Change Your Image
khun-marcus
My favorite movies include (in more or less by ranking):
Tokyo Story
Taxi Driver
Seven Samurai
Vertigo
Only Yesterday
Blue Velvet
Le Samourai
Battle of Algiers
Andrei Rublev
On the Occasion of Remembering the Turning Gate
I was born, but...
The Power of Nightmares
A Brighter Summer Day
Sansho the Bailiff
The Mother and the Whore
Los Olvidados
The Cameraman
Dead Man
The Third Man
There Will Be Blood
The Emperor's Naked Army Marches On
Syndromes and a Century
Cache
The Night of the Hunter
Salo
Reviews
Hak se wui: Yi woo wai kwai (2006)
May be the best film on Triads ever made
Johnnie To's "Election 2" (AKA "Triad Election") not only continues the story of the characters set in the first "Election," but it is such a superlative film compared to its predecessor that it can rightfully stand on its own as a masterpiece of the genre. It's time for the underground Wo Sing Society to pick a new chairman, and the top contender to the throne is the successful businessman Jimmy. We follow him battle for position and leverage, like a high stakes game of chess, against the reigning chairman Lok. Spanning a mere 90 minutes, To directs with great attention to detail and characters, and with not a single frame wasted or in excess. We come to root for Jimmy (if not completely approving of his heinous actions) as he navigates, with both mental and physical prowess, the treacherous underworld of Hong Kong, filled with snitches, hit men, and the most formidable of all, the Machiavellian Lok himself.
One of the busiest and most versatile directors, Johnnie To has made some good, and even great films in the past, but here he has outdone himself in what is probably his masterpiece ("Drug War" is a strong contender for that title as well). The storytelling, cinematography, and the beautiful score by Lo Tayu all add up to a memorable cinematic effect. "Election 2" sets a gold standard for sequels, as it does not require the viewer (though it would be helpful) to view the first "Election" to follow, rather crafting its own story, not derivative but superior to the first. Its conclusion is masterful as well, leaving us with desire to see a continuation of this series. It also lends insight into the operation of mafias in Hong Kong (the beginning sequence plays out like a quick history lesson on the formation, and rules, of underground societies). Finally, it serves as a brilliant political allegory for the dueling that cunning politicians must engage in to win at any and all costs; and how the line between a politician and a gangster is a very thin one. If you're a fan of gangster/organized crime films, "Election 2" is a must have in your collection, to date the greatest film on organized crime in Hong Kong I've seen. And if anyone has any doubts about the legitimacy of this film, I was introduced to this film from someone who was involved with underground activities in Asia
which is all I will mention about that!
The Descendants (2011)
This side of paradise
The reluctant patriarch thrust into various roles of responsibility after his wife falls ill; infighting between relatives over land; marital infidelity – "The Descendants" has all the makings of a cliché-ridden cable movie of the week. What sets this film apart is not only the way it is memorably directed by Payne, but also the setting. It is Hawaii, and this Hawaii is not always the type of Hawaii that is sold at travel kiosks. In this Hawaii, there are swaying palm trees, gorgeous sunsets, and drinks with mini-umbrellas sticking out them, but there are also escalating tensions, moral and ethical dilemmas, and dire consequences. Paradise? "Paradise can go **** itself" the patriarch (played by Clooney, virtually in every frame of this movie) laments at the beginning.
Coming from someone who was born, raised and still living in Hawaii I admired how Payne deconstructed Hawaii from its mirage as a tranquil sanctuary and instead unveiled it as a place with universal problems anyone from anywhere in the world could relate to. In fact, it is when Payne overly infatuates on Hawaii's hallucinatory beauty that the film loses its focus and deflates the central pathos of the film (the puerile Sid, mostly provided as comic relief, wasn't a strong point either). Consider the numerous shots of Hawaii's landscape, the constant use of cheery Hawaiian music, or in particular the sequence where Matt, along with his daughters and his older daughter's boyfriend, stroll along a sandy beach of Kauai, which goes on for an unnecessarily extended period of time, not adding any substantial depth to the story or the characters. It brought to mind Chris Isaak's video for "Wicked Game" where the imagery was not really saying much else except yes, Hawaii has nice beaches and scenery. Perhaps Payne became, like most people outside looking in, intoxicated by the mystique of Hawaii – who could blame him? – but when he detaches himself and steers back on track to the characters, their choices and the resulting consequences, the film excels.
While "The Descendants" does an admirable job of breaking the mold of typical stories set in Hawaii, I consider it merely scratching the surface in redefining how people tell (and view) stories about this unique place, and I was left desiring more. Someday I'd like to see a film about the grittier side of Hawaii – a film not told from the perspective of Punahou-educated upper-class characters that mostly inhabit this film (side note: Punahou is the most expensive private school in Hawaii, a school usually reserved for the "elite" whose alumni includes President Obama) but from common, ordinary locals. This side of Hawaii has been covered in some novels (the writing of Hawaii born/raised/educated Lois-Ann Yamanaka comes to mind), and even TV shows ("Dog the bounty hunter" is an obvious choice; never mind the sensational unrealism of "Hawaii Five-O," both old and new versions), but to see a serious film about the various adversities people in Hawaii face everyday could be an audacious vision in the right hands. With the amount of seedy activities that take place in Waikiki and Chinatown after dark, the increasing amount of corruption in the HPD, the shady dealings politicians and other elites partake in, or the dynamic relationships between locals and "haoles" that this movie barely touches upon, there's no end to the amount of material to draw from and depict that sometimes Hawaii is an idyllic paradise only on the outside.
Madeo (2009)
My least favorite Bong film -- and it still might be one of the best films of the year
After the success of his blockbuster "The Host," I was very excited to hear about Bong Joon-Ho returning to the murder mystery genre, and became very excited when early reviews compared this to "Memories of Murder," which ranks among the best films I've seen this decade. Perhaps my expectations were too high, because I think that "Mother," when compared to his previous works, is probably the weakest film I've seen by Bong so far.
Which is not to say it's a bad film – it's a good film that's very well acted, scripted and directed. I think Bong is too talented of a filmmaker to make a truly bad film. Kim Hye-Ja does an outstanding job playing the mother. The main problem with "Mother" is that it goes on a little too long, particularly the first half. It explores much of the same territory as his great "Memories of Murder" but instead of focusing on the cops' perspective, this time the spotlight is on the mother of the murder suspect. When the police, who are convinced they have the right suspect, won't help her, mother takes matters into her own hands, finding potential clues that turn out to be mostly red herrings and dead ends. Bong retreads much of the same territory as he did in "Memories of Murder," but in a slower, more straightforward fashion.
"Mother" is also Bong's least humorous film to date. He has a gift for composing great scenes of black humor that balance well with the more intense situations on screen. In "Mother" the laughs are sparse; this is Bong's most serious film so far. However, it also contains the greatest twist in Bong's oeuvre. By the second half of the film, the film picks up, and what the mother (and the audience) discovers about the murder completely changes the entire tone of the film; our perceptions of characters we thought we knew change dramatically. It's an unexpected twist which Bong executes masterfully.
I still recommend watching "Mother," but if you are new to Bong's work, I would recommend starting with his great debut, "Barking Dogs Never Bite," and continue chronologically to discover what a brilliant career he has made for himself so far. He can make a great film whether it's an urban comedy-drama, a whodunit thriller, or even a big budget monster/political film – I wouldn't be surprised to see him called up to Hollywood involved with some big name actors some day. I liked "Mother" but wanted to like it more. He's already done a whodunit film, a great one; and while they are overall different films, for my tastes doesn't measure up to the unsettling "Memories of Murder." Flaws aside, because it's a Bong Joon-Ho flick, "Mother" is still better than most of the films currently out. I'd love to see him challenge himself and try other genres, maybe a gangster flick, a heist film, or even a family comedy-drama. He is one of the most intelligent directors working today, and I think he has the talent and skill to try on any genre and make a damn good film out of it. Scary to think he's only 40 years old.
Tyson (2008)
As honest a documentary you'll see this year
What most people remember about Mike Tyson is that while he was a ferocious and dominant fighter in his prime, his character is a different story. He was imprisoned for rape, made obscene comments about his opponents, committed one of the most infamous incidents in all of boxing by biting his opponent's ear, and later became a drug addict facing numerous financial problems.
Which is unfortunate, however, as James Toback's documentary "Tyson" attempts, quite successfully, to dispel the notion of Tyson the savage and show us Tyson the person. He does this by letting Tyson do all the talking, reminiscent of how Errol Morris let Robert McNamara tell his POV in "The Fog of War." And what Tyson tells us about himself adds up to what is probably the most honest documentary you'll see this year. It doesn't even seem like a documentary, conventionally speaking; it's more like a confession, a visual memoir that lends insight into why he acted irrationally many times in his life. You'll get insight as to how he became a boxer, about his legendary trainer and father figure Cus D'amato (In a moving scene, Tyson literally chokes up when recalling D'amato), what he was thinking while preparing for fights, and even his views on women, aided with some very revealing pictures. Of course, like Morris's film, this is all Tyson's story: You will not hear from Robin Givens, Don King, or anyone else. Watching this documentary, however, you come to trust Tyson; and how he bares his soul to the camera is, in some ways, more courageous than facing a formidable opponent in the ring. You feel that not only is Mike Tyson the most honest fighter, but he's also one of the most honest people on this earth.
Toback's documentary manages to be engrossing because he humanizes Tyson, revealing a lesser seen side of the former champion, which is why even non-boxing fans will find this character study fascinating -- it transcends the savagery of the sport and allows us to understand this complicated, contradictory figure. There may be more relevant documentaries out there these days, but it's doubtful they are as honest and revealing as this one.
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008)
This year's "Forrest Gump," only worse
This schmaltzy, bloated film sounds, on paper, like it was going to be some kind of unique experience in cinema; to my knowledge, an entire film that centers around a person aging backwards has never been done before. But as the film eventually progresses on (and very slowly mind you, slower even than "Zodiac;" Fincher is in need of an editor these days) we soon realize that that is the ONLY thing that is unique about the film. It's actually a very conventional bildungsroman which has everything you expect from any coming-of-age story. We see opportunities missed, opportunities taken, chance encounters, and a whole lot of death and dying. It's always a cheap way to narrate a film by killing off characters one by one, but sadly, it IS the film's narrative.
And about the unique element of Benjamin aging backwards, the film doesn't really capitalize on it to make a bigger statement of life (In fact, for a running time of almost 3 hours, it doesn't make ANY profound commentary). Benjamin could have aged normally, and it wouldn't have made a difference. In fact, it just becomes downright bizarre and sometimes even disturbing in some scenes. When you see a decrepit looking Brad Pitt sharing secrets under the bed with a 9 year old girl, you will not feel comfortable. What might have been more poignant is if Benjamin had a real disease and knew he was going to die at a young age, and he still took the chances he took in this film. So the gimmick of age-reversal remains what it is: A gimmick. (Though I'd be curious to see what Fitzgerald had in mind when he wrote his short story.)
There are also some plot events that simply do not make sense in the narrative of the film. Why have Benjamin raised by African Americans? It did not make a difference at all whether he was raised by blacks, whites, or Asians Benjamin is certainly not influenced by the African American community through the course of the film. For a film that starts in the 1910s and makes it a point that Benjamin is raised by blacks, it absolutely makes no mention about the hardships of blacks in pre-civil rights America. Another thing is that the film is told in flashback by Benjamin's one true love, who's dying and lying down in a hospital bed. It is not told in the present, but rather, it is told in 2004 in New Orleans. Yes, hurricane Katrina strikes eventually. What's the point for the filmmakers to include one of America's most devastating natural disasters if it has nothing to do with the plot? In a way, this film made me appreciate the films by people like Yasujiro Ozu (whose "Tokyo Story" is one of the greatest films about the impermanence of life) even more, with their spare, poetic style.
David Fincher has made some of Hollywood's most suspenseful films in recent memory and I thought it'd be interesting for him to try a new genre. But after viewing the results, this is definitely not Fincher's territory, and the only reason I can see why this film was made was purely for Mr. Oscar. It tries to be this year's "Forrest Gump" but even there it fails it has not one memorable line from it, and clearly Fincher is trying too hard to be dramatic. Instead, he eventually becomes melodramatic. It's a curious attempt, and at least it's pretty well shot, not to mention some outstanding aging special effects. In the end, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" is Fincher's chick flick, and I hope it's his last one.
Slumdog Millionaire (2008)
One of the best films of the year, if not the best
On paper, the film sounds like nothing extraordinary. A young man from India gets a chance of a lifetime to go from rags to riches by being a contestant on the Indian version of "Who Wants to be a Millionaire." Throw in another plot strand, that of the same young man trying to reunite with his long lost love, and it sounds like a been there, done that type of story. Yet director Danny Boyle, in what is probably his best film, comes up with ingenious ways to tell this story in what surprisingly turns to be one of the most original films I've seen in a long time. Told with a hyperkinetic pace and punctuated by an outstanding soundtrack (with songs by M.I.A., one of the hottest singers of this generation), this film, detailing the struggles of two brothers growing up, one a street-smart hustler, the other, the hero of the story, more innocent and good-hearted, is never predictable, and is by turns funny, suspenseful, sad and inspiring sometimes all in the same sequence. Boyle makes a point to show the side of India we hardly see in pictures instead of a country of glossy palaces that is home to a more than a few billionaires and an industry which exports four-hour long hyperbolic Bollywood melodramas, we see (in superb shots) a struggling, overcrowded India full of hardship and despair, where slums stretch for miles and life is very cheap, if even worth anything at all. But in no way is this a depressing sob story nor is it a predictable fairytale trying to be this year's Oliver Twist; in fact, it's a hugely entertaining film that offers sharp, incisive social commentary on not just the impoverished of India, but of economic hardships and what people do to overcome such adversity no matter where they may be in the world. That is no easy task, and the fact that Boyle accomplishes it so entertainingly well makes it all the more remarkable. It sounds like it shouldn't work, but as one character notes on Jamal's life, it's bizarrely plausible. It's also one of the most audacious, daring and best films of the year. Stay for the end credits.
(Side note: This film, in one harrowing sequence, confirmed for me what my good friend from Singapore told me: That you should be very cautious when giving money to beggars, particularly those in Asian countries, as they are more than likely controlled by the mafia. Especially if they are blind or look maimed in some way the more pathetic they look, the more they are able to elicit sympathy money from unsuspecting tourists.)