Viewed in
1999, 2002 (Redux)
Formats
DVD
Premise
Francis Ford Coppola's epic masterpiece about an American captain (Martin Sheen) sent into the heart of Cambodia during the Vietnam War to kill a renegade Green Beret (Marlon Brando).
Thoughts
My memory is probably hazy on both versions, but I loved the original. This was definitely one of those films in which the journey meant more than the destination. I still remember those haunting visuals, scenes, dialogue, and characters. It was a surreal, chaotic, maddening, insightful, and ambiguous trip. A must-see for movie buffs.
The Redux version had a couple of gems of a scene, but I do not think they really added to the entire aura of the film. In fact, they kind of stalled the momentum.
What I would change
Nothing.
Showing posts with label war. Show all posts
Showing posts with label war. Show all posts
Atonement
Viewed in
2007
Premise
In 1930's aristocratic England, a young girl's misunderstanding causes her older sister and her lover to be separated and he is forced into fighting World War II.
Who should watch
Those who like epic romance type of movies, but with a strong stomach for the war scenes.
Thoughts
Note: I have not read the novel.
The last act with Vanessa Redgrave totally saved this movie from mediocrity. I could not fathom all the accolades it has received. In terms of epic, separated-by-war love stories, 'A Very Long Engagement', was much more interesting and emotional and romantic.
The most annoying part for me was the music. Except for a handful of exceptions, a score should never stand out. Throughout the movie, sounds from the story, such as the typewriter would 'blend' into the score. While my film maker persona thought it was clever, my film watcher persona found it pretentious and distracting. I think because of that, I also disliked the 'Rashomon'-like and time-jumping storytelling.
I did find two things I really liked. James MaCovey ruled. He was completely convincing as a leading man, and I look forward to seeing more of his future acting. The other gem in the movie was the twist in the last act with the great Vanessa Redgrave. I didn't even know it was her. Her performance and presence flipped the film upside down and caused me to forgive the rest of the story. Almost.
What I would change
Not sure.
2007
Premise
In 1930's aristocratic England, a young girl's misunderstanding causes her older sister and her lover to be separated and he is forced into fighting World War II.
Who should watch
Those who like epic romance type of movies, but with a strong stomach for the war scenes.
Thoughts
Note: I have not read the novel.
The last act with Vanessa Redgrave totally saved this movie from mediocrity. I could not fathom all the accolades it has received. In terms of epic, separated-by-war love stories, 'A Very Long Engagement', was much more interesting and emotional and romantic.
The most annoying part for me was the music. Except for a handful of exceptions, a score should never stand out. Throughout the movie, sounds from the story, such as the typewriter would 'blend' into the score. While my film maker persona thought it was clever, my film watcher persona found it pretentious and distracting. I think because of that, I also disliked the 'Rashomon'-like and time-jumping storytelling.
I did find two things I really liked. James MaCovey ruled. He was completely convincing as a leading man, and I look forward to seeing more of his future acting. The other gem in the movie was the twist in the last act with the great Vanessa Redgrave. I didn't even know it was her. Her performance and presence flipped the film upside down and caused me to forgive the rest of the story. Almost.
What I would change
Not sure.
Au Revoir Les Enfants
Viewed in
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
In WWII occupied France, a young boy attends school at a church, and learns to befriend the quiet new kid.
Liked
The slice of life, the emotional last act.
Thoughts
A well-done, observant drama.
The first two-thirds grabbed my attention by showing what life was like in a makeshift school, with the threat of daily air raids and German patrols. It captured boyhood themes like females, schoolyard politics, and the need to prove you're grown up. It reminded me of the school scenes from The 400 Blows.
At the same time, I was drawn in by the two leads. Much like real-life, bonds were solidified through the passage of time. Julian's initial sense of being threatened and Jean's difficulties fitting in were universal regardless of language and setting. While their relationship developed slowly, it was never boring.
This set up the last act, in which war finally penetrated school walls. There were some really touching moments, such as when the room fell silent at the image of Lady Liberty in a Charlie Chaplin flick, when Julian's family witness racism in a posh restaurant, and of course the last classroom scene. I'm glad I read Ebert's reviews, as I completely missed a key moment of unintentional betrayal that made the rest of the film haunting.
When I think of this film, I think of the catchphrase "silence speaks volumes". The audience's knowledge of the Jean's secrets, compounded by Julian's unawareness, created wonderful tension throughout the story as the noose of time and war tightened around them. All these moments built character. Director Louise Malle, a New Wave film maker, played the film straight, using the occasional flair at the perfect moments.
Obviously, I haven't seen enough French films, but so far Au Revoir Les Enfants was one of the best that I've seen, thanks to strong stories, characters, and a wonderful, memorable third act.
What I would change
Nothing.
2011
Formats
DVD
Premise
In WWII occupied France, a young boy attends school at a church, and learns to befriend the quiet new kid.
Liked
The slice of life, the emotional last act.
Thoughts
A well-done, observant drama.
The first two-thirds grabbed my attention by showing what life was like in a makeshift school, with the threat of daily air raids and German patrols. It captured boyhood themes like females, schoolyard politics, and the need to prove you're grown up. It reminded me of the school scenes from The 400 Blows.
At the same time, I was drawn in by the two leads. Much like real-life, bonds were solidified through the passage of time. Julian's initial sense of being threatened and Jean's difficulties fitting in were universal regardless of language and setting. While their relationship developed slowly, it was never boring.
This set up the last act, in which war finally penetrated school walls. There were some really touching moments, such as when the room fell silent at the image of Lady Liberty in a Charlie Chaplin flick, when Julian's family witness racism in a posh restaurant, and of course the last classroom scene. I'm glad I read Ebert's reviews, as I completely missed a key moment of unintentional betrayal that made the rest of the film haunting.
When I think of this film, I think of the catchphrase "silence speaks volumes". The audience's knowledge of the Jean's secrets, compounded by Julian's unawareness, created wonderful tension throughout the story as the noose of time and war tightened around them. All these moments built character. Director Louise Malle, a New Wave film maker, played the film straight, using the occasional flair at the perfect moments.
Obviously, I haven't seen enough French films, but so far Au Revoir Les Enfants was one of the best that I've seen, thanks to strong stories, characters, and a wonderful, memorable third act.
What I would change
Nothing.
Black Hawk Down
Viewed in
2002
Premise
A group of U.S. soldiers fend for themselves after their helicopter is shot down in civil warring Mogadishu, Somalia.
Who should watch
Anyone in the mood for realistic war movies.
Thoughts
The realistic action and nerve-wracking intensity were very well done.
My main problem with the film was that all the characters looked too much alike. I understand soldiers are supposed to be uniform, but I could never tell one character from another and thus I never sympathized with them. As they become covered in dirt and blood, it became even harder to distinguish.
What I would change
Gave some obvious differences between each soldier.
2002
Premise
A group of U.S. soldiers fend for themselves after their helicopter is shot down in civil warring Mogadishu, Somalia.
Who should watch
Anyone in the mood for realistic war movies.
Thoughts
The realistic action and nerve-wracking intensity were very well done.
My main problem with the film was that all the characters looked too much alike. I understand soldiers are supposed to be uniform, but I could never tell one character from another and thus I never sympathized with them. As they become covered in dirt and blood, it became even harder to distinguish.
What I would change
Gave some obvious differences between each soldier.
The Bridge on the River Kwai
Viewed in
2000
Formats
DVD
Premise
David Lean's tale of a POW British colonel (Alec Guinness) agreeing to build a bridge for their Japanese captors - while oblivious to a plan by the Allies to destroy it.
Thoughts
It's been a while, but I recall a cool performance from the late great Sir Alec Guinness. Also, the whistling version of "Colonel Bogey March" was kind of annoying.
What I would change
No idea.
2000
Formats
DVD
Premise
David Lean's tale of a POW British colonel (Alec Guinness) agreeing to build a bridge for their Japanese captors - while oblivious to a plan by the Allies to destroy it.
Thoughts
It's been a while, but I recall a cool performance from the late great Sir Alec Guinness. Also, the whistling version of "Colonel Bogey March" was kind of annoying.
What I would change
No idea.
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.
Captain America: The First Avenger
Viewed in
2011
Formats
Movie theater (3D)
Premise
Chris Evans stars as Captain America.
Liked
The 3D, the story.
Thoughts
That was fun, and with substance.
It was definitely one of the more interesting origin stories for a comic book character in a while. There was some thought put into how Steve Rogers becomes Captain America with well-done character-building obstacles. I especially loved the twist after he became 'roided up and single-handed taken out some bad guys while weaponless.
Another cool aspect was the old-school feel in terms of visual style, setting, and dialog. Obviously it made sense, since it took place in 1940's America. The film makers succeeded in creating an old-fashioned universe without being anachronistic nor archaic.
Like recent Avengers Marvel flicks, the cast was solid. Surrounding Chris Evans were the likes of Stanley Tucci, Tommy Lee Jones and excellent Hugo Weaving. Hayley Atwell was quite the looker. And Dominic Cooper was very fun as Iron Man's old man.
The 3D was very well-done. Director Joe Johnston was diligent in making sure the post-conversion did not feel like one. The depth of that universe was truly immersive and enhanced the well-executed action sequences. While there was hardly any gratuitous 3D shots, I was definitely caught off guard by the shield ricocheting towards the camera that I actually ducked my head out of instinct. Too bad my local AMC theater gipped me of clarity by dimming their projectors again.
While the story was interesting, I could've done without the two prologues before finally meeting our beloved protagonist. Speaking of Evans as Rogers, he was believable as the underdog and hero, but I still found him to be quite a stiff. I don't think it's entire Evans' fault, as his character lacked any personality other than his underdog-ness.
Thanks to a strong story and 3D, Captain America: The First Avenger was another enjoyable Marvel film that also helped build up to the Avengers movie in 2012.
What I would change
Moved the second prologue later.
2011
Formats
Movie theater (3D)
Premise
Chris Evans stars as Captain America.
Liked
The 3D, the story.
Thoughts
That was fun, and with substance.
It was definitely one of the more interesting origin stories for a comic book character in a while. There was some thought put into how Steve Rogers becomes Captain America with well-done character-building obstacles. I especially loved the twist after he became 'roided up and single-handed taken out some bad guys while weaponless.
Another cool aspect was the old-school feel in terms of visual style, setting, and dialog. Obviously it made sense, since it took place in 1940's America. The film makers succeeded in creating an old-fashioned universe without being anachronistic nor archaic.
Like recent Avengers Marvel flicks, the cast was solid. Surrounding Chris Evans were the likes of Stanley Tucci, Tommy Lee Jones and excellent Hugo Weaving. Hayley Atwell was quite the looker. And Dominic Cooper was very fun as Iron Man's old man.
The 3D was very well-done. Director Joe Johnston was diligent in making sure the post-conversion did not feel like one. The depth of that universe was truly immersive and enhanced the well-executed action sequences. While there was hardly any gratuitous 3D shots, I was definitely caught off guard by the shield ricocheting towards the camera that I actually ducked my head out of instinct. Too bad my local AMC theater gipped me of clarity by dimming their projectors again.
While the story was interesting, I could've done without the two prologues before finally meeting our beloved protagonist. Speaking of Evans as Rogers, he was believable as the underdog and hero, but I still found him to be quite a stiff. I don't think it's entire Evans' fault, as his character lacked any personality other than his underdog-ness.
Thanks to a strong story and 3D, Captain America: The First Avenger was another enjoyable Marvel film that also helped build up to the Avengers movie in 2012.
What I would change
Moved the second prologue later.
Das Boot
Viewed in
1999
Premise
Wolfgang Peterson's masterpiece about a WWII German U-boat.
Who should watch
Those who like suspense more than action.
Thoughts
The story and the acting were well done.
I enjoyed the film because of the filmmaking degree of difficulty. The film managed to be entertaining and exciting despite the fact there was practically one set and the entire plot took place in this submarine. I loved the claustrophobic tone.
What I would change
Nothing.
1999
Premise
Wolfgang Peterson's masterpiece about a WWII German U-boat.
Who should watch
Those who like suspense more than action.
Thoughts
The story and the acting were well done.
I enjoyed the film because of the filmmaking degree of difficulty. The film managed to be entertaining and exciting despite the fact there was practically one set and the entire plot took place in this submarine. I loved the claustrophobic tone.
What I would change
Nothing.
Deer Hunter, The
Viewed in
2010
Formats
HD TV
Premise
Robert De Niro and Christopher Walken star as Pennsylvanian brothers who fight in the Vietnam War.
Liked
The performances.
Disliked
The length in the first act, the point of the film.
Thoughts
Unfortunately I could not see what was so great about this classic film.
One undeniable strength was the acting. The big names of De Niro, Walken and Meryl Streep delivered some intense and painful moments. John Savage was very good as the third brother who was able to leave the Vietnam War, but not in one piece. John Cazele had some scene-stealing moments as an insecure friend. I IMDB'd his career, and was blown away. He only did five films, except they were five of the most prestigious titles of the decade.
Back to The Deer Hunter, not only was the performances strong, the story also had some haunting, unforgettable scenes. In the second hour, there was unrelenting war intensity. The centerpiece was watching captives forced to play Russian roulette against each other, probably the closest thing to actually being tortured psychological.
Then it shifted into a third gear, as it explored how the soldiers attempted to re-adjust to life after war. In a lesser movie, I expected obligatory flashbacks and nightmares. Instead it was thoughtful and observational, especially De Niro's character. The term, "silence is deafening", was masterfully executed in some of these memorable scenes. As for the climax? Wow.
As a mostly character-driven film, it took its time in story-telling. The biggest problem I had with that was the first hour, all dedicated to a wedding. I know the film makers wanted to immerse us with these characters, but I think I would have the same feeling for these characters and understood their pre-war personalities had this chapter been just half an hour long.
My other issue was that I didn't know what this film was about. Clearly there were a few themes, such as the horrors of war. But I felt like I was watching three short stories without much tying them together, except the characters. Maybe I am being overly-critical, but I was expecting greatness from such a hailed film.
Lastly, what was up with the aspect ratio change in the last and third to last shots?
I enjoyed the strong performances, along with some intense, haunting, and insightful moments. But I could not see why this was considered one of the greatest Vietnam War movies of all times, as it tested my patience minute-wise and message-wise.
What I would change
Shortened the first hour by half.
2010
Formats
HD TV
Premise
Robert De Niro and Christopher Walken star as Pennsylvanian brothers who fight in the Vietnam War.
Liked
The performances.
Disliked
The length in the first act, the point of the film.
Thoughts
Unfortunately I could not see what was so great about this classic film.
One undeniable strength was the acting. The big names of De Niro, Walken and Meryl Streep delivered some intense and painful moments. John Savage was very good as the third brother who was able to leave the Vietnam War, but not in one piece. John Cazele had some scene-stealing moments as an insecure friend. I IMDB'd his career, and was blown away. He only did five films, except they were five of the most prestigious titles of the decade.
Back to The Deer Hunter, not only was the performances strong, the story also had some haunting, unforgettable scenes. In the second hour, there was unrelenting war intensity. The centerpiece was watching captives forced to play Russian roulette against each other, probably the closest thing to actually being tortured psychological.
Then it shifted into a third gear, as it explored how the soldiers attempted to re-adjust to life after war. In a lesser movie, I expected obligatory flashbacks and nightmares. Instead it was thoughtful and observational, especially De Niro's character. The term, "silence is deafening", was masterfully executed in some of these memorable scenes. As for the climax? Wow.
As a mostly character-driven film, it took its time in story-telling. The biggest problem I had with that was the first hour, all dedicated to a wedding. I know the film makers wanted to immerse us with these characters, but I think I would have the same feeling for these characters and understood their pre-war personalities had this chapter been just half an hour long.
My other issue was that I didn't know what this film was about. Clearly there were a few themes, such as the horrors of war. But I felt like I was watching three short stories without much tying them together, except the characters. Maybe I am being overly-critical, but I was expecting greatness from such a hailed film.
Lastly, what was up with the aspect ratio change in the last and third to last shots?
I enjoyed the strong performances, along with some intense, haunting, and insightful moments. But I could not see why this was considered one of the greatest Vietnam War movies of all times, as it tested my patience minute-wise and message-wise.
What I would change
Shortened the first hour by half.
Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Viewed in
1998, 2001
Formats
VHS, DVD
Premise
Stanley Kubrick's political satire about a war room of leaders and military try to defuse nuclear holocaust.
Thoughts
It's been a long time, but I recall this being my favorite Kubrick masterpiece. Before there was Eddie Murphy starting the one actor-multiple character gimmick, there was the late great Peter Sellers in his triple roles of hilarity. Personally, the performance I loved the most was the late great George C. Scott as a military general.
What I would change
Nothing.
1998, 2001
Formats
VHS, DVD
Premise
Stanley Kubrick's political satire about a war room of leaders and military try to defuse nuclear holocaust.
Thoughts
It's been a long time, but I recall this being my favorite Kubrick masterpiece. Before there was Eddie Murphy starting the one actor-multiple character gimmick, there was the late great Peter Sellers in his triple roles of hilarity. Personally, the performance I loved the most was the late great George C. Scott as a military general.
What I would change
Nothing.
Enemy at the Gates
Viewed in
2001
Premise
Two snipers play cat-and-mouse against each other in World War II.
Who should watch
Jude Law fans. Those who want more suspense than action.
Thoughts
I liked this film a lot. The best part was the cat-and-mouse between Jude Law and Ed Harris. It was an interesting and exciting twist to the realistic-gritty-war movie genre. This was Jude Law's fist attempt to prove that he could be a lead actor.
What I would change
Gotten rid of the sex scene. It was unsexy, unnecessary and bogged down the momentum.
2001
Premise
Two snipers play cat-and-mouse against each other in World War II.
Who should watch
Jude Law fans. Those who want more suspense than action.
Thoughts
I liked this film a lot. The best part was the cat-and-mouse between Jude Law and Ed Harris. It was an interesting and exciting twist to the realistic-gritty-war movie genre. This was Jude Law's fist attempt to prove that he could be a lead actor.
What I would change
Gotten rid of the sex scene. It was unsexy, unnecessary and bogged down the momentum.
Flags of Our Fathers
Viewed in
2006
Premise
The story of the soldiers who put up the second flag on Iwo Jima that is immortalized in picture.
Who should watch
Anyone with a strong stomach who enjoys great film. Anyone curious about American history.
Thoughts
A sobering and thoughtful film about war and the politics of the war. There is something frustrating or sad seeing young, poor kids fighting for their lives juxstaposed with fat, rich people avoiding the horrors of war.
My girlfriend thinks the characters were not fleshed out enough to be likeable, but I felt differently. Though I will admit it is not as character-intensive as other Clint Eastwood films. Nevertheless, it is a story worth telling and a story worth watching.
The best performance comes from Adam Beach as Ira Hayes, whose story was the saddest. The only annoying thing while watching was that I had the song 'Ballad of Ira Hayes' stuck in my head throughout the entire film.
What I would change
Maybe cut down on the gore.
2006
Premise
The story of the soldiers who put up the second flag on Iwo Jima that is immortalized in picture.
Who should watch
Anyone with a strong stomach who enjoys great film. Anyone curious about American history.
Thoughts
A sobering and thoughtful film about war and the politics of the war. There is something frustrating or sad seeing young, poor kids fighting for their lives juxstaposed with fat, rich people avoiding the horrors of war.
My girlfriend thinks the characters were not fleshed out enough to be likeable, but I felt differently. Though I will admit it is not as character-intensive as other Clint Eastwood films. Nevertheless, it is a story worth telling and a story worth watching.
The best performance comes from Adam Beach as Ira Hayes, whose story was the saddest. The only annoying thing while watching was that I had the song 'Ballad of Ira Hayes' stuck in my head throughout the entire film.
What I would change
Maybe cut down on the gore.
Gone With the Wind
Viewed in
2000
Premise
Film adaptation of the novel about a spoiled Southern lady during the Civil War.
Who should watch
Film buffs.
Thoughts
Just a must-see, awesome epic classic. Vivien Leigh was a tour-de-force as her character went through a vast arc. The famous shot of the rows and rows of wound soldiers took my breath away.
While I had heard 'Frankly darling, I don't give a damn' a gazillion times before, when I heard Clark Gable say in the film after what the characters went through, it just packed an incredible emotion punch.
What I would change
Nothing.
2000
Premise
Film adaptation of the novel about a spoiled Southern lady during the Civil War.
Who should watch
Film buffs.
Thoughts
Just a must-see, awesome epic classic. Vivien Leigh was a tour-de-force as her character went through a vast arc. The famous shot of the rows and rows of wound soldiers took my breath away.
While I had heard 'Frankly darling, I don't give a damn' a gazillion times before, when I heard Clark Gable say in the film after what the characters went through, it just packed an incredible emotion punch.
What I would change
Nothing.
Good Morning Vietnam
Viewed in
2007
Premise
A military disc jockey comes to Vietnam during the war and shakes things up.
Who should watch
Robin Williams fans?
Thoughts
I never like movies that changed into a different movie halfway through the movie. The first half was a Robin Williams comedy vehicle that lets him go nuts almost to the point of annoying, but the second half was him attempting drama and action.
What I liked was how they portrayed the three Vietnamese characters. They were realistic and intelligent. Even Jimmy Wah was not a caricature by being a caricature (does that make sense?).
The American cast was pretty stocked, including the skinny versions of Forest Whitaker, JT Walsh, and Bruno Kirby.
What I would change
Not make it a Robin Williams vehicle.
2007
Premise
A military disc jockey comes to Vietnam during the war and shakes things up.
Who should watch
Robin Williams fans?
Thoughts
I never like movies that changed into a different movie halfway through the movie. The first half was a Robin Williams comedy vehicle that lets him go nuts almost to the point of annoying, but the second half was him attempting drama and action.
What I liked was how they portrayed the three Vietnamese characters. They were realistic and intelligent. Even Jimmy Wah was not a caricature by being a caricature (does that make sense?).
The American cast was pretty stocked, including the skinny versions of Forest Whitaker, JT Walsh, and Bruno Kirby.
What I would change
Not make it a Robin Williams vehicle.
Grave of the Fireflies
Viewed in
2002
Premise
Two orphaned siblings tough it out during WWII Japan.
Who should watch
Anime and film buffs.
Thoughts
Along with 'Akira', this movie was credited for defining modern anime. The realistic and simple style proved that anime does not have to be flashy to tell a story. Also, it had the reputation as one of the saddest movies in history.
I did not feel that emotion punch. The characters were not believable nor sympathetic. I know it was wartime, and they were orphaned, but it seemed silly that they would always do the opposite of what every adult told them, thus putting themselves into deeper and deeper holes.
What I would change
Lowered the hype.
2002
Premise
Two orphaned siblings tough it out during WWII Japan.
Who should watch
Anime and film buffs.
Thoughts
Along with 'Akira', this movie was credited for defining modern anime. The realistic and simple style proved that anime does not have to be flashy to tell a story. Also, it had the reputation as one of the saddest movies in history.
I did not feel that emotion punch. The characters were not believable nor sympathetic. I know it was wartime, and they were orphaned, but it seemed silly that they would always do the opposite of what every adult told them, thus putting themselves into deeper and deeper holes.
What I would change
Lowered the hype.
The Great Dictator
Viewed in
2002
Formats
DVD
Premise
Charlie Chaplin stars in a Nazi satire as a dictator and a Jewish barber who is mistaken for the dictator.
Thoughts
Sadly, I do not remember much, except a weird scene with a giant Earth globe. I probably should re-watch this sometime.
What I would change
No idea.
2002
Formats
DVD
Premise
Charlie Chaplin stars in a Nazi satire as a dictator and a Jewish barber who is mistaken for the dictator.
Thoughts
Sadly, I do not remember much, except a weird scene with a giant Earth globe. I probably should re-watch this sometime.
What I would change
No idea.
Hurt Locker, The
Viewed in
2009
Premise
The film follows the adventures of a bomb squad in American-occupied Iraq in 2004.
Who should watch
Those who want to watch one of the best films of 2009 and one of the best war movies in recent memory.
Thoughts
A great film with tour-de-force acting and suspense.
Most of the time, I was on the edge of my seat, afraid yet enthralled. There were times when I wanted to close my eyes, but could not because they were glued to the screen. About halfway through, the film made a disturbing turn, as terrorists began using humans as bombs. Finally, in the climax, I was blindsided with emotion as the characters' humanity pour out.
To paraphrase Alfred Hitchcock: 'a bomb exploding is action, a bomb not exploding is suspense.', and this film literally proved it. I loved that it was not a political film, but a really believable and in depth exploration of what brave soldiers dealt with on a daily basis. I experienced the incessant life-or-death situations, and confusion and chaos in an unstable, unfriendly, foreign land. I saw characters going beyond human limits to achieve the seemingly insurmountable, and the price they pay.
The three unknown leads, Jeremy Renner, Anthony Mackie, and Brian Geraghty were fantastic. They were believable as soldiers and as humans stuck in hell. Renner's character was either a reckless thrill-junkie or a man bent on accomplishing his task regardless of protocol. His character was memorable, but his performance was haunting. (Although sometimes he looked like Glenn Beck.)
I also loved how there were three unknowns in the lead, with Evangeline Lilly, Guy Pearce, David Morse and Ralph Fiennes in minor roles.
The most underrated quality was that it was easy to tell the soldier characters apart. Even the best war movies struggle with this. It's quite understandable, everyone has the same haircut, uniforms, and camera style is usually herky-jerky to portray 'in the heat of the battle' moments.
Obviously, the three main characters in this film were all wonderfully crafted characters, but on top of there, the film makers added some simple tricks. One is black. One wears goggles. All three have last names that were easy to tell apart.
This masterpiece was nail-biting and haunting, thanks to realistic suspense and memorable characters. I believe this belongs in the pantheon of great war movies.
What I would change
Nothing.
Personal
During most of the film, there were only three soldiers on screen, and it made me think. Since we decided to send these brave souls into hell, didn't they deserve to have all the company and support needed?
2009
Premise
The film follows the adventures of a bomb squad in American-occupied Iraq in 2004.
Who should watch
Those who want to watch one of the best films of 2009 and one of the best war movies in recent memory.
Thoughts
A great film with tour-de-force acting and suspense.
Most of the time, I was on the edge of my seat, afraid yet enthralled. There were times when I wanted to close my eyes, but could not because they were glued to the screen. About halfway through, the film made a disturbing turn, as terrorists began using humans as bombs. Finally, in the climax, I was blindsided with emotion as the characters' humanity pour out.
To paraphrase Alfred Hitchcock: 'a bomb exploding is action, a bomb not exploding is suspense.', and this film literally proved it. I loved that it was not a political film, but a really believable and in depth exploration of what brave soldiers dealt with on a daily basis. I experienced the incessant life-or-death situations, and confusion and chaos in an unstable, unfriendly, foreign land. I saw characters going beyond human limits to achieve the seemingly insurmountable, and the price they pay.
The three unknown leads, Jeremy Renner, Anthony Mackie, and Brian Geraghty were fantastic. They were believable as soldiers and as humans stuck in hell. Renner's character was either a reckless thrill-junkie or a man bent on accomplishing his task regardless of protocol. His character was memorable, but his performance was haunting. (Although sometimes he looked like Glenn Beck.)
I also loved how there were three unknowns in the lead, with Evangeline Lilly, Guy Pearce, David Morse and Ralph Fiennes in minor roles.
The most underrated quality was that it was easy to tell the soldier characters apart. Even the best war movies struggle with this. It's quite understandable, everyone has the same haircut, uniforms, and camera style is usually herky-jerky to portray 'in the heat of the battle' moments.
Obviously, the three main characters in this film were all wonderfully crafted characters, but on top of there, the film makers added some simple tricks. One is black. One wears goggles. All three have last names that were easy to tell apart.
This masterpiece was nail-biting and haunting, thanks to realistic suspense and memorable characters. I believe this belongs in the pantheon of great war movies.
What I would change
Nothing.
Personal
During most of the film, there were only three soldiers on screen, and it made me think. Since we decided to send these brave souls into hell, didn't they deserve to have all the company and support needed?
Inglourious Basterds
Viewed in
2009
Premise
In World War II France, a group of American-Jewish soldiers and a closet-Jewish cinema owner both separate plot to kill Hitler, same time, same place.
Who should watch
Quentin Tarantino fans.
Thoughts
I had a lot of fun watching this film, especially for the performances and indulgent scenes.
I can see why certain audiences will hate this film. This was a two and a half hour long story that felt like two and half hours long. Every chapter took its time with every scene, as I soaked in the characters and the tension. The very first scene took 30 minutes just to establish two characters.
Not only was the story interesting with parallel stories heading for a crash course, each scene had great moments of suspense, dark comedy, or simply great characters. Once again, Tarantino delivers more playful, unabashed violence. I found the scalping of Nazi's to be quite creative.
While Brad Pitt got plenty of screen time in the trailers, I would argue that he was not even the lead in this ensemble act. In fact, I consider Mélanie Laurent to be the lead, as the plotting cinema owner. Nevertheless, Brad Pitt was hilarious as the leader of the Basterds. One of my favorite scenes was when his Tennessee-born character is forced into undercover duties and attempts a hilariously horrible Italian accent.
I loved the European casting and the use of numerous European dialogue, as it reminded me of a Sergio Leone movie. The scene stealer in this film was Christoph Waltz. From the very first scene, I had a smirk on my face as I imbibed in his performance as the deliciously evil Nazi officer in charge of finding and killing Jews.
For those who like long, artsy, violent dark comedies, you will have fun. For those who like fast-paced, Brad Pitt-led romps, you will not have fun.
Lastly, a semi-spoiler. History changed in this story. So don't use this to write your World War II school report.
What I would change
Marketing! Once again, the studios tricked me into walking in expecting something different. Thankfully, this was an excellent film, so while I a surprised by the pace and style, I wring my fists at the studios.
2009
Premise
In World War II France, a group of American-Jewish soldiers and a closet-Jewish cinema owner both separate plot to kill Hitler, same time, same place.
Who should watch
Quentin Tarantino fans.
Thoughts
I had a lot of fun watching this film, especially for the performances and indulgent scenes.
I can see why certain audiences will hate this film. This was a two and a half hour long story that felt like two and half hours long. Every chapter took its time with every scene, as I soaked in the characters and the tension. The very first scene took 30 minutes just to establish two characters.
Not only was the story interesting with parallel stories heading for a crash course, each scene had great moments of suspense, dark comedy, or simply great characters. Once again, Tarantino delivers more playful, unabashed violence. I found the scalping of Nazi's to be quite creative.
While Brad Pitt got plenty of screen time in the trailers, I would argue that he was not even the lead in this ensemble act. In fact, I consider Mélanie Laurent to be the lead, as the plotting cinema owner. Nevertheless, Brad Pitt was hilarious as the leader of the Basterds. One of my favorite scenes was when his Tennessee-born character is forced into undercover duties and attempts a hilariously horrible Italian accent.
I loved the European casting and the use of numerous European dialogue, as it reminded me of a Sergio Leone movie. The scene stealer in this film was Christoph Waltz. From the very first scene, I had a smirk on my face as I imbibed in his performance as the deliciously evil Nazi officer in charge of finding and killing Jews.
For those who like long, artsy, violent dark comedies, you will have fun. For those who like fast-paced, Brad Pitt-led romps, you will not have fun.
Lastly, a semi-spoiler. History changed in this story. So don't use this to write your World War II school report.
What I would change
Marketing! Once again, the studios tricked me into walking in expecting something different. Thankfully, this was an excellent film, so while I a surprised by the pace and style, I wring my fists at the studios.
Letters from Iwo Jima
Viewed in
2006
Premise
Chronicles the lives of the Japanese soldiers during the ill-fated battle of Iwo Jima.
Who should watch
Ken Watanabe fans. Those who have seen 'Flags of Our Fathers'. Fans of great filmmaking.
Thoughts
While it stands alone as a great piece of film, watching this after 'Flags of Our Fathers' adds just that much more greatness. The characters do not cross paths often, but when they do, you understand the history behind these characters.
If you had to compare the two, I like this film better. Mainly because of the humanity factor. It is easier to care about young men in peril than about the politics of war. Nevertheless, I say both must be watched together.
What I would change
Like 'Letters of Iwo Jima', I would cut down on the gore a bit.
2006
Premise
Chronicles the lives of the Japanese soldiers during the ill-fated battle of Iwo Jima.
Who should watch
Ken Watanabe fans. Those who have seen 'Flags of Our Fathers'. Fans of great filmmaking.
Thoughts
While it stands alone as a great piece of film, watching this after 'Flags of Our Fathers' adds just that much more greatness. The characters do not cross paths often, but when they do, you understand the history behind these characters.
If you had to compare the two, I like this film better. Mainly because of the humanity factor. It is easier to care about young men in peril than about the politics of war. Nevertheless, I say both must be watched together.
What I would change
Like 'Letters of Iwo Jima', I would cut down on the gore a bit.
Life Is Beautiful
Viewed in
1998
Formats
Movie theater (subtitled)
Premise
Roberto Benigni stars as a Jewish man who uses humor to protect his son in a Nazi death camp.
Thoughts
My memory is foggy, but it was super cheesy and mushy, and I sobbed uncontrollably. I was so glad I found a subtitled version of it.
What I would change
No idea.
1998
Formats
Movie theater (subtitled)
Premise
Roberto Benigni stars as a Jewish man who uses humor to protect his son in a Nazi death camp.
Thoughts
My memory is foggy, but it was super cheesy and mushy, and I sobbed uncontrollably. I was so glad I found a subtitled version of it.
What I would change
No idea.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)