprising to see a man of such importance presented as a funny storytelling commoner. Of course, his decisive nature and strong leadership weren't omitted, which only contributed to the impressiveness of the character.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Most of the credits for making Lincoln as compelling as he is nevertheless go to Daniel Day-Lewis. Once again he proved his versatility and ability to become one with the character giving a performance so minute and delicate, and at the same time so powerful that one could easily watch just him for 150 minutes (film's running time). He's aided by a brilliant cast of supporting actors including James Spader, Tommy Lee Jones, David Strathairn, John Hawkes, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Jared Harris, Jackie Earle Haley and Michael Stuhlbarg among the rest. Sally Field's performance as Lincoln's wife Mary was not so good as the hype suggests but still helped keep the standard high.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The technical side of the film, as was expected from Spielberg's work, is flawless. Cinematography (Janusz Kaminski), editing (Michael Kahn), production design (Rick Carter), costume design (Joanna Johnston) and of course, music by John Williams, all made the long film as easy watch as can be and a pleasing experience for both eyes and ears.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Spielberg made a film about a very well known, but also a very important, character and an equally known and important episode from American history. It was a safe bet from the beginning and the screenplay from Tony Kushner, his Munich collaborator, just solidified it. However, it feels more as an exploration of the way politics work than as an ode to freedom, and the question remains whether this was Spielberg's intention. The main problem of the film is that it doesn't bring anything new. There is a little bit more humor than expected but other than that all classic Spielberg characteristics are in place: strong characters, simple plot, a touch of melodrama, great acting, impressive visuals, touching music, and so on. Unfortunately that stopped being enough some time ago.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>There is no doubt that <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Lincoln</i> is a very good film. If only Spielberg had the courage of his main character to impose a change where it is an absolute necessity it would have been great. This way we have nothing to do but to enjoy Day-Lewis' magnificent performance and hope that the great director's next film won't be just for the people but also for the history.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-3103997461378762172013-02-21T20:27:00.002+01:002013-03-01T23:31:41.957+01:00The blood is the life, but what good is a life without faith?<i>Bram Stoker - Dracula</i><br />
★★★★★★☆☆☆☆<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
"I want you to believe."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
"To believe what?"</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
"To believe in things that you cannot."</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Stoker's novel surprised me at first for, being written at the end of 19th century when all of the industrial and technological advancements made the idea of everlasting more possible than ever and everyone strove for a kind of immortality for themselves, it's unusual that it seems to battle the very notion of immortality in this world, marking it as a curse.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The most apparent explanation is that Stoker was against immortality as it defies God. The weapons used against the UnDead are the symbols of Christianity: the crucifix, holy water and wafer, and the characters pray to God and call him for help on many occasions throughout the book. That seems to speak in favor of religion and God's existence, but some details reveal a possibility of a different interpretation.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Van Helsing, the man whose knowledge brought Dracula to his end and thus the most important character of the book, at one point defines faith as "that faculty which enables us to believe things which we know to be untrue". At that moment we realize it's not about religion or God but faith as such.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>In the "scientific, sceptical, matter-of-fact nineteenth century" there was little room for faith. People wanted facts and explanations and turned to science which "if it explain not, then it says there is nothing to explain". Though obviously appreciating science (Van Helsing is a doctor), Stoker opposes the blindness it caused in people who thought of it as the only provider of answers, and marking immortality as a curse speaks against those who thought their work was everlasting.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Stoker tells of importance to "have an open mind" because "there are always mysteries in life", and relying just on science can't solve them all. So he wants us to have faith...in the fantastic.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-47730897729174759862013-02-20T23:07:00.000+01:002013-02-21T20:12:55.718+01:00In the search for meaning<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"><i>Lewis Carroll - Alice's Adventures in Wonderland & Through the Looking-Glass</i></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
★★★★★★★★★★<br />
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"><br /></span>
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"><br />
</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Carroll's Alice stories are considered to be full of different meanings, but what I've noticed just now is how Carroll toys with the notion of meaning itself, both literal and hidden. Using words with multiple meanings (dry, miss) or those equally pronounced (tale/tail, flour/flower) Carroll shows how easy it can be to misunderstand, but he doesn't stop there. At one point the Duchess says to Alice: "Everything's got a moral, if only you can find it.", indicating how the hidden meaning is ours to give regardless of that originally intended. Most works aim to deliver a message, but contrariwise, Alice stories only provide a reader with a framework in which to find one.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Halfway through the first book Alice notices how something Hatter said "seemed to have no meaning in it, and yet it was certainly English". That is a hint at the basis of Carroll's work, which is formal logic, one that deals with words and sentences in their abstract form. However peculiar and nonsensical something in his books may seem to us, it is logically valid and makes perfect sense within the worlds he created. Best examples of the importance of logic in his works are various conversations which, however crazy they get in terms of content, always remain sound, as can perhaps best be seen in Alice's dialogue with the White Knight leading to his song.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>It can be said that by making formal logic a basis of his work, and building with imagination on top of it, Carroll established a special recipe for those who came behind him. A recipe that provides us with endless possibilities to create and give meaning both as writers and as readers. As Alice enters strange and wonderous worlds in her dreams so do we whenever we open a fantasy or science fiction book, books that give us the opportunity to find meaning.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-20004097908204796112013-02-09T14:45:00.006+01:002013-02-09T14:48:34.006+01:00Who's the fairest of them all?<em>Brothers </em><i>Grimm - Children's and Household Tales</i><br />
★★★★★★☆☆☆☆<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The visual appearance of women plays an important part in Grimms' tales filled with beautiful princesses and ugly witches . It's almost always connected with personality traits like in <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">The Three Little Men in the Wood</i> where one step-sister is "pleasant and pretty" and the other "ugly and hateful", or <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Mother Hulda</i> where the women are "pretty and industrious" and "ugly and lazy". It seems that good traits are connected with having a good appearance and bad traits with having a bad one, but it's more complicated than that.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>In <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Snow-white</i> both the titular character and the queen, her step-mother, are incredibly beautiful but while one is kind and diligent the other is wicked and mean. It looks strange, but that's because brothers Grimm in their stories use beauty in two different ways. In case of Snow-white (as with most Grimms' princesses and the like) beauty stands as the physical representation of inner qualities, while her step-mother's appearance doesn't have that subtext. Hers is an example of corruption of the mind which comes with prevalence of the physical, which in turn arises from flattery and concentrating on the visual (both symbolized by the mirror). That is also the reason why the queen isn't more beautiful than Snow-white, for, as the story teaches us, real beauty comes from within.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>It is important to remember that the tales come from an oral tradition, and the physical beauty could be imagined by every listener for himself while everyone knew what industriousness, loyalty and honesty are. However, in time people grew more and more visual and eventually appearance became the main criterion for nearly everything. It changed the way things are perceived so much that we lost sight of what is really important. Fortunately we still have Grimms' tales.</div>
Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-88604785840846664572013-02-09T14:42:00.001+01:002013-02-09T14:42:04.798+01:00One book a week
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>I've
recently started with a course called <em><span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Fantasy and Science Fiction:
The Human Mind, Our Modern World</span></em> on Coursera. It's a course based
on reading and interpreting 10 fantasy and science fiction books. Every week we
must read one book and write a short essay concentrating on some particular
thing we found interesting in it. Even though they're not reviews of the whole
books, those essays still reflect my impressions so I've decided to put them
here for your consideration and I hope you'll find them interesting and
revealing.</div>
<br />
<i>
</i>Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-7449230359431019792013-02-06T01:43:00.003+01:002013-02-09T14:10:12.524+01:00A little change is always welcome★★★★★★★☆☆☆<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Often these days prominent filmmakers decide to tell a story already told. Sometimes even a story told multiple times. Whether it's for a lack of ideas or because of their love of the subject and confidence they can make something special out of it is debatable, but whatever the reason the expectations from such endeavour are always high. That was also the case with the latest of that kind, Tom Hooper's Oscar hopeful "Les Misérables".</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Adapted from a famous musical play which was in turn based on the novel by Victor Hugo (both having the same name as the film), the film retains the musical form and does it in an unusual way, with actors singing and recorded live during the shooting. It makes for a somewhat uneven experience due to the difference in actors' vocal capabilities and dependance on the conditions at given time. While the acting is solid across the board, more famous names like Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Sacha Baron Cohen or Helena Bonham Carter do mostly mediocre work singing-wise. Fortunately the young ones: Amanda Seyfried, Eddie Redmayne, Samantha Barks, Aaron Tveit and Daniel Huttlestone, save the day with some great singing. And then there's Anne Hathaway with the performance which there's no sense in writing about but really just has to be seen.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Technically the film is very good but has some minuses. Production design, cinematography, and editing while generally good make some scenes, especially those with the barricade, feel staged. That's probably the legacy of the play, which doesn't work as well in the film. That applies to parts of the story and some of the songs too. I don't know to what extent Hooper and the screenwriting team (in which there were the authors of the play among others) stuck to the play but the theatricality is sometimes too apparent. Costume design on the other hand, as well as makeup and hairstyling, is as great as you would expect from a high budget period piece like this.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>As far as the story is concerned, there's little done to escape from its predictability. I imagine the screenwriters didn't want to steer too much from the source material, but they even didn't have to. A lot would be accomplished with just a little different balance of the themes. The revolution part of the story is left underdeveloped in spite of some striking scenes while too much time is spent on Jean Valjean's lamentations and a sense of thematic connection between the two is, I feel, not properly addressed. Also the relationship between Javert and Valjean is shown mainly as one between the hunter and the hunted while there's much more to it. For example, Valjean as the symbol of change is locked in the seemingly endless battle against Javert as the man who can't break from his own constraints. However, the end comes and Valjean emerges victorious, showcasing that a change will come despite of presently suppressed revolution. All of that and probably more is present in the subtext but Hooper unfortunately failed to put any emphasis on it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>While the singing presents the story without any difficulties and make for some truly rousing scenes, its occasional lengthiness slows the film down making it unbalanced and overlong. In addition to a couple of overly pompous scenes, that degrades "Les Misérables" turning it into a good movie instead of a great one it could have been. It's a shame, but it is what it is. At least we can hear the people sing.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-22825872541627095042013-01-25T23:59:00.000+01:002013-01-26T00:38:26.192+01:00Hey, let's be positive★★★★★★★★★☆<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>It's hard to make a good romantic comedy. There are dozens of them every year and they (almost) all recycle the same formula: guy meets girl, they fall in love but won't admit it, encounter some obstacles, and overcome them all to live happily ever after. There's often a little drama too, added to make for some serious moments, but rarely it bares any real weight. Seeing the trailer it was obvious to me that the same is the case with director David O. Russell's new film "Silver Linings Playbook" so I wondered how can it be that the film was nominated for an Oscar in all important categories, counting the nominations to eight. I've recently watched it and stopped wondering. Sure, it has the same formula, but Russell (who also wrote the screenplay) and his cast make all the difference in the world.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>It's a story of Pat, a history teacher who found his wife with another man and went a little crazy. They put him in a mental institution and diagnosed him with a bipolar disorder but eight months later his mother takes him back home. He meets Tiffany, a good-looking young widow with similar problems to his, but in spite of his impulses decides to only make friends with her as the means to get his wife back. Jennifer Lawrence and Bradley Cooper are simply fantastic in the roles of Tiffany and Pat. After a great turn in the "Winter's Bone" a couple of years ago, Lawrence here does completely different but equally great work showing her admirable range, and Cooper finally proves he is a serious actor after a series of comedic works of dubious quality. No less appealing are those in supporting roles. Robert De Niro (his best role in a long time) and Jacki Weaver as Pat's parents and a special treat, as Pat's friend from mental institution, Chris Tucker in his first non-Carter role in 15 years. All of them did an excellent job and it's no surprise that the film is an Oscar contender in all four acting categories.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Of course, the actors needed a good material to work with as well as a guiding hand and that's were Russell strongly delivered. I didn't read the novel by Matthew Quick which the film was based on so I don't know how much of the credit goes to him but the script is great. It is rare enough seeing most of the characters in the film having some kind of mental disorder, but to see them presented so emphatically, keeping in sight that they are human beings just like the rest, but also realistically, with all their good and bad sides, was almost impossible until now. The reason for that approach is probably in the fact that Russell's son has bipolar disorder as well as OCD (obsessive-compulsive disorder) so he has understanding both of and for the mental disorders. His familiarity with the subject can also be felt by how he handles family relations within the film. The relations between Pat, his father and his mother are at the same time simple and complicated due to the problems they have, and they are portrayed in a way so natural and sincere you can easily imagine something like that happening just around the corner.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>That still leaves the clichéd love story, but in a much better position than initially. Although we've seen it a thousand times and know how it ends, it keeps us invested and make us feel the emotions of its characters. That's because, due to sincere performances by Lawrence and Cooper, it doesn't feel contrived, and the ending we've gotten used to this time feels truly deserved.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>"Silver Linings Playbook" also has one more universal theme. Through showing us how those with some kind of disability deserve to be happy, it actually shows us that we all deserve it. And if we try real hard to be our best selves we have a chance at it. It's optimistic attitude is reinvigorating just as is Russell's take on the genre. After initially being surprised by its Oscar nominations, now I'll be surprised if it doesn't make at least some of them into an award. It's one of the best films of the year and I look forward to watching it again. Oh, and did I mention that Chris Tucker is in it?</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-17769362764919487852013-01-22T03:15:00.003+01:002013-01-22T21:29:50.898+01:00The price of success★★★★★★☆☆☆☆<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>On May 2nd 2011, SEAL Team Six of U.S. Special Forces killed Osama bin Laden. That messed up plans of director Kathryn Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal who were working on a film about a years-long and unsuccessful hunt for the man. They of course changed the story and reportedly scrapped all of their previous work to start anew. The result is "Zero Dark Thirty" (a term marking time between midnight and dawn), one of the most lauded films of the year with five Oscar nominations but also one of the most controversial with its depiction of torture at CIA black sites.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The torture scenes caused a lot of fuss in USA with many taking them as a sign of approval of the methods and politicians from both sides of the spectrum condemning the movie, claiming that no piece of information which lead to the murder of Osama bin Laden came from torture. But are that scenes really that problematic? It is widely known that US military utilized torture in interrogation and it's fair to assume that was so in those first few years of the hunt for bin Laden when the emotions were running high. Not to mention that in the film the torturing really doesn't prove all that useful. It gives Maya, a CIA operative and main character, a name which she never heard of before yet she decides to pursue it relentlessly only to find out that everyone else know of that name, which makes us wonder how she never heard of it in the first place. What's more interesting is that, although both politicians and the authors of the film claim that the whole operation was a product of hard and dedicated work by a group of extraordinary individuals, the film shows it just as a combination of one person's hunch and persistence and pure luck. Now, an idea of US intelligence services functioning just on hunch and luck, that's something really controversial, but to my surprise no one seems to have noticed that.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>"Zero Dark Thirty" is in its essence a classic underdog story. A young, unexperienced, but talented operative has everything going against her but in the end prevails. Although the end is not a happy one for her as she realises that she has no life outside the just completed mission. The main problem with the story is a lack of emotions it provides. We never find out what is it that's driving Maya, making her disregard everything else in favor of her job. The only thing I can assume is that it's a desire to prove she is equally capable as the rest of her colleagues (if not more so) and to make a name for herself amongst them. That adds the subject of male-female (in)equality to the film, parallels with director Bigelow being more than obvious. However, the fact she succeeded more due to a coincidence than to hard work and especially the characterization of the other female operative don't do it justice.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>As with any other work based on a true event there is a conversation on how closely does it follow the truth, but, as always, it's completely misplaced. It's not a documentary and its goals should lie elsewhere, namely in making a compelling and tense middle part because we all know how it begins and how it ends. But it's right there where the film fails. After learning of Abu Ahmed's existence and of his connection to bin Laden as his personal courier the investigation reaches a dead end. It becomes more and more obvious that they really can't find the guy but then a file which no one knew existed miraculously appears and Abu Ahmed's true identity is revealed. It still doesn't help much though. Maya and her colleagues narrow the search to two cities in Pakistan from which he's calling home, but he always calls from a different public phone and they simply don't have enough men to cover all of them. Another situation with no way out requires another miracle. This time the courier buys a cell-phone and they get his number. Why would a man so careful to cover all of his tracks suddenly buy a cell-phone thus allowing the CIA operatives to track him down is beyond my comprehension. But even after that the film doesn't pick up pace. It took around half a year of surveillance to get permission to invade the residence of Abu Ahmed, and the film makes sure we get that. For most of the time the characters do nothing but show their powerlessness and all the scenes that could leave some impact on the viewer are brought down in advance by suggestive filmmaking which make us foresee the outcome. When in the final half an hour came the much anticipated raid scene, my attention was in spite my best efforts much lower than in the beginning and I found the way it is filmed pretty messy and unclear. While my low attention no doubt helped it feel that way, it's a fact that Bigelow didn't care much for the clarity on that one. I can imagine that lack of clarity would easily be the case if I were to look at a real operation, still I feel that in the film the viewer should know who's where doing what.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Technically the film isn't that bad. Cinematography makes for some impressive moments but is mostly undone by an unimaginative editing. The script apart from aforementioned weak spots also has occasional flashes of excellence, mainly in some parts of the dialogue. The acting is solid all over the board, with Jessica Chastain once again proving her versatility although her role and performance are weaker than most of her work from year before. My personal high points of the film are Mark Strong in a good guy role, something you don't see so often, and James Gandolfini as head of the CIA, a comic relief so needed in two and a half hours of despair.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>"Zero Dark Thirty" is in every way a step down for both Bigelow and Boal after the brilliant "The Hurt Locker", lacking its emotion and intensity as well as its profoundness. I can understand the reception in the USA due to the relevance that the story has for them, but an important story does not a good film make. And bearing in mind a feeling of futility present for the most part, I can't help but wonder if it would have been better for the film to embrace it fully by sticking to its original ending. Now imagine that controversy.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-26914282202607293222013-01-17T20:21:00.001+01:002013-01-17T20:53:23.608+01:00Fantasy will destroy power, and laughter will bury it★★★★★★★★★☆<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>I was born and still live in Rijeka, the biggest Croatian port but by global standards a really small city of less than 200 000 people. Although it's one of the biggest ports of the Adriatic sea it's a fairly unimportant city on a bigger scale, but just some hundred years ago that wasn't so. In 1918, after the end of WWI, the city of Rijeka (then called Fiume, the meaning of both names being "river") was one of the hottest points of dispute with both Italy and Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (later the Kingdom of Yugoslavia) claiming sovereignty over what was until then the main Austro-Hungarian port. It even provoked Allies to take control over the city until the negotiations were finished, with US president Woodrow Wilson being the main arbiter in the dispute. But that situation didn't last long as in September 1919 Italian poet and soldier Gabriele D'Annunzio gained control over the city with around 2 500 loyal troops. Thus was created Italian Regency of Carnaro, a self-proclaimed state with D'Annunzio at the helm which was opposed by nearly everybody, Italians included. It lasted for a little more than a year and seemingly left no marks on the future city of Rijeka but made a very peculiar and unusual historic oddity.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The short history lesson has its reasons. It is precisely that small episode of history that inspired Pierre-François Beauchard, a French comic book writer and illustrator commonly known as David B., to create a book called "Par les chemins noirs" ("Black Paths"). The book introduces us to Lauriano, Italian who's had enough of war but can't shake off its horrors, a man who is made up of his works and beliefs and lives in a "Land of No-Where" growing apart from the world that surrounds him. Like most of the other characters he lives by pillaging all over the city of Rijeka (I've decided to refer to it by its current name) along his comrades from the war. But that's just to survive on that most basic level. Lauriano is in fact a dreamer, a lost soul finding and losing itself over and over again. In that he's a metaphor for the city of Rijeka itself (at a given point in time). Run by a man whose ambition is as endless as his love of art, or his insanity for that matter, for a year Rijeka was a home to ex-soldiers, thieves, artists, philosophers, revolutionaries, romantics and simple lunatics of all kinds.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>David B. conveys the feeling of a mad city through fragmented approach to several intersecting stories. Lauriano, who's suffering from PTSD and sees the ghost of his dead friend, falls in love with Mina, a cabaret singer, his comrades are caught in a fight with a Milanese gang, a police commissioner is investigating the trafficking of stolen goods, Guido Keller, one of D'Annunzio's closest associates publishes a magazine called "Yoga", and D'Annunzio himself makes plans to conquer Yugoslavia in an armored train. As the stories progress, the violence and absurdity grow bigger and it all ends in a grotesque but liberating Danse Macabre in the streets of Rijeka. Our main character ultimately gets rid of the ghost of his past, but nevertheless gets even more detached from the world, as we realize the past was his greatest link with the present.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The drawing is even more impressive than the story. With a sort of caricatured style and ignoring the rules of anatomy or perspective, David B. manages to make surreal feel normal and normal feel surreal. The style reveals David's influences in its expressionistic and cubistic qualities, which get more apparent as the violence in the story rises, bringing the old "homo homini lupus" saying to its extreme. Some of the pictures have an impressive, painting-like quality, making it almost a shame they're confined to such a small space. The colour palette is comprised mostly of pastel shades and dominated by bluish-grey for the night scenes and red (often becoming garish) as an indicator of heightened emotions.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>"Par les chemins noirs" makes the most out of a historic curiosity. It sows facts but from them grows illusion as well as truth. What happened makes way for all that didn't but could or even should have. There's romance, war, art, ghosts, saints, thieves, and the most sane individual is the one least connected to this world. It's a really beautiful mess which shows that faith can indeed be helpful, those of others if not your own, and proves that the blackest of paths can lead to the light. Even if only with the help of a saint.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-35118209878038431502013-01-15T23:41:00.001+01:002013-01-16T00:35:34.925+01:00Confess and your sins will be forgiven★★★★★★☆☆☆☆<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Croatian cinema isn't well known in Europe, mainly because of the war that took place here in the nineties and practically put a stop to any serious film productions. But it isn't just Europe that ignored Croatian films. Home audiences also got used to skipping them. It took a lot of time to change that and in the new millennium things started to slowly get better. It still awaits wider recognition but the productions get more numerous every year and the films get more and more diverse. Positive reviews and awards won at international festivals also encouraged people to go to the cinema and see a domestic production. Riding on that wave a new film by well known Croatian director Vinko Brešan called "Svećenikova djeca" ("The Priest's Children") came to the Croatian film theatres and made the biggest opening ever for a domestic film.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>"Svećenikova djeca" tells the story of a young priest named Fabijan who came to work on a small Croatian island. It takes only a short time for him to notice how the population is rapidly decreasing, but after a seller from the only kiosk on the island confesses to him how he "kills people" by selling condoms to everyone, Fabijan gets a great idea. He teams up with the seller (later the pharmacist joins them too) and they start piercing condoms, thus bringing the possibility of pregnancy back in God's hands.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>As you can imagine, that makes for a lot of hilarious situations. The problem is not all of them are that hilarious. Brešan can't seem to break off his mould, revisiting the same or similar setting and characters in each of his films, small island with a close-knit community where everyone represents some stereotype. The audience here is largely used to laugh at stereotypes but for a little more demanding film fan it's just not enough. The other main problem with not just Brešan's but almost all of the Croatian films is acting. For some reason most of Croatian actors can't (or won't?) make their characters feel natural. Their performances feeling staged and unconvincing for a film. It's probably because of their theatrical backgrounds but that's an explanation, not an excuse. To be fair, there are a couple of good performances in the film, especially that of Nikša Butijer as Petar, the seller, with a mixed one by Krešimir Mikić in the main role. There are two things that particularly got my attention, one very bad and one very good. The bad one is music by Mate Matišić (also a screenwriter). It's unimaginative and repetitious with main theme playing over and over again. The good one is cinematography by Mirko Pivčević. The shots are simply fantastic, giving a greater sense of characters and plot and providing beautiful scenes at the same time.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Considering all of the above, it could be hard to understand what drove all those people in the cinema, but it's in fact very simple. Croatia is a country still greatly divided between secular and religious, in fact just right now there is a big debate on Health Education with fierce rhetoric from both sides. Considering the main good guy is a priest (and the main bad guy too as it unveils in the end) and the film looks at both the good and the bad face of the Church, it's destined to attract people from both sides of the conflict. But what makes the film interesting for home audiences doesn't necessarily make it so for the rest, especially when you consider that what is a flat out comedy right until the very end, makes a shift so abrupt that it just doesn't make sense (even with all the implications and message it's supposed to deliver) and ends as a great tragedy. "Svećenikova djeca" isn't a bad film, but it becomes obvious that it won't be Brešan who will put Croatian cinema in the focus of the film world.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-47738826207542201112013-01-14T22:27:00.002+01:002013-01-15T21:11:23.014+01:00Amour★★★★★★★★★★<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>It is awards season now and like probably most of the film lovers I'm trying to watch all of the serious contenders. The latest I've watched is Amour" ("Love"), new work from acclaimed German director Michael Haneke. The film already won the Palme d'Or at Cannes, swept the European Film Awards, and won most of the year's Best Foreign Language Film awards including a Golden Globe, as well as got nominated for five Oscars and a lot more. All of that gave me more than enough reason to view it, and the film itself gave me more than enough reason to review it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>After dealing with causes in "Das weiße Band - Eine deutsche Kindergeschichte" ("The White Ribbon"), his previous work, in "Amour" Haneke deals with consequences. The causes and consequences are of different things, true, but that is not so important. It is the shift of focus from one to another which is interesting. While Haneke was always the one to ask questions, this time it feels more like he's making a statement. To be clear, his treatment of the subject matter is for the most part equally restrained here as is in his other recent works. He stays an objective observer of the elderly couple dealing with death, not once trying to sentimentalize the situation or lead the viewer towards some specific point of view. Yet the feeling I got is that the whole story is a message how things should be, a message that says the way Georges care for Anne and subjects his life to her is the right thing to do.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>It could very well be so because of Emmanuelle Riva and Jean-Louis Trintignant, actors playing the couple. Their performances are so sincere and natural that they without any trouble carry entire film on their own. There are just a few more roles in the film, none of them with serious screen time, though it's worth to mention standardly good Isabelle Huppert and it's nice to see William Shimell in his only second starring role. But Riva and Trintignant are those who deserve our admiration. It's fascinating to watch them depict what could very easily happen to themselves soon, especially considering that some of the things Haneke puts them through are very tough and deeply disturbing.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Although it may seem so, "Amour" isn't all dying and depression. The beginning of the film serves as an explanation of what's to come. It shows a beautiful relationship full of understanding and compassion between two old people still in love, something we're not so used to see. It is exactly that love and devotion which give Georges the strength to care for Anne and do all that must be done. It is love without any romanticizing. Its purest form. With all the hard work, tough decisions and incomprehension bound to appear between even closest of lovers, but also tenderness, faith and smiles existent only in those who completely embraced one another.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Regardless of my praise on objectiveness and naturalness of Haneke's depiction I should bring to attention that it is after all just one of the choices of artistic expression and as such ultimately involves some degree of deception and playing with the viewer. He does it using long, static shots which give us time to feel the full impact of that which transpires. The ordinariness of the shots, which are not composed just to make a beautiful sight, also forces you to think while watching the movie, inviting you to recognize their meaning, which serves as a witness to a great cinematography by Darius Khondji and his excellent understanding with Haneke.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>While there are probably a lot of people who won't like the film and will blame it for being too arty, my guess is there are also a lot of those who will praise it without fully understanding it. "Amour" is a depressing drama only at first sight. When you take a second look at it, you realize it's a tribute to a great and long life filled with love every step of the way. The way death comes in it surely isn't the one anyone would like for themselves, but what is more important, a beautiful death or a beautiful life?</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-55837100191168416762013-01-08T14:56:00.004+01:002013-01-08T14:56:54.442+01:00Into the realm of technology★★★★★★★☆☆☆<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>I must admit I'm not a loyal fan of either J.R.R. Tolkien's or Peter Jackson's work. I've read "The Hobbit" and "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy long time ago, and haven't even finished watching Jackson's adaptations. I found both books and movies fun and good but nothing more. Therefore I wasn't very excited when news of "The Hobbit" adaptation finally came. Even less promising was an announcement that the book will be adapted as a trilogy of movies. Decision to go and see the first one (titled "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey") nevertheless was motivated almost entirely by the 48 fps in which Jackson decided to film it, and in the end I'm not that sorry for it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The story of "The Hobbit" is already known by everyone, young and old alike, so there's no need to go into it in detail. A young Hobbit by the name of Bilbo Baggins joins thirteen dwarves and a wizard named Gandalf on a quest to kill a dragon and reclaim the lost dwarven kingdom. That's the basic outline. The problem is there isn't much more to it. As we can expect, the journey can't pass without difficulties, so the merry bunch gets attacked by trolls, goblins and orcs only to be saved by the wizard over and over again, very much like in the LOTR trilogy. But this time it all happens in a dissimilar manner. Instead of creating tension, a feeling of urgency, or any sense of peril, Jackson mostly decided on comedic approach. Thus the dialogues are comedic even when the characters are in great danger as is the way they behave. This, of course, is not the case in all of the situations, but it's present enough to make apparent Jackson's intention of bringing the movie closer to a younger audience. The intention is also apparent in the esthetics of some scenes which resemble video games, like the battle of stone giants or the escape from the Goblin lair. In fact, the whole movie is made similar to a video game, introducing and forming the party in the beginning and then venturing from one battle to the other, occasionally resting on safe ground (Rivendell).</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>All those things orienting the movie towards youngsters are in fact nothing bad. We mustn't forget that the book was written for children in the first place. What is a little disappointing though is that Jackson obviously didn't have the adults in mind at the same time. The movie has some unnecessary flashbacks and story arcs which may prove too complicated for the youngest to understand while simultaneously being too blunt and shallow for the older audience. Those could have been replaced with some real characterization and meaningful dialogue, or at least left out to give a greater sense of urgency, considering the deadline the characters have. There is also too much dependency on LOTR with the reappearance of the old Bilbo, Frodo, Saruman, Galadriel and Elrond, most of which are completely redundant. It's clear that Jackson wants to connect the trilogies as much as possible, it just isn't as clear why. Although, with a classic trilogy behind us and a first part of a prequel trilogy aiming for children, something smells conspicuously like an inside of a tauntaun here.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>In spite of all the minuses I've mentioned (or maybe even because of them), the movie is fun. It's a three-hour-long ride through the land of Middle-earth featuring great comedic performances by Martin Freeman as Bilbo, Ian McKellen as Gandalf and all of the thirteen actors playing the dwarves, as well as the always fantastic Andy Serkis as Gollum. Cinematography, production design, costume design and makeup, as well as the visual effects are all on a level expected of a movie this big, and enriched by the always great Howard Shore's music. The young will probably love "The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey" as well as the fans of the book and the whole LOTR franchise or those who would like to visit the Middle-earth once again. So if you belong to any of those go to the nearest movie theater and let the journey begin.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
P.S.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>I've mentioned that I've watched the movie practically only because of the frame rate in which it was shown, so I feel obliged to write a few words about it. The opinions are divided between those who are saying that it looks like a documentary about filming the real movie and those who find the frame rate more immersive. I've been skeptical about it but in the end found out I belong to the latter group. The most obvious advantage of a higher frame rate is in quick camera movements which are fluid as they simply cannot be in 24 fps. The problem is that Jackson abuses it in some scenes, inducing dizziness with all the twisting and spinning at high speed, and even the movements of the characters sometimes seem too fast. 48 fps really make the movie look more real, but not in the bad way. The additional frames help the world of Middle-earth and all that inhabits it feel more palpable, as though it really exists, and they even do so more than the (really good) 3D. No doubt Jackson needed a capable crew and a big budget to make everything feel like an actual thing instead of a prop but he largely succeeded. There are probably some things which could've been done better, but it's a fantasy movie, needing much more to create an illusion of genuineness. I can't wait to see some present-set story filmed in such way. 48 fps make a more immersive visual experience than 3D and with immersiveness being the current goal, my guess is that Jackson just set a new standard.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-62484024726648660332013-01-07T18:09:00.002+01:002013-01-07T18:12:20.531+01:00To live is to think★★★★★★★★☆☆<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The latest Ang Lee movie, "Life of Pi", is an adaptation of a beautiful prize-winning novel of the same name written by Yann Martel. For a long time the novel was considered to be unfilmable so Lee's work was awaited with reserve, but only to thrill almost everyone upon its release.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>"Life of Pi" is a story of Piscine Molitor Patel, or Pi as he renamed himself. Pi grew up in Pondicherry, a little town in India, where his father ran a zoo. He was a curious boy who looked for answers beyond his father's scientific approach and embraced Hindu, Christian and Muslim religions along the way. The life was sweet in Pondicherry but unfortunately, due to financial difficulties, Pi's father had to close the zoo and the family prepared to move to Canada. They were traveling on the same boat as their animals from the zoo which were sold to western buyers when a great storm hit them. After the storm came down Pi found himself as the only human survivor, in a lifeboat with zebra, hyena, orangutan and a tiger named Richard Parker. There began his true search for God, meaning and the limits of human strength.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>For a movie most of the time containing only one boy and a tiger to succeed, those two really had to be something special. Suraj Sharma, who plays Pi, is a newcomer. A risky choice for a role so important and complex, but one that enables us to focus on the character without the distraction of a familiar face. Considering his inexperience, Sharma has done a very good job with just a few unconvincing moments. The tiger on the other hand remained flawless. It's mostly CGI with only a few scenes containing a real animal, but the CGI is incredibly lifelike and among the best I've ever seen. It gives so much depth to the tiger, making it a rounded character completely deserving of a full name.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The movie was filmed in 3D which is an unusual choice for a serious drama but Lee and cinematographer Claudio Miranda made it an indispensable part of the completed work. The cinematography is mesmerizing and its effects are greatly helped by the 3D which feels so natural you simply enjoy it without even being aware it's there. The beauty of the images emphasizes the meditative nature of the story, its plot serving only as the ground for spiritual ideas to grow.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-indent: 35.4pt; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
The message of the movie can be interpreted in different ways. Some will say it is a religious one, but it can also be said to deny the existence of any kind of god. There's also the message about the importance of stories. The way we pick them, digest them, and the impact they have on us. Nevertheless, it's not the precise meaning Martel or Lee had in mind what's most important, but the one every person finds for oneself, for "Life of Pi" is one of those rare movies which are not complete without someone watching them. Therefore it has as many interpretations of the story as there are those who watched it. In that way it does two of the most important things every piece of art should do, it makes you think and it makes you discuss it. If for nothing else, it should be seen because of that.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-66342608483880915572012-12-21T00:14:00.001+01:002012-12-21T00:17:05.890+01:00Cod(d)ed★★★★★★☆☆☆☆<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>I accidentally learned of a novel named "C" reading some newspaper. The brief description intrigued me so I decided to read it. It was only later that I found out who is Tom McCarthy and that the particular novel was shortlisted for the Man Booker Prize in 2010. I'm no expert on modern literature, and never even heard of the other contestants but must say I'm puzzled as to why "C" has such high acclaim.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The novel tells a story of Serge Carrefax. His life is a pretty unusual one. Born in England at the end of the 19th century to a father who runs a school for deaf children and is a front runner in a field of wireless communication, and a mother who is dedicated to making and selling silk and even more so to her laudanum, Serge spent most of his childhood with his older sister whose suicide left a great mark on him. He went on to become a soldier in WWI, a student of architecture in London, and a sort of spy for the British government in Egypt. He spent hours listening to radio waves containing Morse code messages, months getting treatment in an Eastern European spa, he flied over the fronts day after day killing Germans and ended up as their prisoner, lived his college days high on cocaine and heroin, and ended up in a ludicrous spy game at the foot of the pyramids. Yet, the novel isn't about the events of Serge's life but the way he perceives them.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Serge was born with a caul, a sort of veil covering a baby's head at birth, and lived most of his life like it was never removed. That invisible membrane could only be broken through sex and drugs, which allowed him to see more clearly. But even then he couldn't overcome the main barrier in his life, that in communication. Communication is in fact the main theme of the novel. From radio waves and mirror signals to talking with the dead and codes in language. Serge communicates all the time, but never directly. When he's having sex with Tania, a masseuse suffering from polio, Audrey, a drug addicted actress, or any other of the girls, he does it from behind, like the shadows he saw as a child (his sister and Widsun?), avoiding the intimacy of the look in the eyes. He talks with a lot of people, yet that talk is somehow hollow, as if he operates on some other frequency. That is why he got hooked on cocaine and heroin, they've taken him places he felt more at home at, among the bugs and two-dimensional shapes throughout the labyrinth of his mind.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>There is a lot more that could be written about Serge. I'm not sure I even understood it all. McCarthy writes interestingly and his words convey multiple meanings, not all easily identified. As his main character, the author also doesn't communicate directly but through a series of codes, with a whole stack of recurring motifs. While it was an interesting read, and it definitely kept part of its secrets hidden from me, I somehow doubt I'll be coming back to it. The meanings and messages it transmits are so disparate that I just can't see a satisfying payoff coming from it. Maybe we just operate on a different frequency.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-44185796121301150762012-12-12T22:22:00.001+01:002012-12-12T22:24:10.234+01:00A multitude of drops★★★★★★★★★☆<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Every once in a while there comes a movie which strives to break the boundaries of cinema and storytelling and go beyond the limits of our imagination. Those movies provide unique viewing experience and leave marks on your heart as well as your mind. Just from watching the extended trailer (probably the best I've ever seen) it was apparent that the latest work from directors Lana and Andy Wachowski and Tom Tykwer falls into that category. It is a movie called "Cloud Atlas", just like the book written by David Mitchell which it's based upon.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The movie contains six interwoven stories spanning from 19th century to distant post-apocalyptic future and converging into a timeless message about love, justice and the importance of human actions. It unravels thematically rather than chronologically, showing similar situations in different stories as though they all take place simultaneously. That resulted in a lot of short scenes and required extensive editing which, although it finely underlines common themes, will no doubt prove to be too demanding for part of the audience. Another thing which could be confusing for some but really works to the movie's advantage is the casting of the same actors in a multitude of different roles. Although the characters are different, there is a common denominator to the roles played by the same actor. Sometimes it's a stereotype like in the case of Hugo Weaving who plays a villain in every story, and sometimes it's a more nuanced trait like with Tom Hanks whose characters follow their own interests whether motivated by love, greed, or self-preservation, heroes and villains alike. The casting, consisting of the actors of both genders and all of the races where each of them plays characters of both genders and all of the races, has a special and unique role in this movie carrying in itself one of the messages the authors wish to share. The one of equality between all human beings. Considering all that is said about the casting it's obvious the actors had to be in their top form, and fortunately for most of the parts they've been. It's worth pointing out Hugh Grant and Tom Hanks doing great job in roles completely against the type. Hanks is a little less convincing in his standard good-guy roles, trying maybe too hard to make a difference between them, but that doesn't diminish the great work he's done here.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>As in acting, we can see oscillations in other areas such as make-up and prosthetics. While some of it looks great (Hugh Grant as a Kona Chief, Hugo Weaving as Old Georgie), some is disappointingly poor (Caucasian actors as Koreans). The same disbalance is found in the music, with great main theme and not so interesting rest of the soundtrack. Trying to cover as many genres as they could (thriller, romance, history, comedy, sci-fi, drama, adventure), the directors made a commendable effort, and even the single comedic story, which feels a little disconnected because of its tone at first, greatly fits in the overall movie. There are many other things making more sense after watching the movie for the second time, and some completely new revelations too. At first I thought some stories were weaker than the others, but now I manage to see them as one, just as the directing trio, and the author of the book of course, imagined it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The main message of the movie is that of the importance of battle against oppression which, at least that's what the authors believe, is never in vain, for our every action leaves consequences we're not even aware of. The oppression is always that of people in power over those they consider less worthy, whether because of their skin colour, age, sexual orientation, social status or just because they are weaker. It's a story well known in today's world. We see the same thing happening all over it. Thus the message is as important as it can be.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>"Cloud Atlas" is probably one of the most ambitious movies, if not ever, then certainly of this century. It connects what seems unconnectable in terms of genres, stories, characters and messages. It brings together art and entertainment in a glorious fashion, engaging all of our senses and making us think and feel at the same time. It acknowledges the obvious but still gives hope. It tells us it's worth being ourselves. And I can't think of a greater thing a movie can do.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-36456834526744905822012-12-07T13:28:00.002+01:002012-12-07T13:29:49.229+01:00Love and devotion★★★★★★☆☆☆☆<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Reading "Marina" I finally managed to find a downside to Carlos Ruiz Zafón's work. He's building all of his novels on same foundations of mystery and horror, and they evolve in a same way discovering grand and tragic destinies of figures from the recent past which reflect in main characters' stories. To be clear, Zafón is doing it all with great skill, making it impossible to put the book down. It's just that it becomes repetitive reading the (almost) same story over and over again.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The story is narrated by Oscar Drei, a fifteen-year-old living in a catholic boarding school in Barcelona. One day he meets a girl of his age named Marina and together they discover the secret of the once famous doctor specialized in prosthetics Mijail Kolvenik and his wife Eva Irinova. It's a tragic story of love, greed, hope, madness and horror which has yet to finish. Of course, the story of Mijail and Eva will leave its marks on Oscar and Marina, who get as close to each other as two persons can, becoming best friends and falling in love with each other.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>As usual, Zafón fills the book with many interesting characters, but this one is shorter than his later work so we unfortunately don't get to see much of them. Nevertheless, he successfully creates a veil of mystery and melancholy around each of them and makes us care for their destinies. Another thing that keeps you glued to the book is the atmosphere he creates. It's a dark but beautiful hidden Barcelona, with its narrow streets and old buildings, the same one he revisits in his later works. There's one difference, as this novel is set in 1979/80, later than his other works. Because of the setting and events that take place it's easy to forget when it is all supposed to be happening, but if you're aware of it you'll see it doesn't fit the story, or at least I felt that way. The problem is there is no background difference between the events from more than thirty years ago the characters are told about and that what they go through in the novel. Like no time has passed. I assume it's because no matter how modern the city gets, Zafón still sees the mystical Barcelona somewhere in it. It's a beautiful and commendable view, but in this particular case it just isn't much believable. And here we come to my main objection. I fell in love with Zafón's work for many reasons but one in particular. His ability to tell a story like it's supernatural but do it so without any supernatural elements. It's because of that I find his earlier work, and "Marina" amongst it, faulty, with its unnecessary use of supernatural. I'll admit it brings a great sense of uneasiness and fear, more than your average horror in any case, but it makes the story less believable. In other words, I can imagine there's the cemetery of forgotten books somewhere in Barcelona (however improbable that might be), but I can't imagine there are human-doll hybrids going around killing people.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Another recurring Zafón's theme repeats here, the fascination with books. It isn't so obvious as in some other of his works but it turns out to be very important. From Marina's dream to become a great writer to the realization that the book we've read is in fact written by Marina and Oscar. It's a device he used again in his later work, as well as many other, but with a better skill and to a greater effect. That shows he develops as an author, getting better with time. Just like we dream Marina would...</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2666675172498711669.post-5900242795293522962012-12-02T16:26:00.002+01:002012-12-02T16:28:46.506+01:00The movie is fake. The mission is real.★★★★★★★★☆☆<br />
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>The line between fiction and reality is nowadays often blurred, with television and newspapers assaulting people with all kind of half-checked information, so it's refreshing to see a piece of work that makes clear distinction between the two. And it's even better that it does so by mixing them together.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
</div>
<a name='more'></a><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>"Argo", Ben Affleck's latest effort as both, a director and an actor, is a fictional work about a real event which consisted of creating a fictional event about a work of fiction. Confused? If you've seen the movie you're not. It is all displayed so clearly that it's easy to overlook its complexity. In 1979 Iranians took hold of US embassy in Tehran as a retaliation for US sheltering their overthrown Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. They held people who were working there as captives, but 6 diplomats managed to hide in the house of the Canadian ambassador, and escaped two months later with the help of CIA exfiltration expert Tony Mendez, posing as a Canadian film crew making a (fake) sci-fi with an eastern vibe. It sounds like one of those things that could only happen in a movie, so it was a logical decision to put it there. And putting it there means crossing from reality to fiction. So a joint CIA and Canadian Government operation can become one man's quest to save his fellow countrymen, as it basically did. There are, of course, other involved, but the movie's main character is Tony Mendez. He came up with the idea, found all the people needed to do the job, and himself went to Tehran to help the diplomats escape.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>Affleck the director does a very good job. Although we know how it's all going to end, there's an unbearable tension and a sense of fear for the characters we feel right till the last minute. What's even more fascinating is that we're at the same time aware of the silly and clichéd solutions utilized to create those feelings (everything happens in the nick of time) but we don't care about them. Affleck the actor isn't as good. He's mostly expressionless and makes the weakest link in the otherwise almost perfect cast. A shame considering he gets most of the screen time. Fortunately, the likes of Clea DuVall and Christopher Denham present us with some of the most intense performances we've seen in the last couple of years. Make-up, costume design and the overall production design make us go back in time as well as see and feel the differences between the east and the west, while Rodrigo Prieto's cinematography makes the fear and tension palpable with the help of great editing by William Goldenberg. There's a brilliant interchange of Iranian woman reading accusations against the US and the cast of the fake movie reading the screenplay, which displays all of it.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; text-justify: inter-ideograph;">
<span style="mso-tab-count: 1;"> </span>In spite of its serious subject matter the movie contains a lot of humour, presented mostly by the two Hollywood characters and directed towards the same movie industry. And while the Hollywood gets criticized for a lot of things, it's ultimately lauded for the hope and sense of magic it brings to people whether the movie is real or fake. But, as Affleck shows us by naming his movie after the one it tells about, all the movies are actually fake. It's only their meaning and the impact they have that matter.</div>
<br />Dariohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01332718484986076636noreply@blogger.com0