Ratcatcher
Ratcatcher (1998)
★★★ / ★★★★
This coming-of-age urban drama was about James (William Eadie) and his increasing guilt which started when he got into a fight with another kid who accidentally drowned. He doesn’t have an outlet for his negative emotions and his environment is far from helpful. His family is somewhat unstable led by an irresponsible, unloving father, they live in an impoverished neighborhood and there’s a garbage strike (the story is set in Scotland during the mid-1970s)–which means that the garbage do not get picked up which causes tremendous health hazards for everyone (lice, rats, contaminated water, you name it). Written and directed by Lynne Ramsay, I couldn’t help but get engaged in the film’s poeticism. There was a nice contrast between how children see the world and how children hopes the world should be like. I was greatly affected by James’ struggle to want to be a good person but couldn’t because his parents and older siblings are not good models on how to express emotions. They’re always cursing, yelling, hitting each other and avoiding the main issue altogether. He doesn’t have a lot of friends, with the exception of an older girl Margaret (Leanne Mullen) and the mentally challenged Kenny (John Miller), both of which are constant targets of the older boys. It pained me whenever he ran away from home to visit a nice house because it’s his dream for his family to finally get out of the miserable place where they’re currently living. I felt his desperation and I knew he was just a character but I really wished I could provide him some sort of comfort. I liked the atmosphere that Ramsay created because it reflected the main character’s mindset. I also liked the fact that the story did not shy away from sensitive issues such as death and childhood depression. As for its ending, I didn’t expect it but I thought it was handled with such craft. In some ways, it’s hopeful because the director sets up an argument which straddles the line between spirituality (not necessarily religion) and imagination. This is a great effort from Ramsay and I’m very interested in seeing what she has to offer from her other films.
Le dernier jour
Dernier jour, Le (2004)
★★★ / ★★★★
There was a certain “je ne sais quoi” about this movie that I loved. The story was about an eighteen year old Simon (the stunning Gaspard Ulliel) who happens to meet a girl on a train (Mélanie Laurent) on his way back home for the holidays. She invites himself to his home, which at first turned out okay, but the longer she stays there, the more frustrated Simon becomes. Emotions escalate when Simon’s friend (Thibault Vinçon) enters the picture because Laurent starts to fall for him. I think this film was deceptively simple. Even though the dialogue was minimal, the film had a plethora of interesting imagery and stiffled emotions that kept bubbling over the surface. The prime example of this was Ulliel’s character. Simon was such a sensitive character and I felt like a lot of things could tip him to the breaking point. However, he managed to find inner strength time and time again to deal with another painful reality and so I was able to sympathize for him. Even though he was sad and bordeline desperate for affection, we rarely saw him cry, which I think made him that much more lovable. What did not work for me as well, however, was the storyline regarding his mother (Nicole Garcia) and her much younger lover (Bruno Todeschini). I didn’t quite see the connection between that story and Simon’s plight. If the commonality was about loneliness and the suffocation they felt, I think that’s too superficial. If this film had been longer to further explore that bond, I think this could have been a much more powerful picture. Indeed, this was a slow-moving film but I found it to be rewarding because it was thoughtful with its approach. This is farthest from a Hollywood film which typically has defined conventions of a genre. “Le derniere jour” was more like an artistic take on what it was like to be in someone’s shoes who felt like everybody was slowly drifting away.
Wristcutters: A Love Story
Wristcutters: A Love Story (2006)
★★ / ★★★★
Based on a short story “Kneller’s Happy Campers” by Etgar Keret, “Wristcutters: A Love Story” stars Patrick Fugit as a depressive guy who one day decides to kill himself and later wakes up in an alternate universe where people who have successfully committed suicides are sent to live. In that other universe, he meets a Russian ex-rocker (Shea Wigham) and while searching for Fugit’s ex-girlfriend (Leslie Bibb), the two meet a hitchhiker (Shannyn Sossamon) who claims that she did not kill herself. I thought the first part of the movie was pretty interesting and it did have its darkly comedic moments. However, as the film went on, I just grew tired of it because even though the three main characters are on the road and constantly meeting new quirky persons, I feel like they’re going absolutely nowhere. Therefore, the story becomes stagnant and quite tedious to watch because pretty much everyone is sad or depressed (which, I guess, would make sense because they all decided to kill themselves). The story is a one-note joke/what-if question which could’ve been more interesting if the characters actually offer some insight with each other. Admittedly, there were some really good scenes between Fugit and Sossamon but those deep conversations weren’t enough to save the picture’s stagnant disposition. I also didn’t like the third act of the movie when the Fugit, Wigham and Sossamon arrived in this town where “miracles” happen. It got even worse when they met Messiah (Will Arnett) who claims that he can separate his soul from his body. That part of the picture felt like a foreign appendage which eventually infected the whole body of work. However, I do give credit to the film for offering something different and taking risks when it comes to its humor. I just can’t quite recommend it because the negatives outweigh the positives.
The Tale of Despereaux
Tale of Despereaux, The (2008)
★★★ / ★★★★
A lot of people were disappointed by this animated flick but I must say that I enjoyed it. It may not be as intelligently written or have as deep a story as most Pixar films bit it had enough heart to keep me interested from beginning to end. Matthew Broderick lends his voice as Despereaux, a mouse of small stature with big eyes, big ears and a strong sense of smell. He’s not like any other mouse because he doesn’t know how to be scared of certain things like a typical mouse should. In fact, he thrives on the excitement of acquiring cheese from mousetraps and reading books instead of eating them. I thought the first part of the film was fascinating in a psychological point of view because Despereaux, a youngster mouse, is encouraged to be scared of pretty much everything. Even though he is a mouse, he describes himself as a gentleman who is brave and honorable. The joke/reverse psychology works in its own universe and as a lesson for younger viewers. However, what did not work as well for me was Roscuro (voiced by Dustin Hoffman) and Miggery Sow (voiced by Tracey Ullman). Roscuro accidentally “killed” the queen (via drowning in soup or a heart attack?) which drives the king to banish rats out of the kingdom as well as cooking soup, which is the kingdom’s source of happiness. As the kingdom plunges into a depression, Roscuro feels extreme guilt and, like Despereaux, he feels like an outcast and seeks redemption. The third outcast is Miggery Sow who I initially thought had some sort of a mental disorder but, with a little bit of psychoanalysis, I eventually came to a conclusion that she wants to be treated like a princess (instead of actually being one as she portrayed) because she wasn’t loved as a child. Although her character wasn’t as developed as I wanted it to be, what I liked about her part of the story was that it was open to interpretation. I thought it was weird how Roscuro and Miggery Sow, one way or another, become a villain and I wasn’t sure of the filmmakers wanted the audiences to think that. This is one of those films that could’ve benefited more if it had a longer running time. It tried to tackle three main characters but it wasn’t successful because the last two I mentioned weren’t explored enough. Other notable voices include Emma Watson, Kevin Kline, William H. Macy, Stanley Tucci, Frank Langella, Richard Jenkins and Christopher Lloyd. Based on Kate DiCamillo’s books, “The Tale of Despereaux” may not have been a critical success but the animation is impressive and it has enough implications for the older audiences if one were to look closely.
No Regret
No Regret (2006)
★★★ / ★★★★
Hee-il Leesong, the first openly gay director in South Korea who leads a gay-themed film, is someone to watch out for. “No Regret” is about a recently-turned-eighteen orphan (Young-hoon Lee) who leaves the orphanage and heads to Seoul to find a job. Unable to balance school and several low-paying jobs, he decides to work as a male prostitute with the hope of earning enough money to go back to school. The main character meets a rich upcoming businessman (Han Lee) several times including the strip club where he works. Eventually, after a plethora of inner and outer conflicts between the two, they finally fall for each other. But that’s only the beginning of their problems. What I love about this picture is that it didn’t glamorize male prostitution. It managed to paint a picture that people who are involved in such underground jobs are miserable and messed up yet still have human longings that are almost never achieved. They keep telling themselves, “If I earn enough money, I’ll get out of this place and lead a better life” but insecurities of not being good enough for “normal” society soon take over and they get stuck from moving on. Young-hoon Lee impressed me because he can brood really well. When he cried (and he did several times), I felt the sting of his depression and desperation. The moment when I could identify with him the most was when he expressed his insecurities to his lover; mainly that he’s poor and not well-educated. To me, that explains why he initially did not want to get in a relationship with Han Lee’s character. The lead character’s lover is rich, educated and has several options with his life. When they finally get into a relationship, that jealousy never really goes away and it sucks them into a negative spiral. I also thought that the lead character feels guilty for taking away his lover’s opportunities just to be with him. That negative spiral is then aided by Han Lee’s family because they want him to marry a girl despite finding out that their son is a homosexual. The complexity of the situations and morals of these characters are well-integrated in the script so I enjoyed watching the story unfold. However, my biggest problem is the film’s last twenty minutes. The events that transpired were so out of character, I thought the whole sequence was a dream (or a nightmare?). Though the ending did make me laugh in some sick, twisted way (one either loves it or hates it, I suppose), I feel like it could’ve ended better. I felt like the moral implications that pervaded the rest of the film were thrown out the window and, I must admit, I felt a little cheated. Nevertheless, I’m giving this a recommendation because the acting, script, and story are commendable. I’m looking forward to Hee-il Leesong’s next film because he proved to me that he is very capable of telling stories that are both rewarding and unpredictable.
The Sea Inside
Sea Inside, The (2004)
★★★ / ★★★★
This picture is based on the true story of Ramón Sampedro and his campaign in support of euthanasia which lasted for thirty years. Written and directed by Alejandro Amenábar, although the issue the film tried to tackle is controversial and serious, he’s smart enough to make the film somewhat uplifting so it doesn’t feel at all heavy-handed. Javier Bardem made me feel so much for his character because of his willingness to die with whatever dignity he has left. Being a quadriplegic, he claims that his life should be treated as a right and not an obligation. Therefore, just like any other right, he should be allowed to give up his right to live and not be forced to stay alive by the government and other groups who oppose euthanasia. I thought the most interesting scenes in the film consisted of Bardem interacting with three characters: his lawyer who has her own share of problems that is similar to Bardem (Belén Rueda), a local woman who falls for Bardem (Lola Dueñas) and a nephew that he sees as his own son (Tamar Novas). Each of those three characters are compelling because even though they have their own opinion regarding Sampedro’s situation, not all of them are able to express their complete thoughts. It’s up to the audiences to interpret the three characters’ positions when they’re on their own or not interacting with Bardem. I also enjoyed the fact that both sides of the subject of euthanasia are able to express their arguments. Personally, I support euthanasia because I believe in our individual rights to do whatever we want with our bodies, especially when we’re in a situation where we no longer want to continue to live. But there were arguments here and there that made me question my own beliefs because we are shown that the issue of euthanasia goes beyond moral and legal issues. This is a rich film because its writing has substance that works on multiple levels and the characters have subtlety that will otherwise be missed if one is not invested in the story. I recommend this film to everyone, whether one may or may not support euthanasia, because it offers no easy answer regarding which side is “right.” It’s main goal is to simply show one man’s life and what he stood for.
Beautiful Ohio
Beautiful Ohio (2006)
★ / ★★★★
Chad Lowe’s directoral debut is rather difficult to get through because it doesn’t rise above the stereotypes regarding depressing suburban drama. William Hurt and Rita Wilson have two sons: David Call, a certified genius in mathematics, and Brett Davern, who is rather ordinary. Michelle Trachtenberg complicates the storyline by filling in the role as the not-so-girl-next-door who the two brothers happen to be attracted to. The first part of the film is rather interesting because it explores the jealously between the two brothers–mainly Davern struggling to live in his big brother’s shadow versus stepping out of it. I could relate to the two brothers because they pretty much have nothing in common except for their unconventional parents. Things quickly went downhill from there because the dialogue mostly consisted of the characters discussing theories, influential musicians and citing quotes from renowned individuals. Their pretentiousness created this wall between me and the characters. Therefore, when something dramatic happens to a particular character or a revelation occurs, I found myself not caring. I didn’t find anything particularly profound that drove the story forward either. Lowe really needed something above the whole parents-not-really-caring-about-their-children idea because it’s all been done before by better films. Davern reminded me of Emile Hirsch in “Imaginary Heroes,” which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but without the nuances of pain and complexity. If Lowe had explored the common theme of characters not understanding each other (literally through language or emotionally) in a more meaningful and not a heavy-handed manner, this picture would’ve worked. The revelation about a certain character in the end felt out of place. Don’t waste your time with this one.
White
White (1994)
★★ / ★★★★
This second part of the trilogy confused me. It started off with promise because it focuses on the ugly divorce between Julie Delpy and Zbigniew Zamachowski. Even though I thought the story would revolve around Delpy, Zamachowski is interesting because he’s vulnerable but he’s not above not taking revenge for the hateful things that Delpy did to him. After the divorce, Zamachowski ended up back in Poland and began acquiring wealth. He then hatched a plan to answer the questions that have been bothering him and decided to return to Delpy’s life. The first and last part of this picture were effective because it embraced its atypical way of telling the story. One moment it’s a marriage drama but the next it’s a well-told dark comedy. However, the middle portion was too aimless for my liking. I constantly found myself trying to figure out where the story was going or if it was even planning on going anywhere. Zamachowski’s character who has been kicked around like a homeless puppy by a handful of individuals spent too much time feeling sorry for himself. It works in some segments of the film because it makes the audiences root for him, but spending too much time in a depressed state can lead to audiences’ ambivalence. Even as he started to gain wealth and power, he still felt sorry for himself. Whatever happened to a depressed but strong protagonist like from its predecessor (played with such craft by Juliette Binoche)? I also missed the astute use of music and color in order to reveal certain layers of a character. This one barely had any and that frustrated me. If one is looking for an unconventional film that straddles the line between drama and dark comedy, this is the one to see. But if one is looking for something that’s rich in implications and technical ways of revealing certain aspects of characters without using words, avoid this one because it will disappoint.
Blue
Blue (1993)
★★★ / ★★★★
I think this film is very mysterious. Writer and director Krzysztof Kieslowski tells the story of Julie Vignon (played by the exquisite Juliette Binoche) who survived a car crash as her husband and daughter perished. After trying to commit suicide, she decides to sever everything from her past life and start over. Upon introspection, she realizes that the only way she can achieve true liberty from the past is to embrace it. I can understand why a lot of people would completely dismiss this film after one viewing. Perhaps the most common complaint is that the story unfolds too slowly. I personally didn’t find that a problem because of the way Binoche carried her character from beginning to end. Her frustrations range from obvious to subtle. I thought there were two stand-out scenes: when Binoche decides to eat the candy that belonged to her late daughter (and the manner of which she ate it) and when she discovered a mouse taking care of its babies. Those two scenes defined this film because metaphor is one of the most crucial factors that drove the story forward. Nothing may be going on at first glance but when one really looks at Binoche’s subtle facial expressions and body language, one will come to the conclusion that she’s going through an inner turmoil that cannot be mollified with words like “I’m sorry.” I also found this film to be very technical. The use of color is outstanding because it tells the audience how a character is feeling or what the character might be thinking. As for the music, the movie becomes that much more alive whenever the orchestra would play on the background. The colors and music work together to highlight certain emotions that Binoche is going through. This is the first part of an ambitious trilogy and I’m excited to see what the second and third films have to offer.
Dans Paris
Dans Paris (2006)
★★ / ★★★★
There’s a lot of complex dynamics between the characters in this film but most of them were not explored enough. The best scenes were when the two brothers, Romain Duris and Louis Garrel, would talk to each other about women, the value of life and their childhood. I also found the father (Guy Marchand) interesting but he wasn’t given much to do except hover in the background like some sort of annoyance for the two leads. Duris returns home after a bad break-up and stays in bed all day. Garrel tries to find ways to alleviate his brother’s depression by–strangely enough–sleeping with other women. That statement doesn’t make sense but after seeing the entire picture, in a strange way, it does have some hidden meaning. I wouldn’t have gotten it either if Garrel’s character didn’t literally voice it out to his brother in the final scene. Still, this film is very uneven. In the beginning, Garrel talks to the camera and he claims that he’s going to be the narrator. As the film went on, that narration was completely thrown out the window. It would’ve been wiser if Christophe Honoré, the director, was more consistent about the narration because the film got a little confusing at times. One minute we’re looking at something that happened a week ago and the next we’re looking at something that happened a few months ago. The fact that this film is in French (I have no problem with that; I love foreign films) is another issue because there were some dialogues that do not directly correlate with the subtitles. (I know a little bit of French.) Given that handicap, jumping from one moment in time to another makes it that much less accessible. I liked that this film referenced other great filmmakers from the likes Jean-Luc Godard (scenes outside the home) and Bernardo Bertolucci (scenes in the home). Plus, that one scene when Garrel was looking at movie posters of “Last Days” and “A History of Violence” made me laugh due to the fact that Garrel looked at Michael Pitt’s picture with a certain recognition. (They worked together in one of my favorite films “The Dreamers.”) Little tidbits like that made me enjoy this movie despite my frustrations with its techniques. This is definitely not for everyone but if you’re the kind of person that likes to see movies which honor certain signatures of other great filmmakers, check this one out. (I still say it should have been more character-driven…)
Stop-Loss, Sleepwalking, Kramer vs. Kramer
Stop-Loss
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
I appreciate Kimberly Peirce for making a pretty effective film about a policy that is (unfortunately) not familiar to a lot of Americans: stop-loss. Basically, stop-loss involuntarily extends a soldier’s service even if his or her contract has ended. Ryan Phillippe continues to add another serious film in his repertoire and he’s effective here as a soldier who doesn’t want to go back to Iraq. He owns every scene he’s in because you can see in his eyes that determination of wanting to live his own life after serving in the military. Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Channing Tatum also did a great job portraying soldiers that took different paths. The film started off well–the scenes in the battlefield is nothing short of gripping. Unfortunately, the picture became a little unfocused somewhere in the middle when Phillippe’s character decided to go AWOL. Still, there were scenes during the middle portion that stood out and established that these soldiers aren’t done being in the war even if they’ve returned home. They go through guilt, post-traumatic stress disorders, and anger; once a person goes to war, there is no going back. What really didn’t work for me, though, was the jarring hip-hop and hard rock soundtrack. I think the film could’ve been elevated with a slow, political folk songs instead. This film is very sad on the surface but very angry in its core.
Sleepwalking
[ 2 stars out of 4 ]
This is not a feel-good movie but that doesn’t make it a bad movie. Even though it may be very heavy-handed on the drama, it managed to have some sort of focus on the story. Set mostly in the winter and shot in areas where there are no bright colors, the tone is depressing and at times a bit claustrophobic. Still, the performances here are pretty good: Charlize Theron is the mother who doesn’t know how to be one because she gets distracted by life’s circumstances, Nick Stahl is the symptathetic brother who sees himself as a failure so he tries hard to pick up his sister’s responsibilities–something he could be successful at, and Dennis Hopper as the father who was way too hard on his children and his past actions catch up to him. Not a lot of things happen in this movie because the film’s purpose was to observe. Still, it could have been much more powerful if Theron has been on screen more and if the picture had more comedic moments that serve as a hint of sunlight amidst all the darkness. By the end of the movie, the tone was more bitter than bittersweet because the characters are still trapped, despite the actions they have taken to try to break free from their own prisons.
Kramer vs. Kramer
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
This picture possesses a silent power that cannot be found in many modern family dramas. Dustin Hoffman and Meryl Streep did a great job as far-from-perfect parents; one chose to leave and one had to stay. Eventually, they fight for their child in the courtroom but not in a loud or very dramatic way; it was done in a very naturalistic manner which made the film all the more impressive. The script is very smart in showing how the characters changed in a span of eighteen months. For instance, there’s a scene in the beginning that’s done again in the end to show how the two characters have evolved. There’s no wasted scene here–often, a struggle is shown that will eventually change the character’s outlook on how to parent or prioritize. Still, the title suggests that there will be a war between the father and mother but it never really happened, so it was kind of misleading. Another thing is that some critics say that the film did not favor one parent over the other. I disagree because Hoffman has a considerable screen time than Streep. I think the film would be more balanced if the two lead actors had an equal amount of time in front of the camera. It would feel more like what’s at stake is very, very crucial (or more important than it already is). This is a great family drama–its power mostly lies in the unsaid than the things that are said.
The Ice Storm, The Incredible Hulk, What Happens in Vegas
Ice Storm, The
[ 3 stars out of 4 ]
I saw this film back when I was in high school and I didn’t get the point of it. Upon viewing it with a lot more experience, I thought that it was a smart observation about surburban life. Although it was somber in various levels, it is also darkly comic while still being tragic. Thanks to Ang Lee’s ability to balance tones and characters, this turns out to be not just another look at suburban depression. It actually has something important to say, which should be apparent by the end of the film. I must give kudos to Sigourney Weaver for playing an unlikeable but hilarious character. Although her character says one thing, she completely thinks and does the opposite–which I think most people can relate to, including myself. Christina Ricci, Tobey Maguire, and Katie Holmes were (or looked anyway) so young here to the point where it was kind of shocking. All of them delivered and proved to be interesting side characters. In a way, this is kind of like a classic novel that literature professors love to dissect. Motifs, contradiction, foreshadowing… all of those things that make up a rich novel can be found in this film. If one is into films about tragedy in suburbia, I recommend this one without hesitation.
Incredible Hulk, The (2008)
[ 4 stars out of 4 ]
I’m greatly surprised with this movie because “The Hulk” directed by Ang Lee was such a disappointment; that if a great director couldn’t make it work, there must be something wrong with where the material was based upon. “The Incredible Hulk,” directed by Zak Penn, is much more engaging because it was action-packed without having to result to mindless violence and Edward Norton can easily be digested as a man trying to change himself for the sake of others’ safety. Moreover, I loved that science was constantly used as an explanation and weapon: I loved the whole primer-DNA segment with the hilarious and sarcastic scientist, played by Tim Blake Nelson, because that’s one of the main ways to alter protein expression–and therefore phenotype–in real life). Liv Tyler is also pretty darn great here because she was both elegant and strong in her own way. I also like the CGI look of this Hulk a lot better than the other one. Lee’s Hulk is more light or flourescent green and it looked more cartoonish. Penn’s, on the other hand, is dark green and looks more sinister. Overall, this is without a doubt, the better film not just in comparison with the first, but as a stand-alone film. I rarely say this but this film deserves a sequel. I’m crossing my fingers for that Avengers film! …But I must say, I’m really curious about the longer version that Norton wants released (and since it wasn’t, he chose to not advertise for this film).
What Happens in Vegas
[ 2 stars out of 4 ]
It’s not as bad as critics and most audiences claim it is. I think this is one of those movies that became a victim of group think. Don’t get me wrong–it did have forced humour (that either worked or didn’t) and characters making stupid decisions right after another–but none of it is meant to be taken seriously. Since I saw this movie via Netflix, I think I would have been a lot less figiving if I had seen this in theaters because it is not worth the ten dollars. I did enjoy the way Cameron Diaz and Ashton Kutcher’s characters would torture each other. As much as I would like to believe that people like them do not exist, they do. I learned to accept that fact and pretended that I was watching those kind of people interact with each other while watching this film. I thought Diaz and Kutcher did eventually had some sort chemistry, especially toward the end, so I somewhat bought the whole romantic notion… even if it was a bit too forced. The side characters made me laugh at times and I appreciated the movie’s energetic tone. It’s not the greatest movie in the world but it’s not the worst either. Compared to “The Heartbreak Kid,” “What Happens in Vegas” is a masterpiece.
