Viewed in
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
Matt Damon stars as a New York Senator who falls in love with a ballerina (Emily Blunt), but mysterious men in hats keep them apart for mysterious reasons with mysterious powers.
Liked
The acting.
Disliked
The similarities to Dark City.
Thoughts
From the moment I saw the trailer, I instantly thought of my favorite film of all time. The plot, premise, and archetypes all looked too familiar. Sadly, I was right.
Having said that, it was still a good film. It obviously had much better star power with Damon as the lead. He was excellent as a promising politician with a checkered past, carrying the film through its sci-fi and romantic moments with natural ease. Blunt was lovely and had good chemistry with our hero. Like most American films, you need a British accent to let the audience know "don't mess with this guy", and Terence Stamp was very strong as the antagonist. I also liked solid performances by John Slattery and Anthony Mackie (The Hurt Locker).
For me, everything else was predictable because I had seen this story before in Dark City. Hero fighting the system? Check. His history and love life possibly manufactured? Check. Horde of baddies with abilities to control time and space? Check. Free will versus fate? Check. Retro metropolis setting? Check. Heck, even both films' bad guys have weaknesses against water! At least the Strangers from the 1998 masterpiece didn't need hats to keep them in power.
Obviously not everything was identical, but you get the picture. There were some aspects of this film that were superior, such as star power, special effects, better developed love story, and overall production value.
Look, I know The Adjustment Bureau probably got an unfair shake because of I happened to love Dark City with a passion. I highly doubt most moviegoers love or remember an indie sci-fi flick released a dozen years ago (though a quick web search yielded a surprising number of hits), so their experience won't be as deja vu as mine. So without bashing it any further, I thought it was a decent, accessible science fiction thriller that didn't dumb things down for the audience.
What I would change
No idea. I never read Philip K. Dick's short story, so I don't know how close this was to the original source, which would give it some leeway in terms of coincidental similarities with you-know-what.
Showing posts with label suspense. Show all posts
Showing posts with label suspense. Show all posts
Alien (Director's Cut?)
Viewed in
2008
Premise
The first in the franchise, in which a mysterious, killing alien stows away on a human cargo ship.
Who should watch
Those who like effective, scary science fiction.
Thoughts
While I am not a fan of horror, I enjoyed this influential film. Not only did it launch Sigourney Weaver's career, it also proved that a female action star was possible. Had this film failed, director Ridley Scott might not have been able to create his masterpiece, 'Blade Runner'.
In addition to Weaver, the well-acted cast included Ian Holm and Tom Skerritt. What was interesting was because the story took place entirely on a cargo ship of seven (or eight), it sometimes felt like I was watching a play.
Considering when this was filmed, I was pleasantly surprised by the special effects, as they were very convincing even by 2000's standards. Well, except for the giant computers with monochrome monitors and archaic code.
What made it so scary was the Hitchcock-style suspense. I was expecting a big monster just tearing the place up for two hours. Instead, there was a lot of nerve-wracking waiting. The camera was often from the character's point of view, so I was as clueless as the characters, until it was too late.
This film contained one of the most famous scenes in cinema history, which I will just call 'the dinner scene'. Unfortunately, since I watched this nearly 30 years after it debuted, I had already seen the scene in tributes and parodies. I felt a bit cheated out of the shocking experience of seeing it for the first time.
Even though the late great Jerry Goldsmith did not like how his score was altered for the film, I thought the end result was very effective. The minimalistic music and long pauses of silence enhanced the unknown danger awaiting the hapless humans.
Thanks to special effects, Sigourney Weaver, and great pacing by the film makers, this horror film did what it was supposed to do, it made me sit on pins and needles wanting to know what happens next.
What I would change
Nothing.
Random
I put a question mark on whether I had seen the 'Director's Cut' because according to sources, there were two added scenes, but I only recall seeing one in my viewing. While it explained the demise of two of the characters better, I thought leaving that up to the audience's imagination was the right choice initially.
Was this the first film to start the monster-behind-the-trash-is-a-cat cliche?
2008
Premise
The first in the franchise, in which a mysterious, killing alien stows away on a human cargo ship.
Who should watch
Those who like effective, scary science fiction.
Thoughts
While I am not a fan of horror, I enjoyed this influential film. Not only did it launch Sigourney Weaver's career, it also proved that a female action star was possible. Had this film failed, director Ridley Scott might not have been able to create his masterpiece, 'Blade Runner'.
In addition to Weaver, the well-acted cast included Ian Holm and Tom Skerritt. What was interesting was because the story took place entirely on a cargo ship of seven (or eight), it sometimes felt like I was watching a play.
Considering when this was filmed, I was pleasantly surprised by the special effects, as they were very convincing even by 2000's standards. Well, except for the giant computers with monochrome monitors and archaic code.
What made it so scary was the Hitchcock-style suspense. I was expecting a big monster just tearing the place up for two hours. Instead, there was a lot of nerve-wracking waiting. The camera was often from the character's point of view, so I was as clueless as the characters, until it was too late.
This film contained one of the most famous scenes in cinema history, which I will just call 'the dinner scene'. Unfortunately, since I watched this nearly 30 years after it debuted, I had already seen the scene in tributes and parodies. I felt a bit cheated out of the shocking experience of seeing it for the first time.
Even though the late great Jerry Goldsmith did not like how his score was altered for the film, I thought the end result was very effective. The minimalistic music and long pauses of silence enhanced the unknown danger awaiting the hapless humans.
Thanks to special effects, Sigourney Weaver, and great pacing by the film makers, this horror film did what it was supposed to do, it made me sit on pins and needles wanting to know what happens next.
What I would change
Nothing.
Random
I put a question mark on whether I had seen the 'Director's Cut' because according to sources, there were two added scenes, but I only recall seeing one in my viewing. While it explained the demise of two of the characters better, I thought leaving that up to the audience's imagination was the right choice initially.
Was this the first film to start the monster-behind-the-trash-is-a-cat cliche?
The American
Viewed in
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
George Clooney stars as a hitman in hiding in a small Italian village.
Loved
George Clooney's performance.
Liked
The character study.
Thoughts
If I had to use one word to describe this excellent piece of work, it would be "subtle".
Everything about it was subtle, none more exemplified than Clooney's performance. He was mesmerizing, as he was able to express his characters emotions, introversion, and paranoia with minimal dialog. In fact, the directing and acting were good at putting this internal stuff onscreen that the story would have been just as clear had I watched on mute. All of those quiet moments truly built up for a wonderful, emotional payoff in the climax.
The only non-subtle aspect was the cinematography. Throughout the film, my eyes were treated to beautiful shots of unique Italian villas and vast natural landscapes. Just gorgeous eye candy.
As a pure character study, it clearly cared more about the people in the story than the story itself; I assume if I thought twice about the plot, there might be some unanswered loose ends. Also, I am certain that its pace and silence would likely bore the typical moviegoer.
This was truly an elegant, underrated film. While he was not nominated, Clooney's performance should not be overlooked.
What I would change
Nothing.
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
George Clooney stars as a hitman in hiding in a small Italian village.
Loved
George Clooney's performance.
Liked
The character study.
Thoughts
If I had to use one word to describe this excellent piece of work, it would be "subtle".
Everything about it was subtle, none more exemplified than Clooney's performance. He was mesmerizing, as he was able to express his characters emotions, introversion, and paranoia with minimal dialog. In fact, the directing and acting were good at putting this internal stuff onscreen that the story would have been just as clear had I watched on mute. All of those quiet moments truly built up for a wonderful, emotional payoff in the climax.
The only non-subtle aspect was the cinematography. Throughout the film, my eyes were treated to beautiful shots of unique Italian villas and vast natural landscapes. Just gorgeous eye candy.
As a pure character study, it clearly cared more about the people in the story than the story itself; I assume if I thought twice about the plot, there might be some unanswered loose ends. Also, I am certain that its pace and silence would likely bore the typical moviegoer.
This was truly an elegant, underrated film. While he was not nominated, Clooney's performance should not be overlooked.
What I would change
Nothing.
American Psycho
Viewed in
2010
Premise
Christian Bale's breakout role as a 1980's American powerful businessman with murder as a hobby. Based on the controversial novel, which I have not read.
Loved
Bale's performance.
Liked
The dark comedy.
Disliked
Getting confused at the end.
Thoughts
I loved Bale's performance, but I cannot say the same for the whole movie.
Christian Bale made this film go. He was detached, pretentious, vain, misogynistic, narcissistic, jealous, hot-headed, and all sorts of nasty rolled into one. You would think such a protagonist would be hard to like. But Bale was somehow able to embody all that with delightful charm and a magnetic presence. Despite his lack of human decency, I could still relate to his frustrations in office politics or finding how he did not have the coolest business card.
Because of Bale's wonderful execution as this character, his killings were justified and fun, from an entertainment standpoint. Some were suspenseful, others were darkly humorous, but they were all interesting. While they were bloody, they were not graphic or gory.
Throughout the film, it reminded me of Fight Club, only bloodier and more satirical. It had a similar style of snarky voice over protagonist narration. Also, it had themes of hate for and rebelling against the materialistic, dehumanizing aspect of American society.
What ruined it for me was the last act. Things started to get confusing (like the lawyer scene) to the point of frustration, and I was not sure what the resolution was. Was there a consequence (and therefore a meaningful arc) for Patrick Bateman? I had to look online to double-check the plot afterward. Turns out it was intentionally ambiguous. Maybe because I was comparing it to Fight Club that I expected a more straight-forward ending. In any case, if it's going to be open-ended like that, it could have been executed better for me to realize that.
Even though I did not like how it ended, I appreciated the film for its risks, themes, entertaining murders, and most importantly, Christian Bale portrayal of such an inhuman (but entrancing) character.
What I would change
Find a way to let the audience realize the ending was meant to be interpreted.
2010
Premise
Christian Bale's breakout role as a 1980's American powerful businessman with murder as a hobby. Based on the controversial novel, which I have not read.
Loved
Bale's performance.
Liked
The dark comedy.
Disliked
Getting confused at the end.
Thoughts
I loved Bale's performance, but I cannot say the same for the whole movie.
Christian Bale made this film go. He was detached, pretentious, vain, misogynistic, narcissistic, jealous, hot-headed, and all sorts of nasty rolled into one. You would think such a protagonist would be hard to like. But Bale was somehow able to embody all that with delightful charm and a magnetic presence. Despite his lack of human decency, I could still relate to his frustrations in office politics or finding how he did not have the coolest business card.
Because of Bale's wonderful execution as this character, his killings were justified and fun, from an entertainment standpoint. Some were suspenseful, others were darkly humorous, but they were all interesting. While they were bloody, they were not graphic or gory.
Throughout the film, it reminded me of Fight Club, only bloodier and more satirical. It had a similar style of snarky voice over protagonist narration. Also, it had themes of hate for and rebelling against the materialistic, dehumanizing aspect of American society.
What ruined it for me was the last act. Things started to get confusing (like the lawyer scene) to the point of frustration, and I was not sure what the resolution was. Was there a consequence (and therefore a meaningful arc) for Patrick Bateman? I had to look online to double-check the plot afterward. Turns out it was intentionally ambiguous. Maybe because I was comparing it to Fight Club that I expected a more straight-forward ending. In any case, if it's going to be open-ended like that, it could have been executed better for me to realize that.
Even though I did not like how it ended, I appreciated the film for its risks, themes, entertaining murders, and most importantly, Christian Bale portrayal of such an inhuman (but entrancing) character.
What I would change
Find a way to let the audience realize the ending was meant to be interpreted.
Amores Perros
Viewed in
2007
Premise
Alejandro González Iñárritu's and Gael García Bernal's breakout movie that's a Mexican 'Pulp Fiction' mixed with 'Crash' and Westminster Dog Show.
Who should watch
People who enjoy fancy multiple-storyline movies.
Thoughts
There was some good stuff, even though this style of story-telling was getting gimmicky. Bernal was a great presence. Despite all the coincidences and chance happenings, a lot of the character behavior was realistic and sympathetic. My favorite storyline was the former guerrilla-turned-wino-turned-hit man who was hired to kill a man by his business partner.
Just a warning: those no dogs were hurt, there were plenty of realistic scenes of animal cruelty. This may be a bigger deal in the post-Michael Vick era.
What I would change
A steadicam every once in while would have been nice. I was glad I did not try to watch this on a plane.
2007
Premise
Alejandro González Iñárritu's and Gael García Bernal's breakout movie that's a Mexican 'Pulp Fiction' mixed with 'Crash' and Westminster Dog Show.
Who should watch
People who enjoy fancy multiple-storyline movies.
Thoughts
There was some good stuff, even though this style of story-telling was getting gimmicky. Bernal was a great presence. Despite all the coincidences and chance happenings, a lot of the character behavior was realistic and sympathetic. My favorite storyline was the former guerrilla-turned-wino-turned-hit man who was hired to kill a man by his business partner.
Just a warning: those no dogs were hurt, there were plenty of realistic scenes of animal cruelty. This may be a bigger deal in the post-Michael Vick era.
What I would change
A steadicam every once in while would have been nice. I was glad I did not try to watch this on a plane.
Angels & Demons
Viewed in
2009
Premise
Based Dan Brown's novel, Tom Hanks must protect the Vatican from the Illuminati.
Who should watch
Tom Hanks fans and fans of the book.
Thoughts
It has been a while since I read the novel, but I felt it was faithful to the main plot of the story. Sure, a lot of the little cool puzzles had to be swept aside, but that is always a necessary evil when adapting for film.
Since I remembered the basic story, it was as if I were watching for the second time. Yet, it was still enjoyable for me, as I was able to see how the film makers had to trick the audience in certain key scenes. I am sure if I thought hard enough, I could find the plot holes, but I was entertained to not care.
Compared to the 'Da Vinci Code' movie, this was much better. Partly because of a better story to tell, but also the film was livelier in style. My main problem with the other movie was that Hanks and Ron Howard were cruising on auto-pilot. Here, there was more intensity from the scenes and acting, aided by Hans Zimmer's grandiose score. It did not feel like a two hour twenty minute movie.
Maybe it was the theater dimming their projector lights again, but the image appeared to be obviously computer graphic-y (yes, I made that up). A lot of exterior and structure shots were hazy, unclear, and just gave off the aura of artificiality, as if they filmed it all on set, even though they did film stuff in Italy.
Perhaps it was my lowered expectations, but I liked it much more than the critics did. As a fan of the novel, I enjoyed this entertaining adaptation.
What I would change
Not sure.
2009
Premise
Based Dan Brown's novel, Tom Hanks must protect the Vatican from the Illuminati.
Who should watch
Tom Hanks fans and fans of the book.
Thoughts
It has been a while since I read the novel, but I felt it was faithful to the main plot of the story. Sure, a lot of the little cool puzzles had to be swept aside, but that is always a necessary evil when adapting for film.
Since I remembered the basic story, it was as if I were watching for the second time. Yet, it was still enjoyable for me, as I was able to see how the film makers had to trick the audience in certain key scenes. I am sure if I thought hard enough, I could find the plot holes, but I was entertained to not care.
Compared to the 'Da Vinci Code' movie, this was much better. Partly because of a better story to tell, but also the film was livelier in style. My main problem with the other movie was that Hanks and Ron Howard were cruising on auto-pilot. Here, there was more intensity from the scenes and acting, aided by Hans Zimmer's grandiose score. It did not feel like a two hour twenty minute movie.
Maybe it was the theater dimming their projector lights again, but the image appeared to be obviously computer graphic-y (yes, I made that up). A lot of exterior and structure shots were hazy, unclear, and just gave off the aura of artificiality, as if they filmed it all on set, even though they did film stuff in Italy.
Perhaps it was my lowered expectations, but I liked it much more than the critics did. As a fan of the novel, I enjoyed this entertaining adaptation.
What I would change
Not sure.
Argo
Viewed in
2012
Formats
Movie theater.
Premise
As the Iranian revolution reaches a boiling point, a CIA 'exfiltration' specialist concocts a risky plan to free six Americans who have found shelter at the home of the Canadian ambassador.
Liked
Unexpectedly funny scenes. Everything in general.
Thoughts
I was surprised by the amount of humor throughout the story. Most of it came from Alan Arkin as the bitter, grizzled movie producer who decides to help the CIA, but there was also some hilarious moments by the serious people due to the absurdity of the circumstances. I very much enjoyed the jabs at Hollywood, but it was also very restrained, never letting it get in the way of the plot.
This film literally had no weak points. The direction was clear and everything was easy to follow. Performances were strong, especially Arkin. Characters were fully fleshed-out. Obstacles were formidable and believable. For me, the opening sequence was when the film was at its best. It captured the time and place, set the table for what the protagonists were up against, and was flat out intense.
I wanted to love this movie, but couldn't. And honestly, I don't know why. The only thing I can think of was that I knew how it ended, so despite director Ben Affleck's best attempt to show how dire the mission was, I never got caught up in the suspense (aside from the opening).
Argo was a super-solid and very enjoyable film. I can see why it's got Oscar buzz, not that my heart agrees.
2012
Formats
Movie theater.
Premise
As the Iranian revolution reaches a boiling point, a CIA 'exfiltration' specialist concocts a risky plan to free six Americans who have found shelter at the home of the Canadian ambassador.
Liked
Unexpectedly funny scenes. Everything in general.
Thoughts
I was surprised by the amount of humor throughout the story. Most of it came from Alan Arkin as the bitter, grizzled movie producer who decides to help the CIA, but there was also some hilarious moments by the serious people due to the absurdity of the circumstances. I very much enjoyed the jabs at Hollywood, but it was also very restrained, never letting it get in the way of the plot.
This film literally had no weak points. The direction was clear and everything was easy to follow. Performances were strong, especially Arkin. Characters were fully fleshed-out. Obstacles were formidable and believable. For me, the opening sequence was when the film was at its best. It captured the time and place, set the table for what the protagonists were up against, and was flat out intense.
I wanted to love this movie, but couldn't. And honestly, I don't know why. The only thing I can think of was that I knew how it ended, so despite director Ben Affleck's best attempt to show how dire the mission was, I never got caught up in the suspense (aside from the opening).
Argo was a super-solid and very enjoyable film. I can see why it's got Oscar buzz, not that my heart agrees.
The Bank Job
Viewed in
2010
Formats
DVD
Premise
A movie (loosely) based on the famous Baker Street robbery, used as a government blackmail cover-up.
Liked
The twists in the story.
Disliked
Too many characters.
Thoughts
A film with a much more entertaining second act.
What I really liked about it was the cool plot twists after the bank heist. It became a slick cat-and-mouse affair with multiple pursuers in a giant spiderweb of consequences. Instead of a brainless shootout, I enjoyed observing the characters outsmarting each other to survive the fallout. Those expecting a Jason Statham action flick might be disappointed by that.
Speaking of Statham, he was rock solid in the lead, with his gruff, kick-butt presence while being more brains than brawn. The rest of the cast were mostly unfamiliar British actors, but they were likable and solid as well. Shame on me for missing the Mick Jagger cameo.
When you think Statham and English heist movies, you think Guy Ritchie flicks. Here, you could see director Roger Donaldson doing his best to restrain from emulating that frenetic, kinetic style. There were some slick cinematography to give it a cool vibe, but he managed to keep them from distracting the moment. Donaldson's vision of the 1970's was pretty fun, especially in terms of fashion, music, and bountiful bare breasts.
My biggest issue was that the film makers put too many minor characters into the story. It was a pain to keep track of all these people. There was probably way too many coincidences in the plot to make it believable, but it sure made it entertaining as hell when all the dominoes began to topple.
This film was enjoyable thanks to the battle of wits between charming characters in the second half. We will not know until 2054 whether a government coverup was actually part of the robbery, but in terms of making an entertaining film, I would like to believe it was true.
What I would change
Nothing.
2010
Formats
DVD
Premise
A movie (loosely) based on the famous Baker Street robbery, used as a government blackmail cover-up.
Liked
The twists in the story.
Disliked
Too many characters.
Thoughts
A film with a much more entertaining second act.
What I really liked about it was the cool plot twists after the bank heist. It became a slick cat-and-mouse affair with multiple pursuers in a giant spiderweb of consequences. Instead of a brainless shootout, I enjoyed observing the characters outsmarting each other to survive the fallout. Those expecting a Jason Statham action flick might be disappointed by that.
Speaking of Statham, he was rock solid in the lead, with his gruff, kick-butt presence while being more brains than brawn. The rest of the cast were mostly unfamiliar British actors, but they were likable and solid as well. Shame on me for missing the Mick Jagger cameo.
When you think Statham and English heist movies, you think Guy Ritchie flicks. Here, you could see director Roger Donaldson doing his best to restrain from emulating that frenetic, kinetic style. There were some slick cinematography to give it a cool vibe, but he managed to keep them from distracting the moment. Donaldson's vision of the 1970's was pretty fun, especially in terms of fashion, music, and bountiful bare breasts.
My biggest issue was that the film makers put too many minor characters into the story. It was a pain to keep track of all these people. There was probably way too many coincidences in the plot to make it believable, but it sure made it entertaining as hell when all the dominoes began to topple.
This film was enjoyable thanks to the battle of wits between charming characters in the second half. We will not know until 2054 whether a government coverup was actually part of the robbery, but in terms of making an entertaining film, I would like to believe it was true.
What I would change
Nothing.
The Battle of Algiers
Viewed in
2000
Formats
VHS
Premise
A film commissioned by the Algerian government that shows the Algerian revolution from both sides.
Thoughts
Don't remember much, except it was very suspenseful at times, and it had a real objective, documentary-like feel to it.
What I would change
NA
2000
Formats
VHS
Premise
A film commissioned by the Algerian government that shows the Algerian revolution from both sides.
Thoughts
Don't remember much, except it was very suspenseful at times, and it had a real objective, documentary-like feel to it.
What I would change
NA
The Birds
Viewed in
1999
Formats
VHS
Premise
Alfred Hitchcock's masterpiece about a town besieged by angry birds. Not to be confused with the Angry Birds game.
Thoughts
If I recall, it was both a technical and visual spectacle. There were numerous interesting things about this film, from the amazing buildup of suspense in the playground, to the lack of traditional score from Bernard Herrmann, to Hitchcock's ability to create convincing special effects with limited technology. Even if I was not impressed by the visual effects, it was genuinely scary.
What I would change
Nothing.
1999
Formats
VHS
Premise
Alfred Hitchcock's masterpiece about a town besieged by angry birds. Not to be confused with the Angry Birds game.
Thoughts
If I recall, it was both a technical and visual spectacle. There were numerous interesting things about this film, from the amazing buildup of suspense in the playground, to the lack of traditional score from Bernard Herrmann, to Hitchcock's ability to create convincing special effects with limited technology. Even if I was not impressed by the visual effects, it was genuinely scary.
What I would change
Nothing.
Black Swan
Viewed in
2010
Formats
Movie theater (digital)
Premise
Natalie Portman stars as a sheltered ballerina given the pressure-filled lead role in "Swan Lake".
Loved
The acting, the sound effects.
Thoughts
Another strong entry by director Darren Aronofsky, and arguably Natalie Portman's best performance to date.
The main reason why this film succeeded was because Portman. She delivered memorably in creating a naive, oppressed kid put into the pressure cooker of being in the spotlight, gradually unraveling. Newly-appointed, her character needed to tap into her dark side to truly become a ballet star. Portman masterfully recreated the innocence of a young lady, at the same time subtly allow her character to seep into uncontrollable danger.
She was helped by some great supporting performances. Mila Kunas and Winona Ryder were excellent, but Barbara Hershey was mesmerizing as Portman's obsessive, iron-fisted, complex mother.
Aronofsky immersed the audience into Portman's head with mood, performance, subtle use of special effects, and wizardry with sound. He created a psychologically haunting style, in which fantasy blended into reality, and each scene kept me on my toes regarding which realm I was in. I loved how sound was used. With Aronofsky's deft manipulation of voices and effects from unnatural angles, I highly recommend watching this with a good surround system, whether it be at home or theater.
Overall, the story was pretty strong, especially the tug-of-war between Portman and her mother, and the subplot of the ousted ballet ex-star. Though if you have seen enough of these kind of psychological thrillers, there was a slight aura of predictability. But the film makers executed it very well. Another minor beef was that I did not appreciate the "cheap" horror techniques to make me jump.
For some reason, people compared Black Swan to Aronofsky's The Wrestler, but I thought it more closely resembled Pi. Both were visually/psychologically dark/haunting, with themes of obsession and treading the dangerous unknowns of the mind. I would not consider this one of this year's best films, but still highly recommendable, thanks to Aronofsky's execution and memorable performances by Portman and Hershey.
What I would change
Less of the horror shock tactics.
2010
Formats
Movie theater (digital)
Premise
Natalie Portman stars as a sheltered ballerina given the pressure-filled lead role in "Swan Lake".
Loved
The acting, the sound effects.
Thoughts
Another strong entry by director Darren Aronofsky, and arguably Natalie Portman's best performance to date.
The main reason why this film succeeded was because Portman. She delivered memorably in creating a naive, oppressed kid put into the pressure cooker of being in the spotlight, gradually unraveling. Newly-appointed, her character needed to tap into her dark side to truly become a ballet star. Portman masterfully recreated the innocence of a young lady, at the same time subtly allow her character to seep into uncontrollable danger.
She was helped by some great supporting performances. Mila Kunas and Winona Ryder were excellent, but Barbara Hershey was mesmerizing as Portman's obsessive, iron-fisted, complex mother.
Aronofsky immersed the audience into Portman's head with mood, performance, subtle use of special effects, and wizardry with sound. He created a psychologically haunting style, in which fantasy blended into reality, and each scene kept me on my toes regarding which realm I was in. I loved how sound was used. With Aronofsky's deft manipulation of voices and effects from unnatural angles, I highly recommend watching this with a good surround system, whether it be at home or theater.
Overall, the story was pretty strong, especially the tug-of-war between Portman and her mother, and the subplot of the ousted ballet ex-star. Though if you have seen enough of these kind of psychological thrillers, there was a slight aura of predictability. But the film makers executed it very well. Another minor beef was that I did not appreciate the "cheap" horror techniques to make me jump.
For some reason, people compared Black Swan to Aronofsky's The Wrestler, but I thought it more closely resembled Pi. Both were visually/psychologically dark/haunting, with themes of obsession and treading the dangerous unknowns of the mind. I would not consider this one of this year's best films, but still highly recommendable, thanks to Aronofsky's execution and memorable performances by Portman and Hershey.
What I would change
Less of the horror shock tactics.
Bourne Ultimatum
Viewed in
2007
Premise
Jason Bourne tries to find his past in the allegedly finale to the trilogy.
Who should watch
Fans of the first two films.
Thoughts
This was one of the most satisfying endings of any movie trilogy.
Everything that made the first two work was on display in this film. There was plenty of mystery-solving, fight scenes, nostalgic old-school car chases, and Jason Bourne just being a badass spy. I liked all the new characters and actors that fit into Bourne's past.
If this was the finale, there was no letdown. I liked how the opening shot was what happened immediately after the ending of 'Bourne Supremacy'. For those who had the first two films in their minds, there were some nice tie-ins and references. What was interesting was that not all the loose ends were tied, yet it felt like a complete trilogy. Julia Stiles' character's twist was subtly awesome.
While Jason Bourne will never reach the immortal James Bond, I was glad Hollywood was able to make a cool, brainy spy series.
What I would change
Reduced Bourne's invincibility. There were a couple of car crashes when he walked away without a scratch, which was a bit different than the first film. This was the same thing that happened to the 'Die Hard' series.
2007
Premise
Jason Bourne tries to find his past in the allegedly finale to the trilogy.
Who should watch
Fans of the first two films.
Thoughts
This was one of the most satisfying endings of any movie trilogy.
Everything that made the first two work was on display in this film. There was plenty of mystery-solving, fight scenes, nostalgic old-school car chases, and Jason Bourne just being a badass spy. I liked all the new characters and actors that fit into Bourne's past.
If this was the finale, there was no letdown. I liked how the opening shot was what happened immediately after the ending of 'Bourne Supremacy'. For those who had the first two films in their minds, there were some nice tie-ins and references. What was interesting was that not all the loose ends were tied, yet it felt like a complete trilogy. Julia Stiles' character's twist was subtly awesome.
While Jason Bourne will never reach the immortal James Bond, I was glad Hollywood was able to make a cool, brainy spy series.
What I would change
Reduced Bourne's invincibility. There were a couple of car crashes when he walked away without a scratch, which was a bit different than the first film. This was the same thing that happened to the 'Die Hard' series.
Bourne Identity, The
Viewed in
2007
Premise
A man suffering from amnesia finds out he's really good at being a secret agent. Based on the novel.
Who should watch
Matt Damon fans. Fans of the book.
Thoughts
It was well made. I was somewhat reminded of movies like 'The French Connection', especially in terms of realistic characters and authentic car chases. While I knew about the main character's amnesia, I did not expect him to have a college student get sucked into the plot. I really liked how that was handled, and that was my favorite part.
What I would change
I would speed up the pacing in some of the places.
2007
Premise
A man suffering from amnesia finds out he's really good at being a secret agent. Based on the novel.
Who should watch
Matt Damon fans. Fans of the book.
Thoughts
It was well made. I was somewhat reminded of movies like 'The French Connection', especially in terms of realistic characters and authentic car chases. While I knew about the main character's amnesia, I did not expect him to have a college student get sucked into the plot. I really liked how that was handled, and that was my favorite part.
What I would change
I would speed up the pacing in some of the places.
Bourne Supremacy, The
Viewed in
2007
Premise
In the sequel to 'Bourne Identity', Jason Bourne is framed for murder.
Who should watch
Fans of the book and the first movie. Matt Damon fans.
Thoughts
I liked how more emotional this movie was as the plot delved deeper into Jason Bourne's past. There was little sequel letdown as it maintained the realistic characters and old school car chases. My favorite part was the last car chase, in which it first felt like an average car chase, then the increasing intensity snuck up on the audience, and finally it culminated in an exciting climax.
What I would change
Once again, I felt the pacing in some areas to be slow.
2007
Premise
In the sequel to 'Bourne Identity', Jason Bourne is framed for murder.
Who should watch
Fans of the book and the first movie. Matt Damon fans.
Thoughts
I liked how more emotional this movie was as the plot delved deeper into Jason Bourne's past. There was little sequel letdown as it maintained the realistic characters and old school car chases. My favorite part was the last car chase, in which it first felt like an average car chase, then the increasing intensity snuck up on the audience, and finally it culminated in an exciting climax.
What I would change
Once again, I felt the pacing in some areas to be slow.
Breach
Viewed in
2007
Premise
The telling of how the F.B.I brought down the worst spy in U.S. history, Robert Hanssen.
Who should watch
Chris Cooper and Ryan Phillipe fans. Those who enjoy subtle acting.
Thoughts
This was a wonderfully acted film. Ryan Phillipe held his own playing opposite one of the greatest underrated actors of my time. Chris Cooper deserved a nomination for best actor. He was threatening and enthralling. It looked like his Hanssen character could read your mind.
The espionage story was well written and easy to follow. In terms of spy movies, it was pretty simple, but that was because this was not a spy movie. It was a great acting character film within a spy setting.
What I would change
Nothing.
2007
Premise
The telling of how the F.B.I brought down the worst spy in U.S. history, Robert Hanssen.
Who should watch
Chris Cooper and Ryan Phillipe fans. Those who enjoy subtle acting.
Thoughts
This was a wonderfully acted film. Ryan Phillipe held his own playing opposite one of the greatest underrated actors of my time. Chris Cooper deserved a nomination for best actor. He was threatening and enthralling. It looked like his Hanssen character could read your mind.
The espionage story was well written and easy to follow. In terms of spy movies, it was pretty simple, but that was because this was not a spy movie. It was a great acting character film within a spy setting.
What I would change
Nothing.
Buried
Viewed in
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
Ryan Reynolds stars as an American contractor during the U.S. occupation of Iraq who finds himself buried in a coffin in the desert.
Loved
The premise.
Liked
The visual creativity.
Thoughts
Definitely one of the most interesting films of 2010.
Obviously, I was very intrigued by the premise, and the film makers were able to create some fascinating moments via performance, cinematography, and sound. Aside from the uniqueness of this film, I was also drawn in by its challenges.
I got to say, Ryan Reynolds has impressed me in the past couple of years with his film choices and performances. Being the only character onscreen, he carried the story with natural ease. And much like his contemporary, James Franco in 127 Hours, he also had to figure out how to create his character with minimal space and movement.
The behind-the-scenes for Buried would probably be fun, just to see how many coffin sets they created, and the preparation required to get the shots they wanted while still maintaining the claustrophobia that Rodrigo Cortes envisioned. I also imagine the degree of difficulty for lighting must have been enormous, yet they pulled it off very well, everything was lit believably physically and emotionally. I really dug the use of colors within the confined space.
For me, the writing was the weakest link. It was solid, after all, it kept me invested in the story, the climax was very effective, and the plot was mostly plausible. However, at times it got a little preachy about the business of nation occupation/rebuilding, and Reynolds' character does do a few illogical things. Also, having watched the MythBusters episodes about coffins, I had a hard time believing he had enough oxygen while exerting so much energy and using his lighter within the time frame of the plot.
This film really stood out for its unique story and look. I thought it did a pretty good job of making an interesting film for the whole 90 minutes. Too bad the moments kept vacillating between haunting and implausible.
What I would change
Taken out the snake scene, since it felt inconsequential, and silly. Also, replaced the ending credits song with a more heavier, befitting choice.
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
Ryan Reynolds stars as an American contractor during the U.S. occupation of Iraq who finds himself buried in a coffin in the desert.
Loved
The premise.
Liked
The visual creativity.
Thoughts
Definitely one of the most interesting films of 2010.
Obviously, I was very intrigued by the premise, and the film makers were able to create some fascinating moments via performance, cinematography, and sound. Aside from the uniqueness of this film, I was also drawn in by its challenges.
I got to say, Ryan Reynolds has impressed me in the past couple of years with his film choices and performances. Being the only character onscreen, he carried the story with natural ease. And much like his contemporary, James Franco in 127 Hours, he also had to figure out how to create his character with minimal space and movement.
The behind-the-scenes for Buried would probably be fun, just to see how many coffin sets they created, and the preparation required to get the shots they wanted while still maintaining the claustrophobia that Rodrigo Cortes envisioned. I also imagine the degree of difficulty for lighting must have been enormous, yet they pulled it off very well, everything was lit believably physically and emotionally. I really dug the use of colors within the confined space.
For me, the writing was the weakest link. It was solid, after all, it kept me invested in the story, the climax was very effective, and the plot was mostly plausible. However, at times it got a little preachy about the business of nation occupation/rebuilding, and Reynolds' character does do a few illogical things. Also, having watched the MythBusters episodes about coffins, I had a hard time believing he had enough oxygen while exerting so much energy and using his lighter within the time frame of the plot.
This film really stood out for its unique story and look. I thought it did a pretty good job of making an interesting film for the whole 90 minutes. Too bad the moments kept vacillating between haunting and implausible.
What I would change
Taken out the snake scene, since it felt inconsequential, and silly. Also, replaced the ending credits song with a more heavier, befitting choice.
Body Heat
Viewed in
2012
Formats
HDTV
Premise
William Hurt stars as a sleazy lawyer who falls for femme fatale Kathleen Turner. Together they decide to murder her rich husband.
Loved
Pretty much everything, especially the leads.
Thoughts
Sometimes it's just plain entertaining to watch bad people do bad things to each other.
This was probably the last great film noir to come out. (My favorite film, Dark City had elements, but it's far from being pure noir.) The only flick of its kind that could touch it would be Double Indemnity. It had everything you expect. Sexy broads, shady characters, sultry flirtations, double-crossings, unexpected twists, suspenseful murderous moments, distinct score, and plenty of night shoots when morality goes to sleep. The only things absent were the hard shadows and main character voice overs. I didn't miss either in this case.
I always thought Faye Dunaway was the reigning queen of that era, now I'm no longer sure. Good googly moogly, did Kathleen Turner amp up the sexy in this film! Every curve, every innuendo, every look, every feign made me weak in the knees and hard in the... never mind. The first flirtatious twenty minutes with William Hurt were just pitch perfect in dialog, performance and execution. I could watch that section on a loop forever.
As for Hurt, he ain't no slouch either. Completely believable as a sleazy womanizer, yet able to be Turner's (near) equal without being a dick. I don't know what the secret was, aside from writing and acting, but somehow the film was able to create two shady, yet totally memorable and lovable leads.
The rest of the cast was excellent, and quite amusing. I had never seen a non-white-haired Ted Danson before. Nor had I ever seen a svelte, handsome, and smooth-skinned Mickey Rourke prior to this.
Body Heat was more than just a great exercise in style and acting. The story was very intriguing, full of well-timed reveals and twists. I thought it would be the standard kill-the-rich-husband-but-it-gets-messy tale, but the third act was juicy. Another great aspect was its timelessness. Even the old school telephones gave it a time and place that was familiar to the genre. Nothing else, not even the pace, felt outdated. My only complaint of the story was the resolution, when I think they tried too hard, and I'm not sure if everything made sense while watching.
A must-see for film buffs and film noir fans, this masterpiece was one of the best of its decade, thanks to its seduction, subterfuge, style, and story.
2012
Formats
HDTV
Premise
William Hurt stars as a sleazy lawyer who falls for femme fatale Kathleen Turner. Together they decide to murder her rich husband.
Loved
Pretty much everything, especially the leads.
Thoughts
Sometimes it's just plain entertaining to watch bad people do bad things to each other.
This was probably the last great film noir to come out. (My favorite film, Dark City had elements, but it's far from being pure noir.) The only flick of its kind that could touch it would be Double Indemnity. It had everything you expect. Sexy broads, shady characters, sultry flirtations, double-crossings, unexpected twists, suspenseful murderous moments, distinct score, and plenty of night shoots when morality goes to sleep. The only things absent were the hard shadows and main character voice overs. I didn't miss either in this case.
I always thought Faye Dunaway was the reigning queen of that era, now I'm no longer sure. Good googly moogly, did Kathleen Turner amp up the sexy in this film! Every curve, every innuendo, every look, every feign made me weak in the knees and hard in the... never mind. The first flirtatious twenty minutes with William Hurt were just pitch perfect in dialog, performance and execution. I could watch that section on a loop forever.
As for Hurt, he ain't no slouch either. Completely believable as a sleazy womanizer, yet able to be Turner's (near) equal without being a dick. I don't know what the secret was, aside from writing and acting, but somehow the film was able to create two shady, yet totally memorable and lovable leads.
The rest of the cast was excellent, and quite amusing. I had never seen a non-white-haired Ted Danson before. Nor had I ever seen a svelte, handsome, and smooth-skinned Mickey Rourke prior to this.
Body Heat was more than just a great exercise in style and acting. The story was very intriguing, full of well-timed reveals and twists. I thought it would be the standard kill-the-rich-husband-but-it-gets-messy tale, but the third act was juicy. Another great aspect was its timelessness. Even the old school telephones gave it a time and place that was familiar to the genre. Nothing else, not even the pace, felt outdated. My only complaint of the story was the resolution, when I think they tried too hard, and I'm not sure if everything made sense while watching.
A must-see for film buffs and film noir fans, this masterpiece was one of the best of its decade, thanks to its seduction, subterfuge, style, and story.
The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari
Viewed in
2010
Formats
Netflix streaming (Xbox 360)
Premise
A German town is besieged by mysterious murders coinciding with the appearance of a somnambulist.
Loved
The awesome art designs.
Liked
The psychological mystery.
Thoughts
If Tim Burton made a silent picture, I think it would look a lot like this.
Visually, there was a lot interesting things going on. I loved the sets, oozing with off-kilter, unfriendly, jagged edges. Somehow the film makers tinted the film in different background colors to help dictate the time of day in the story. Each character's makeup was equally bizarre, especially the mad Dr. Caligari (wearing what looked like Mickey Mouse gloves).
The story was surprisingly complicated for a 71 minute silent picture, with a moving plot, spooky intrigue, and psychological twists.
It was interesting to see how early movie makers tried to use the iris. In this case, they utilized it like spotlights and curtains in a stage production.
Unfortunately, I could not dig up any research on if the score was original or not, or who translated the subtitles to English. All I know was that the incessantly dissonant score drove my mom batty.
The biggest flaw was that sometimes I had trouble understanding what was happening in the story onscreen. This probably had to do with the limitations of black-and-white silent pictures.
I highly recommend this film, not just because it was credited with pioneering German Expressionism, film noir, horror, and twist endings, but because it was haunting, intriguing, and memorable.
What I would change
Nothing.
2010
Formats
Netflix streaming (Xbox 360)
Premise
A German town is besieged by mysterious murders coinciding with the appearance of a somnambulist.
Loved
The awesome art designs.
Liked
The psychological mystery.
Thoughts
If Tim Burton made a silent picture, I think it would look a lot like this.
Visually, there was a lot interesting things going on. I loved the sets, oozing with off-kilter, unfriendly, jagged edges. Somehow the film makers tinted the film in different background colors to help dictate the time of day in the story. Each character's makeup was equally bizarre, especially the mad Dr. Caligari (wearing what looked like Mickey Mouse gloves).
The story was surprisingly complicated for a 71 minute silent picture, with a moving plot, spooky intrigue, and psychological twists.
It was interesting to see how early movie makers tried to use the iris. In this case, they utilized it like spotlights and curtains in a stage production.
Unfortunately, I could not dig up any research on if the score was original or not, or who translated the subtitles to English. All I know was that the incessantly dissonant score drove my mom batty.
The biggest flaw was that sometimes I had trouble understanding what was happening in the story onscreen. This probably had to do with the limitations of black-and-white silent pictures.
I highly recommend this film, not just because it was credited with pioneering German Expressionism, film noir, horror, and twist endings, but because it was haunting, intriguing, and memorable.
What I would change
Nothing.
Captain Phillips
Viewed in
2014
Formats
HDTV.
Premise
Based on a true story, Tom Hanks stars as an American captain of a cargo ship that is hijacked by Somali pirates.
Loved
Hanks' performance, Barkhad Abdi, cat-and-mouse plot.
Liked
Clarity in directing.
Disliked
Handheld cameras.
Thoughts
When I first saw the trailer, I thought this would be the typical "get this guy an Oscar!" movie, where the lead actor shined, and the rest of it would be average. That sound you hear is me eating crow.
Don't get me wrong, Tom Hanks was incredible. He was instantly likable and believably intelligent. But where he truly earned his paycheck was the last ten minutes, when he just hit the perfect notes of emotions, resulting in an unparalleled, powerful catharsis. It was a virtuoso performance that frankly should've been nominated for Best Actor.
As mentioned, Hanks was not the only star of the film. Newcomer Abdi was fantastic as the lead pirate, Muse. Not only did he have a unique face, but his presence put him on equal footing with Hanks' character. He was as cunning and resourceful and determined to succeed. In fact, the title of just Captain Phillips does injustice to the two opposing captains.
This compelling battle of the brains and strategy wouldn't have been fully realized without strong writing from Billy Ray and lucid directing from Paul Greengrass. The suspenseful action was easy to understand, Muse's crew were easily distinguishable, and you really felt the seesaw struggle for control of the upper hand and for command of the ship. At the same time, the story was an intricate, fascinating look into the how's of modern piracy, piracy-defense tactics, and Navy/SEAL protocols.
All this technique, thought, and detail hooked me into the harrowing tale, and the fantastic performances uppercutted me with a great emotional payoff.
If I had to nitpick, it would be the incessant handheld camera. It worked great for the action sequences, but they needed to calm down during the quiet moments of a movie. It wasn't nauseating as some other movies, and I could understand most of the scenes took place on the ocean, but still.
Also, I thought the score was a bit too bwongy for the film, and lo and behold, Hans Zimmer was given special thanks in the credits. Lastly, it was amusing to hear that Bill Simmons thought Hanks' Boston accent was so forced that it ruined his viewing experience. I, on the other hand, never thought twice about the accent.
Captain Phillips was one of the year's best, thanks to clear-cut writing and directing, powerful acting, especially Abdi and Hanks, culminating in an unforgettable finish.
2014
Formats
HDTV.
Premise
Based on a true story, Tom Hanks stars as an American captain of a cargo ship that is hijacked by Somali pirates.
Loved
Hanks' performance, Barkhad Abdi, cat-and-mouse plot.
Liked
Clarity in directing.
Disliked
Handheld cameras.
Thoughts
When I first saw the trailer, I thought this would be the typical "get this guy an Oscar!" movie, where the lead actor shined, and the rest of it would be average. That sound you hear is me eating crow.
Don't get me wrong, Tom Hanks was incredible. He was instantly likable and believably intelligent. But where he truly earned his paycheck was the last ten minutes, when he just hit the perfect notes of emotions, resulting in an unparalleled, powerful catharsis. It was a virtuoso performance that frankly should've been nominated for Best Actor.
As mentioned, Hanks was not the only star of the film. Newcomer Abdi was fantastic as the lead pirate, Muse. Not only did he have a unique face, but his presence put him on equal footing with Hanks' character. He was as cunning and resourceful and determined to succeed. In fact, the title of just Captain Phillips does injustice to the two opposing captains.
This compelling battle of the brains and strategy wouldn't have been fully realized without strong writing from Billy Ray and lucid directing from Paul Greengrass. The suspenseful action was easy to understand, Muse's crew were easily distinguishable, and you really felt the seesaw struggle for control of the upper hand and for command of the ship. At the same time, the story was an intricate, fascinating look into the how's of modern piracy, piracy-defense tactics, and Navy/SEAL protocols.
All this technique, thought, and detail hooked me into the harrowing tale, and the fantastic performances uppercutted me with a great emotional payoff.
If I had to nitpick, it would be the incessant handheld camera. It worked great for the action sequences, but they needed to calm down during the quiet moments of a movie. It wasn't nauseating as some other movies, and I could understand most of the scenes took place on the ocean, but still.
Also, I thought the score was a bit too bwongy for the film, and lo and behold, Hans Zimmer was given special thanks in the credits. Lastly, it was amusing to hear that Bill Simmons thought Hanks' Boston accent was so forced that it ruined his viewing experience. I, on the other hand, never thought twice about the accent.
Captain Phillips was one of the year's best, thanks to clear-cut writing and directing, powerful acting, especially Abdi and Hanks, culminating in an unforgettable finish.
Carlito's Way
Viewed in
2012
Formats
HDTV
Premise
Al Pacino stars as a former convict who tries to leave his criminal world.
Liked
Performances, deep cast, well-drawn characters.
Thoughts
You know what? I liked this way better than Scarface.
Pacino was fantastic here. Not only was he charming and believable, he effortlessly portrayed a man at crossroads; someone who's age is catching up to him, but still has just enough in the tank to do what's violently necessary.
The cast ensemble was strong, including Penelope Ann Miller, John Leguizamo, Viggo Mortenson, James Rehborn, and Luis Guzman. All got some smartly-written parts and knocked them out of the park. I especially liked Penelope Ann Miller's role, as Pacino's weary love interest.
Nearly stealing the show was the great Sean Penn. First, from his awesome Jew-fro. Then from his interesting character as a childhood friend who his entire life on the sidelines and thinks he can immediately play the game.
Normally, I'm not a big fan of voice-over narration. Here, it works decently well. The film makers don't overuse it, and it helped paint a bigger picture of Pacino's character's past and insights.
The gangster story was nothing new, and in fact, the film started with Pacino dying. There are some predictable moments and arcs, but the execution, acting, and character depth made it forgivable. For Carlito's Way, you know what kind of ride it is, so just sit back (sorta) and enjoy the ride.
2012
Formats
HDTV
Premise
Al Pacino stars as a former convict who tries to leave his criminal world.
Liked
Performances, deep cast, well-drawn characters.
Thoughts
You know what? I liked this way better than Scarface.
Pacino was fantastic here. Not only was he charming and believable, he effortlessly portrayed a man at crossroads; someone who's age is catching up to him, but still has just enough in the tank to do what's violently necessary.
The cast ensemble was strong, including Penelope Ann Miller, John Leguizamo, Viggo Mortenson, James Rehborn, and Luis Guzman. All got some smartly-written parts and knocked them out of the park. I especially liked Penelope Ann Miller's role, as Pacino's weary love interest.
Nearly stealing the show was the great Sean Penn. First, from his awesome Jew-fro. Then from his interesting character as a childhood friend who his entire life on the sidelines and thinks he can immediately play the game.
I've had issues with director Brian de Palma's too-flashy style in the past. Here, he did a great job of minimizing his fancy camera tricks, saving them up for the perfect moments of emotion or intensity. Best examples were his breathtaking, elaborate, one-take shots of the gurney scene and chase through New York metro. The film did a good job of building suspense in individual scenes, as well Pacino's gradually cornering himself into tighter/more dangerous spots. Props to writer David Koepp for contributing to the excellent pacing and story structure.
Normally, I'm not a big fan of voice-over narration. Here, it works decently well. The film makers don't overuse it, and it helped paint a bigger picture of Pacino's character's past and insights.
The gangster story was nothing new, and in fact, the film started with Pacino dying. There are some predictable moments and arcs, but the execution, acting, and character depth made it forgivable. For Carlito's Way, you know what kind of ride it is, so just sit back (sorta) and enjoy the ride.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)