Screen Time: Mini Reviews
June 19th 2011 05:57
Screen Time will be a new segment for whenever I may watch a few films in a short period of time and write mini-reviews of them. Here's the first installment.
Four Lions (2010, Morris)
A brilliantly clever satire and directorial debut from one of the writers of In the Loop. The subject matter is on the surface but the tone is so absurdist off the bat; a completely subversive political black comedy -- ranking right up there with The Producers and To Be or Not to Be (original or remake) -- about a group of British Jihadists. The performances are naturalistic, the energy is top-notch, and seriously, did how funny this is? It's difficult to pull off this type of humor and co-writer/director Christopher Morris succeeds, never wavering or backing down. Something to seek out immediately.
Robocop (1987, Verhoeven)
I think I saw this years and years ago. If so, I remembered nothing. This film was pure, exhilarated fun. The look of it: that eighties look where it's supposed to be the future yet the picture lacks the crispness of today inherently adds to its charm. This is going to be remade and one knows, just by watching the original, what the new film will look like: the colors will be bright and vivid, the action will be sped-up and kinetic; there will be CGI. Robocop as it stands today is, in my mind, a sci-fi masterpiece. It doesn't take it self too seriously and that's what makes it great. I had more fun watching this film than I've ever had at a modern day Hollywood blockbuster. Sometimes, simpler is more. Also, the violence within is highly entertaining -- again, the lack of severity in the actions occurring and the intent to have fun with this film yet without making it a joke is balanced fantastically by Director Paul Verhoeven. One of my new favorite films.
Pat and Mike (1952, Cukor)
Perhaps I'm about to make a sacrilegious statement, but I'm not all about Tracy/Hepburn films. I do like Adam's Rib and Woman of the Year (although both are in need of a rewatch and honestly if you asked me I can't remember which one I liked more -- because one of them I had some issues with). But I've always preferred Katharine Hepburn with someone like Cary Grant or Jimmy Stewart. Her comedy with Tracy is very specific: it has dryness to it, while in films with other leading men she's more carefree and zany. As a personal preference, it's how love her best. With Tracy, she's more reserved, and there's always some sort of serious undertone going on. Pat and Mike was the same. It didn't soar. It's as though it kept trying to get off the ground but the engine just kept revving. The film failed to engage me. Perhaps I'll visit it at one point again, as I know it's beloved by many but at this juncture, it was a miss.
The Red Balloon (1956, Lamorisse)
A very nice meditation on youth. Some beautiful imagery and camera placement in this short. It takes you right in from the first frame and you can't help but feel as though you too are heading on a journey with this balloon. A beautiful look at the desire to hold onto innocence and a world that tries to take that away from us. The end contains some of the most breathtaking shots and is truly magical. Very sweet, uplifting piece.
Certified Copy (2011, Kiarostami)
The best 2011 film I've seen thus far. A breathtaking poetic essay on reality, imitation and what we make of it. This was fascinating from the very first frame. I will not discuss the plot. All I will say is this is conversation piece about two people over the course of one day. Juliette Binoche is incomparable. William Shimell, a soap opera star, looks like he was born to be in feature films. Their dynamic flows as easy as water from a spring. Director Abbas Kiarostami unsettles the viewer with his camera's eye; Binoche looks directly at us -- from the point-of-view of Shimell, the point-of-view of a couple through a window -- and it's as though she's looking through us, trying to communicate some secret message. Perhaps she's trying to wink at us, tell us what's going on beneath the surface here. It's up to the viewer to ultimately decide this, or not. I chose not to. Yes, my mind wandered and wondered at times but moreover I was too caught up in the unbelievable depth that was unfolding before my eyes. This film should be viewed and discussed and written about for years to come. Captivating from start to finish.
Cracks (2011, Scott)
As soon as Cracks begin, you immediately know the type of score it will embody, the type of shots it will incorporate. The film is predictable by definition and perhaps tries too hard to be clever when it, in fact, has very little to say. The score becomes so innocuously common over the period of the film you can practically start surmising the next notes. Where Cracks excels is in its brief interludes of subtly but sadly, these are few and far between. The cast is attractive and try their best; Juno Temple has a way about her, a quality that draws the viewer’s eye in. Eva Green is always lovely to see but sadly, she's given a character whose depth is sacrificed for a seductive screen presence which never quite rings true given the flimsiness of the characters' arcs. Spanish actress Maria Valverde is very nice here, but again it's the lack of depth and structure of the film as a whole which limits these performances to the shortcomings of screenwriters as well as director Jordan Scott. Cracks isn't a terrible film; there are far worse. It is, however, a film I desperately wanted to love yet ended up underwhelmed.
Four Lions (2010, Morris)
A brilliantly clever satire and directorial debut from one of the writers of In the Loop. The subject matter is on the surface but the tone is so absurdist off the bat; a completely subversive political black comedy -- ranking right up there with The Producers and To Be or Not to Be (original or remake) -- about a group of British Jihadists. The performances are naturalistic, the energy is top-notch, and seriously, did how funny this is? It's difficult to pull off this type of humor and co-writer/director Christopher Morris succeeds, never wavering or backing down. Something to seek out immediately.
Robocop (1987, Verhoeven)
I think I saw this years and years ago. If so, I remembered nothing. This film was pure, exhilarated fun. The look of it: that eighties look where it's supposed to be the future yet the picture lacks the crispness of today inherently adds to its charm. This is going to be remade and one knows, just by watching the original, what the new film will look like: the colors will be bright and vivid, the action will be sped-up and kinetic; there will be CGI. Robocop as it stands today is, in my mind, a sci-fi masterpiece. It doesn't take it self too seriously and that's what makes it great. I had more fun watching this film than I've ever had at a modern day Hollywood blockbuster. Sometimes, simpler is more. Also, the violence within is highly entertaining -- again, the lack of severity in the actions occurring and the intent to have fun with this film yet without making it a joke is balanced fantastically by Director Paul Verhoeven. One of my new favorite films.
Pat and Mike (1952, Cukor)
Perhaps I'm about to make a sacrilegious statement, but I'm not all about Tracy/Hepburn films. I do like Adam's Rib and Woman of the Year (although both are in need of a rewatch and honestly if you asked me I can't remember which one I liked more -- because one of them I had some issues with). But I've always preferred Katharine Hepburn with someone like Cary Grant or Jimmy Stewart. Her comedy with Tracy is very specific: it has dryness to it, while in films with other leading men she's more carefree and zany. As a personal preference, it's how love her best. With Tracy, she's more reserved, and there's always some sort of serious undertone going on. Pat and Mike was the same. It didn't soar. It's as though it kept trying to get off the ground but the engine just kept revving. The film failed to engage me. Perhaps I'll visit it at one point again, as I know it's beloved by many but at this juncture, it was a miss.
The Red Balloon (1956, Lamorisse)
A very nice meditation on youth. Some beautiful imagery and camera placement in this short. It takes you right in from the first frame and you can't help but feel as though you too are heading on a journey with this balloon. A beautiful look at the desire to hold onto innocence and a world that tries to take that away from us. The end contains some of the most breathtaking shots and is truly magical. Very sweet, uplifting piece.
Certified Copy (2011, Kiarostami)
The best 2011 film I've seen thus far. A breathtaking poetic essay on reality, imitation and what we make of it. This was fascinating from the very first frame. I will not discuss the plot. All I will say is this is conversation piece about two people over the course of one day. Juliette Binoche is incomparable. William Shimell, a soap opera star, looks like he was born to be in feature films. Their dynamic flows as easy as water from a spring. Director Abbas Kiarostami unsettles the viewer with his camera's eye; Binoche looks directly at us -- from the point-of-view of Shimell, the point-of-view of a couple through a window -- and it's as though she's looking through us, trying to communicate some secret message. Perhaps she's trying to wink at us, tell us what's going on beneath the surface here. It's up to the viewer to ultimately decide this, or not. I chose not to. Yes, my mind wandered and wondered at times but moreover I was too caught up in the unbelievable depth that was unfolding before my eyes. This film should be viewed and discussed and written about for years to come. Captivating from start to finish.
Cracks (2011, Scott)
As soon as Cracks begin, you immediately know the type of score it will embody, the type of shots it will incorporate. The film is predictable by definition and perhaps tries too hard to be clever when it, in fact, has very little to say. The score becomes so innocuously common over the period of the film you can practically start surmising the next notes. Where Cracks excels is in its brief interludes of subtly but sadly, these are few and far between. The cast is attractive and try their best; Juno Temple has a way about her, a quality that draws the viewer’s eye in. Eva Green is always lovely to see but sadly, she's given a character whose depth is sacrificed for a seductive screen presence which never quite rings true given the flimsiness of the characters' arcs. Spanish actress Maria Valverde is very nice here, but again it's the lack of depth and structure of the film as a whole which limits these performances to the shortcomings of screenwriters as well as director Jordan Scott. Cracks isn't a terrible film; there are far worse. It is, however, a film I desperately wanted to love yet ended up underwhelmed.
| 36 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Bryn Tilly
Horrorphile
RoboCop is one my favourite sf action movies too. I saw it when it came out and it was an absolute blast. Did you see the director's cut or the original theatrical cut? The director's cut is more violent (basically it's the version that Verhoeven had to then cut to get an R rating), for example you see Murphy actually having his arm blown off, whereas the original version one minute he had it and then a few seconds later it was gone and everyone was like, what the hey?! Rob Bottin's special effects makeup, including the design of RoboCop is awesome, the last great work that he did. The stop-motion animation may look dated compared to CGI work now, but it adds to the look and feel. ED-209 has become a cult villain. The movie has many quotable cult lines, "I'll buy that for a dollar!" ... This, and Verhoeven's Starship Troopers, perfectly capture the director's aggressive, adult cartoon, satirical stylistic. I didn't like Total Recall so much, that was just too cheesy-looking for me. I look forward to a decent Blu-ray of this movie.
Comment by Cinema is Truth
Cinema is Truth
Cinema is Truth
Comment by Bryn Tilly
Horrorphile