Change Your Image
Jeffreybar
Reviews
Happiness (1998)
A Tough Call...
There have been few films which I've really felt the need to write about afterwards. This is certainly one of them.
I'm not uptight, nor do I feel that a film necessarily has to be upbeat or enlightening -- and this film is certainly neither. But there is something about this film which is extremely unsettling, and not just for its supremely dark subject-matter. On the other hand, a day after watching it for the first time, I cannot stop thinking about it. Perhaps that is the reason why I am so troubled by this film: it is infectious, and the virus it carries is one of unabated bleakness and hopelessness.
At this point, it's hard to imagine that there's anyone who still believes that suburbia is full of wholesomeness and well-adjusted people. The premise -- that the image of happiness is merely a veneer which hides a dark and desperate inner life -- is just not fresh enough to carry a whole movie. But it's not even a question of whether the premise can carry the movie. In spite of what some other reviewers have said, this is most certainly not a boring film. And it does stick with you like very little else I have seen, so there is definitely some power here which doesn't exist in similar, inferior, films like _Magnolia_.
But I guess what bugs me about this film is that it seems to rely on the principal failing of postmodern thought -- that it is merely enough to point out the sheer arbitrariness and duplicitousness of contemporary existence and the values we extol. In a way, the "exposing" of this arbitrariness and duplicitiousness creates an even bigger problem than the problem it exposes. Life is bleak, life is meaningless. I get it. The question is not whether this is true; the question is what can be done about it. How does a film which thrives on bleakness and conveys only bleakness and ends in bleakness and exists only to paint a picture of absolute bleakness accomplish anything at all? Social satire's primary purpose is to do something in the social realm -- does this film accomplish anything except to depress its viewers? It certainly didn't for me.
On a lesser note, but still noteworthy -- the gross-out stuff seems totally out of place (even given the film's subject matter) and really detracts from what it does do well. Five minutes worth of material being edited out certainly wouldn't make the film any more hopeful, but it would make it stronger for what it does do.
Trois couleurs: Rouge (1994)
Very disappointing conclusion to the otherwise excellent Colors Trilogy
contains allusions to spoilers ;)
After the magnificent Blue & White, I expected Red to be as amazing and affecting a film -- not only stylistically impressive, but philosophical and involving as well. Certainly Red is the first, but as for the other two? On the philosophical side, certainly there is the old man's nihilism for much of the film, but what does Kieslowski counter this with? The final scene? I fail to see how that does anything aside from connect several disparate people together in a rather trite _Magnolia_-esque manner, to which I say (as I did in that movie), "So what?"
And as for being involving or affecting, this film totally strikes out for me. Both of the two main characters are vastly underdeveloped and largely unsympathetic. The newly-robed judge was somewhat more interesting initially, but due to his role as a sort of meta-character, he came up shallow in the end as well (where is the payoff?). I found myself repeatedly shouting, "Who cares!" at the screen whenever anything of importance happened to these characters. Indeed, the only figure in the movie I found myself to be remotely sympathetic to was the dog.
Blue and White are wonderful pieces of film. It is truly a tragedy that Kieslowski couldn't pull the hat trick with Red.
La leggenda del pianista sull'oceano (1998)
Incredibly Uneven...
In some respects, I found this movie to be highly frustrating. There are a couple of stunningly beautiful scenes in this movie (such as the stormy-piano scene) and the duel between Jelly Roll Morton and 1900 is great. Tim Roth plays his character with pathos and charm, and whenever he has a speaking part, he dominates the screen (particularly notable is the discussion he and Max have near the end of the movie). Finally, the piano music is just wonderful, start to finish.
But, some of this movie is highly clichéd, particularly some of the dialog -- which is surprising, considering just how philosophical and wonderful some of the other dialog is. There are some pretty gaping plot holes (and I don't consider myself to be a plothole-seeking pedant by any stretch of the imagination...they're just really hard to miss). And honestly, the acting by pretty much everyone *but* Tim Roth is pretty mediocre.
What to say? It's hard to reconcile all this. This is both of one the most beautiful and most irritating films I've seen in a long time. I give it an 7/10 because the beautiful parts are so beautiful, but I could easily have given it a 4/10 because the flawed parts are so flawed. It's no Cinema Paradiso, but I'd say it's worth watching in spite of its flaws.
Dom durakov (2002)
great movie, but ugh bryan adams
Quite frankly, this movie deserves a 10/10 for its wonderful portrayal of life in a mental institution caught in the crossfire between Russian and Chechen forces. But why oh why oh why did the (clearly intelligent and artful) director have to make such extensive use of Bryan Adams? I could have dealt with it if there was just one fantasy with him, or if most of the fantasies had been silent (rather than plagued with his sugary awful romance-pop), or even if (God forbid) they had used MORE THAN ONE BRYAN ADAMS SONG for these sequences. It's the same song over and over again. Ugh.
That said, this movie is a great treatise on the new imperialism that is threatening to destroy the world (not just in Russia, Americans might take note here). There's clearly a lot of Fellini to be found if you go looking for it -- the accordion-playing heroine, the colorful characters, and particularly the circus music which shows up from time to time. Also, I was very strongly reminded of Begnini's "Life Is Beautiful", another film which managed to find humanity and quirky warmth in the midst of a truly awful conflict and situation.
Even with Bryan Adams this movie gets an easy 8/10.
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
Good adaptation, although not without weaknesses.
I am a little surprised to see this movie as #2 all-time on the IMDb lists. It's a worthy adaptation of the greatest book of the 20th century, but not a fantastic one. Granted, the book is very difficult to adapt to the screen, and one would probably need 10 movies to really do justice to the complexity and subtlety of Tolkein's world. But this movie takes a remarkably organic and historical-feeling book and turns it into a Star Wars-type heroic quest. I find it hard to completely forgive the contrivances introduced to make things neat and tidy, and there are some really cheesy moments scattered throughout the movie. Also, Jackson & Walsh's dialog does not always blend seamlessly into Tolkein's. It frequently becomes some sort of strange amalgam of 20th-century hollywood cliche and gorgeous shakespearian lines. Finally, Shore's soundtrack, which is wonderful in the dark and scary moments of the movie, is painfully overbearing in the more "tender" ones.
For all this, _FotR_ is a pretty good movie. There is some wonderful cinematography, and there are several genuinely chill-inducing moments in the film. Oh, and the Balrog rocks. :)
Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)
Brand loyalty is a powerful force...
I think a lot of people giving this movie rave reviews are probably in some sort of denial -- after waiting 20 years for the prequel to the (frankly excellent) Star Wars Trilogy, they just cannot come to terms with the fact that this movie is, frankly awful. It's not just that Jar Jar is annoying, it's not just that Darth Maul is poorly developed and a thinly-veiled aim at the toys market, it's not just that the "mitichlorians" (or however you spell it) is one of the most ridiculous (and unnecessary) story devices of all time, it's not just that this movie could have been a masterpiece for all ages but instead was only palatable by the under-ten crowd or the terminally brand-loyal. But all of these things combined to create a landmark to disappointment that will stand for all ages. Oh well...here's hoping Episode II is a step back in the right direction.
X-Men (2000)
Wow! Is it really *that* good?
Don't get me wrong -- this movie had some pretty great special effects, a decent story, and (for the genre) above average acting. But it wasn't *that* good. Wasn't anyone else bothered by the blatant attempt to set up the sequel at the end?
Toys (1992)
Why all the negativity about this film?
I have to admit, when I decided to go through some of my favorite movies on IMDb and see what other people had to say, I was nothing less than astounded by the low rating and many negative comments on Toys. This movie is easily in my top 20 movies of all time, maybe higher -- one of the few movies that still makes me cry after dozens of viewings. The poignant and relevant message, combined with stunning imagery and set design and a great score makes Toys a real (apparently underappreciated) classic.