This "documentary" looks and sounds like exactly what it is: A poorly disguised propaganda film, with only one purpose in mind: To provide justification for torture and other crimes against humanity and all the crimes committed by CIA and other US government agencies in their war against terrorism. We are having to put almost two hours to watch CIA employees one after another providing various excuses trying (mostly in vain) to provide justification, that there is nothing wrong in torture - or that there is nothing wrong with killing few thousand innocent civilians in a drone attacks, where both the decision maker and the button pusher are, what you could only call as "soccer moms", who are quite clearly obviously indifferent and unemphatic, with a certain type of ignorance and arrogance added for a good measure. Watching these people say on screen that there is nothing wrong with what they did makes this "documentary" an unbearable experience to watch. This is so blatantly fascist and evil in nature, that you can only wonder what happened to the idea of human rights in USA?
Reviews
11 Reviews
In Dubious Battle
(2016)
James Franco fails to deliver the best in Steinbeck's story
27 February 2017
"In Dubious Battle" was one of the movies I wanted to see more than any other film from Hollywood in 2016. My original enthusiasm faded quickly only after 10 minutes into the film.
Let me explain: "In Dubious Battle" is one of the best Steinbeck novels, as important classic as its companion piece, the unforgettable "Grapes of Wrath", which not only happens during the same time period, also deals with the same issues of this era. "In Dubious Battle" hasn't been filmed before, for obvious reasons, as it has much more clear political message in it, as the main characters are members of the American Communist Party, who are sent on a mission to fight for fair wages among the apple pickers, who are mostly vagrant families and other victims in the downfall of the economic collapse, which lead to the Great Depression. Unlike "Grapes of Wrath", "In Dubious Battle" is mainly about how destructive and unfair the labour laws were during that time, which enabled rich land owners to exploit the destitute workers to the maximum, giving them basically wages which wouldn't have even covered the expenses of food and shelter.
However... I find it near inexcusable for what the writers and the director have actually done to this masterpiece of source material. Some of the most memorable scenes and events in the book, have been completely either written out or have been softened or edited into something completely different, which no longer does any justice to the original Steinbeck novel. This has lead to very visible and easily noticeable mistakes and clear errors in the production of the movie. There are totally unforgivable errors of fluid continuity via truly strange film editing, mainly in form of abrupt cutting, which even leave seriously weird time gaps: -As an example, one of the most memorable scenes in the book, is the first meeting between Al and the newly arrived Jim & Mac, has been butchered to a bare minimum, which fails to deliver any of the originally intended importance of this meeting. This is the first truly odd of really weird cuts throughout the film, which leaves in amateur like time-lapses. There should have been a complete scene, where Al prepares for them a free meal out of sympathy and after being flattered, a hamburger steak with mashed potatoes and thick brown gravy, which is described meticulously in detail by Steinbeck in the book, using almost two pages to underline both the hunger of Jim & Mac, and to establish the future important relationship between Al, his father and Jim & Mac.
I would see the main culprit for this travesty being mainly the director James Franco. His direction clearly shows he doesn't seem to have any emotional attachment for telling this important story, which is evident in how much has been actually left out from the original complete story. Franco hasn't done anything to cover the obvious and weird time gaps and missing events in this movie. It would be justified to say that Franco probably hasn't concentrated nearly as much as he should have. Could be out of interest or just lacking adequate motivation. In any case, I am not impressed with Franco's directorial work. He is still much better as an actor. As a director he has made silly mistakes and unforgivable editorial choices, which do effect the entire movie's atmosphere and how well the story is being delivered to the viewers. As it stands now, the movie lacks emotion, dynamic and empathy for the story or the characters.
The second fail point for this movie is its casting - Almost the entire cast of the main characters appear to be far from being motivated, and this has lead to a display of some of the most mediocre acting performances of 2016. The only exception to the rule is Vincent D'Onofrio, who is playing London, and even in his case, just barely. I find just about everything disappointing in this film, cinematography certainly isn't doing any justice to it either, and this could be possibly because the sets aren't in any way convincing that this is early 1930's, the camera angles are to put it mildly, unconventional, there are close shots, when the scene would have rather called for medium or even long shots and then there are long shots in place of close shots. In some places the seriously weird cutting disrupts even viewers ability to follow the story, as the cuts don't make any sense. The third low point is the soundtrack, which doesn't fit the movie, or the time-line, when the movie is supposedly happening.
Finally... Even with all the shortcomings in this movie, it is still watchable and even enjoyable (with strong reservations), but don't expect a clear and concise masterpiece. It works also much better for those people who haven't read Steinbeck's novel, but fails to convince most of the film scholars and academics, who will easily spot the many flaws in this production.
Let me explain: "In Dubious Battle" is one of the best Steinbeck novels, as important classic as its companion piece, the unforgettable "Grapes of Wrath", which not only happens during the same time period, also deals with the same issues of this era. "In Dubious Battle" hasn't been filmed before, for obvious reasons, as it has much more clear political message in it, as the main characters are members of the American Communist Party, who are sent on a mission to fight for fair wages among the apple pickers, who are mostly vagrant families and other victims in the downfall of the economic collapse, which lead to the Great Depression. Unlike "Grapes of Wrath", "In Dubious Battle" is mainly about how destructive and unfair the labour laws were during that time, which enabled rich land owners to exploit the destitute workers to the maximum, giving them basically wages which wouldn't have even covered the expenses of food and shelter.
However... I find it near inexcusable for what the writers and the director have actually done to this masterpiece of source material. Some of the most memorable scenes and events in the book, have been completely either written out or have been softened or edited into something completely different, which no longer does any justice to the original Steinbeck novel. This has lead to very visible and easily noticeable mistakes and clear errors in the production of the movie. There are totally unforgivable errors of fluid continuity via truly strange film editing, mainly in form of abrupt cutting, which even leave seriously weird time gaps: -As an example, one of the most memorable scenes in the book, is the first meeting between Al and the newly arrived Jim & Mac, has been butchered to a bare minimum, which fails to deliver any of the originally intended importance of this meeting. This is the first truly odd of really weird cuts throughout the film, which leaves in amateur like time-lapses. There should have been a complete scene, where Al prepares for them a free meal out of sympathy and after being flattered, a hamburger steak with mashed potatoes and thick brown gravy, which is described meticulously in detail by Steinbeck in the book, using almost two pages to underline both the hunger of Jim & Mac, and to establish the future important relationship between Al, his father and Jim & Mac.
I would see the main culprit for this travesty being mainly the director James Franco. His direction clearly shows he doesn't seem to have any emotional attachment for telling this important story, which is evident in how much has been actually left out from the original complete story. Franco hasn't done anything to cover the obvious and weird time gaps and missing events in this movie. It would be justified to say that Franco probably hasn't concentrated nearly as much as he should have. Could be out of interest or just lacking adequate motivation. In any case, I am not impressed with Franco's directorial work. He is still much better as an actor. As a director he has made silly mistakes and unforgivable editorial choices, which do effect the entire movie's atmosphere and how well the story is being delivered to the viewers. As it stands now, the movie lacks emotion, dynamic and empathy for the story or the characters.
The second fail point for this movie is its casting - Almost the entire cast of the main characters appear to be far from being motivated, and this has lead to a display of some of the most mediocre acting performances of 2016. The only exception to the rule is Vincent D'Onofrio, who is playing London, and even in his case, just barely. I find just about everything disappointing in this film, cinematography certainly isn't doing any justice to it either, and this could be possibly because the sets aren't in any way convincing that this is early 1930's, the camera angles are to put it mildly, unconventional, there are close shots, when the scene would have rather called for medium or even long shots and then there are long shots in place of close shots. In some places the seriously weird cutting disrupts even viewers ability to follow the story, as the cuts don't make any sense. The third low point is the soundtrack, which doesn't fit the movie, or the time-line, when the movie is supposedly happening.
Finally... Even with all the shortcomings in this movie, it is still watchable and even enjoyable (with strong reservations), but don't expect a clear and concise masterpiece. It works also much better for those people who haven't read Steinbeck's novel, but fails to convince most of the film scholars and academics, who will easily spot the many flaws in this production.
Tasting Menu
(2013)
Exaggerated Pretension of Hypocrisy
19 October 2016
The reasons behind motivations for making this movie completely escapes me. Rarely (thankfully) do I come cross with this type of a movie, which from the outset has everything going for it's success. It has an incredible international ensemble cast, some of who are remarkably talented actors, setting is already stunning without having to even do "set decoration" as you are using one of the world's best restaurants as a stage... -And then you waste every single potential this movie ever had, by providing a completely clueless director, beyond boringly bland, meaningless script, screw up lighting, sound, cinematography, select an idiotic soundtrack with the most unfitting selection songs you can think of, plus you screw up the sound mixing where music is way too loud, and talking becomes almost muffled, then you give your incredible cast nothing but naïve, ridiculous, moronic lines to mull over in 4 languages, and you are bound to get this kind of pretentiousness served up with incredibly unremarkable Spanish/Catalan actors and actresses whose correct place would be in the dark corners of the local amateur theatre. What ever potential this movie had, was without any doubt lost in the hands of totally incompetent director and even more incompetent writer, who focus on things that have nothing to do with the weak plot, and then embellish it with even more incredibly pretentious, hypocritical presentation of a high-end haute cuisine. This movie starts to annoy you from the very first minute, and the source of annoyances just seem to pile up scene after another. If there is something meaningful to say about this movie, one could only hope, that all of this would actually been made on purpose, possibly to portray how pretentious the wealthy jet-set group concentrated around ridiculously exaggerated modern fusion molecular haute cuisine cooking actually can be, such as actually serving battered, deep fried fish bones, and charging 60 euros for a plate. If this isn't stupidity, I don't know what is. Some of the highly rated three star Michelin restaurants actually DO this kind of "cooking" day-in-day-out, all this being served to completely ignorant group of wealthy socialites, who wouldn't be able to tell 10 euro bottle of sparkling wine and 150 euro bottle champagne apart, if you present it to them as "exquisite". (BTW. I happen to know for a fact, this has happened for real at least once in a certain three star Michelin restaurant.) Thankfully, there are some three star Michelin restaurants, that actually do serve proper, well defined haute cuisine, but not the way it being presented on this movie, which belongs to the bargain basket at your local supermarket. This movie is nothing but an embarrassment for its makers.
Symbol
(2009)
Hilarious Weirdness in the Company of Masters
30 September 2016
I picked originally this movie for watching, because of it's mystery, single room element, which has been covered so well over and over again, without much ingenuity or desire to create something new. Imagine my surprise, when I found this movie to be a guaranteed 100% cult classic masterpiece for the future. It is difficult to describe and analyse all the ingenious subtleties of this yet another wonderful piece of modern cinematic treasure, into which Japan's movie industry has been evolving for a number of years. Some of the most creative pieces of modern cinema have certainly come from Japan during the past 10 years or so.
This movie is also weird, very weird in fact, no question about it. But it is so fabulously done, the jokes are funny, they are very funny. All that which shows us, this movie is not only brilliantly thought out, it is even more astonishingly executed, it is even more difficult to find any actual goofs from this one, (as it is from most Japanese movies) - Every single prop seems to be always in it's right place! There are way more thoughts and semantics in this movie, than just a few obscure references to the direction humanity is evolving into. The outline of a man trapped inside a room, which he is clearly destined to escape from, is only faintly veiled depiction of humanity itself, which is only given purpose by creating comedy, when seemingly random objects start popping out of the walls, if we bother to manipulate, or pull the "right" levers, as in life in itself in the real outside world. The comic slapstick routines which Hitoshi Matsumoto so superbly and funnily pulls off, are truly funny, obviously the work of a master comedian, who knows extremely well the physical side of comedy, as well as the importance of sounds, facial expressions, movements and timing. And while you're watching the movie unfold, you will most certainly notice that you will start yourself imagining the infinitely various ways how he could (or should) escape from the room, using the objects found in the room. And at the same time, you can only smile and laugh for how much fun and comedy one can pull from a bottle of soy sauce, toilet plunger, sushi and a hanging rope.
The other worthy observation is the parallel story line, which from the outline has absolutely nothing to do with our antagonist in his bright white room, this fact is even underlined by showing us that it happens as far away from Japan as possible, in Mexico, in the world of Luchador wrestler's family and work place, the wrestling ring. Naturally this so far removed place, with its people who are so far removed from our antagonist, must somehow be tied together, at point which the movie evolves into completely different spheres, becoming more surreal and fantasy driven. The viewer however, is not left out in the cold, as if you were watching closely from the beginning, you will understand everything when the movie ends.
What a brilliant, weird, intelligent, clever and hilarious movie!
This movie is also weird, very weird in fact, no question about it. But it is so fabulously done, the jokes are funny, they are very funny. All that which shows us, this movie is not only brilliantly thought out, it is even more astonishingly executed, it is even more difficult to find any actual goofs from this one, (as it is from most Japanese movies) - Every single prop seems to be always in it's right place! There are way more thoughts and semantics in this movie, than just a few obscure references to the direction humanity is evolving into. The outline of a man trapped inside a room, which he is clearly destined to escape from, is only faintly veiled depiction of humanity itself, which is only given purpose by creating comedy, when seemingly random objects start popping out of the walls, if we bother to manipulate, or pull the "right" levers, as in life in itself in the real outside world. The comic slapstick routines which Hitoshi Matsumoto so superbly and funnily pulls off, are truly funny, obviously the work of a master comedian, who knows extremely well the physical side of comedy, as well as the importance of sounds, facial expressions, movements and timing. And while you're watching the movie unfold, you will most certainly notice that you will start yourself imagining the infinitely various ways how he could (or should) escape from the room, using the objects found in the room. And at the same time, you can only smile and laugh for how much fun and comedy one can pull from a bottle of soy sauce, toilet plunger, sushi and a hanging rope.
The other worthy observation is the parallel story line, which from the outline has absolutely nothing to do with our antagonist in his bright white room, this fact is even underlined by showing us that it happens as far away from Japan as possible, in Mexico, in the world of Luchador wrestler's family and work place, the wrestling ring. Naturally this so far removed place, with its people who are so far removed from our antagonist, must somehow be tied together, at point which the movie evolves into completely different spheres, becoming more surreal and fantasy driven. The viewer however, is not left out in the cold, as if you were watching closely from the beginning, you will understand everything when the movie ends.
What a brilliant, weird, intelligent, clever and hilarious movie!
At River's Edge
(2011)
Remarkably Unremarkable (in a good way)
12 September 2016
Just finished watching "Ogawa no hotori" (At the River's Edge), and what I found astounding in this movie, is that it doesn't stand out in any way or form, making this a bit bland experience for a Japanese jidaigeki genre film. Having said that, we are assured from the beginning, that we are on a path which is well trodden and well covered in Japanese cinema. The acting, story, and directing is what you can only call as "well defined standard" - There are no real surprises regarding the plot, no actor or actress could be really described as going over their heads - everyone just seems to be doing what they're supposed to do, without fail. The sword fights aren't in any way remarkable or even particularly memorable, as opposed to some of the greatest examples of this genre. The soundtrack with pretty much standard score, isn't anything to feel shivers on your spine either.
However, on one account, this movie is truly enjoyable: Visually, this movie is perfect as any well photographed film could be, and Japan as a country, does offer some of the most beautiful scenery in the whole world, and the director Tetsuo Shinohara has used it exceptionally well. Having said all of the above, the movie isn't actually seriously bad in any way either, it just fails to impress, as some recent more serious jidaigeki films have, as for example a delightfully different "Ame Agaru" (After the Rain) by Takashi Koizumi or the simply wonderful and impressive remake of "Ichimei" (Hara-Kiri) by Takashi Miike. If you aren't too demanding from your period drama films, "At The River's Edge" is still enjoyable as good and decent entertainment.
However, on one account, this movie is truly enjoyable: Visually, this movie is perfect as any well photographed film could be, and Japan as a country, does offer some of the most beautiful scenery in the whole world, and the director Tetsuo Shinohara has used it exceptionally well. Having said all of the above, the movie isn't actually seriously bad in any way either, it just fails to impress, as some recent more serious jidaigeki films have, as for example a delightfully different "Ame Agaru" (After the Rain) by Takashi Koizumi or the simply wonderful and impressive remake of "Ichimei" (Hara-Kiri) by Takashi Miike. If you aren't too demanding from your period drama films, "At The River's Edge" is still enjoyable as good and decent entertainment.
Grave of the Fireflies
(1988)
Heartwrenching Brutality of Reality
28 April 2016
As it is already well known, "Grave of the Fireflies" is without much of a doubt, the most saddest animation film ever made. I was already well aware of the films attributes, when I finally got a chance to see this with original Japanese soundtrack. But... I still wasn't prepared for the roller coaster ride of an experience I won't, and even more importantly, can't never, ever forget. This movie will rip your heart apart during its 89 minute duration. It will turn like a sharp needle through your chest, unless you are made of wood, this movie will make you question morality of mankind, it will force you to reckon what is humanity's guilt or responsibility for one and another.
And this movie is relentless... It won't let you go of its depressing grip, even for a moment. And it will twist, turn and tear your soul apart in ways that you never thought were even possible, no matter how tough you think you are. And all of this only gets worse and worse, more closer to the end you get.
So... does this mean it makes poor entertainment? Well.. yes, when speaking strictly about how this movie will (or at least should) make you feel. But.. is it a good movie? -YES! Without any question about it -This IS one of the best animations ever made, both visually and by its story content. I had previously only seen the movie dubbed in English, which I have to say, is a travesty, near criminally bad. The original Japanese voice of "Setsuko" (by "Ayano Shiraishi") is simply so heart warming and so touching. And it's difficult to believe that nothing of this sort comes through from the bad English dub, which is just wrong, wrong, wrong!
To finish this off, it must be said, that even knowing all of the above, before actually seeing the film, there really is nothing that would properly prepare you for this extraordinary emotional experience of a life time. It is a must see film, a masterpiece by it's own right, and has more than earned its place on the IMDb Top 250 list. (When I'm writing this, the film is at position 60.)
And this movie is relentless... It won't let you go of its depressing grip, even for a moment. And it will twist, turn and tear your soul apart in ways that you never thought were even possible, no matter how tough you think you are. And all of this only gets worse and worse, more closer to the end you get.
So... does this mean it makes poor entertainment? Well.. yes, when speaking strictly about how this movie will (or at least should) make you feel. But.. is it a good movie? -YES! Without any question about it -This IS one of the best animations ever made, both visually and by its story content. I had previously only seen the movie dubbed in English, which I have to say, is a travesty, near criminally bad. The original Japanese voice of "Setsuko" (by "Ayano Shiraishi") is simply so heart warming and so touching. And it's difficult to believe that nothing of this sort comes through from the bad English dub, which is just wrong, wrong, wrong!
To finish this off, it must be said, that even knowing all of the above, before actually seeing the film, there really is nothing that would properly prepare you for this extraordinary emotional experience of a life time. It is a must see film, a masterpiece by it's own right, and has more than earned its place on the IMDb Top 250 list. (When I'm writing this, the film is at position 60.)
The Little House
(2014)
Superb Art-house with outstanding performance by Haru Kuroki
24 April 2016
I had this movie earmarked for a long time, until I finally got a chance to see it today. I've seen few Yoji Yamada flicks before, to mention some of the best: "The Hidden Blade" (2004), "The Twilight Samurai" (2002) and "Love and Honour" (2006), so I had at least some idea what to expect. But this... - This movie is nothing sort of a masterpiece! In spite the fact that Yamada is one of Japan's most productive directors of all time, I still wasn't quite prepared. This movie is simply irresistibly at the same time heart breaking and heart warming, without forgetting this is pure eye candy on film. The film has only few sets outside the house, which is just appropriate, as after all, the movie is about the "little red house". However, what truly makes this film is the outstanding performance by Haru Kuroki. Watching her playing the maid is so heart warming that just watching her is enough to make grown men start crying. I mean really, she doesn't even need to deliver any lines! Mark my words, you will hear from this young actress in the future. I knew she had won the Silver Bear for best actress at the 2014 Berlin Film Festival, for her performance in this film, but I had no idea the role she played was this good! While watching her playing this modest, humble and loyal maid is something you will never forget. I can't even remember when I have seen a performance by an actress the last time, that would be even close to the sheer brilliance of this role. I think I will also need to have a look at some of the Yamada's older films, to see if there is anything I have missed.
If you believe you could have an understanding and insight for Art House -films, but have never watched any before, this would work really well as an introduction to a larger world. What a simply wonderful movie!
If you believe you could have an understanding and insight for Art House -films, but have never watched any before, this would work really well as an introduction to a larger world. What a simply wonderful movie!
Mission Impossible: Samurai
(2014)
Entertaining Japanese period comedy at it's best
21 April 2016
For the past 15 years or so, there has been a noticeable steady stream of refreshingly quirky Japanese Jidaigeki Chambara (period movie with swordplay) films that have much lighter touch and feel, than the older style over-the-top serious dramas, that became somewhat stagnated and boringly routine during the 80's and 90's.
Just to mention few of this newer style here: "A Tale of Samurai Cooking: A True Love Story" (2013), "After the Rain" (1999), "Kiyosu Conference" (2013) and "Dora-heita" (2000) are just few examples of the real treasure trove, that modern Japanese film industry has become.
Just having finished watching "Samurai Hustle", I can't begin to tell you, how delightful surprise this movie was! The story is not only well written, it is simply superbly written! It also has some ingenious comedy elements, the sword fight scenes are extremely well choreographed, and even utilises "Matrix" style CGI, with stop screens. Although, I must say that much more could have been yanked out of the fight scenes with slightly better editing and/or camera work. And this is the only low key of the movie. However, it must be equally said, that isn't the real backbone of this movie, which relies heavily on telling a story which is somewhat typical for Japanese films. From the very beginning, we know we are about see another story which emphasises the eternal fight between good and evil, right against wrong, poor against rich, and so on. The subject of injustice and how to handle it, is something that Japanese film makers do more than any other movie making country. You could say it is almost a constant variable, which is as important as the Daikon radish in Tokyo style Ramen.
Interestingly, contrary to what you might expect, the film makers seem to also have pushed the famous, much fabled Bushido code, to the backseat, while it is there of course very much present, but it isn't stiff and forced over, which actually comes off rather well. This might even cause disturbance among some of the die hard fans of the genre, who consider Bushido as "untouchable". However, in this movie, it only adds to the enjoyment of this film, and it still provides a realistic portrayal of the era's strict code of ethics, but it is just done without unnecessary and uncalled "theatrics" that can be used to describe some of the older specimens of this genre.
There are also few other really interesting points in this movie, worth taking a closer look. You might want to take a special notice how meticulously well the wardrobe the actors wear has extremely realistic appearance of clothing actually worn during the 1700s, you can see the dust, sweat stains, tiny patches, and handmade crude stitches, that a poor samurai would use to mend his own clothing.
Besides the costume department, set decoration is the ultimate pinnacle of carefully well thought out and highly detailed period style. Nothing, and I do really mean NOTHING seems to be out of place in this movie. Every single set or prop looks exactly like we would be transported back in time into the 18th century Japan. You can almost smell the fresh lacquer from the wood. Even insects they used look great! The two hour duration is just right for telling an excellent story like this. And you won't be disappointed, the movie is that good, it should well last more than one viewing, without getting bored.
Finally... I must say, that even when this movie isn't an instant classic "masterpiece" in epic proportions, it is still pure entertainment at it's best, and that is what good movies should ultimately be. And most definitely, you will most certainly be better off watching this movie, if you don't try to take it too seriously. Honestly, you'll get much more out of this while watching without any specific expectations. Just enjoy watching a great, entertaining story unfolding right in front of you.
Just to mention few of this newer style here: "A Tale of Samurai Cooking: A True Love Story" (2013), "After the Rain" (1999), "Kiyosu Conference" (2013) and "Dora-heita" (2000) are just few examples of the real treasure trove, that modern Japanese film industry has become.
Just having finished watching "Samurai Hustle", I can't begin to tell you, how delightful surprise this movie was! The story is not only well written, it is simply superbly written! It also has some ingenious comedy elements, the sword fight scenes are extremely well choreographed, and even utilises "Matrix" style CGI, with stop screens. Although, I must say that much more could have been yanked out of the fight scenes with slightly better editing and/or camera work. And this is the only low key of the movie. However, it must be equally said, that isn't the real backbone of this movie, which relies heavily on telling a story which is somewhat typical for Japanese films. From the very beginning, we know we are about see another story which emphasises the eternal fight between good and evil, right against wrong, poor against rich, and so on. The subject of injustice and how to handle it, is something that Japanese film makers do more than any other movie making country. You could say it is almost a constant variable, which is as important as the Daikon radish in Tokyo style Ramen.
Interestingly, contrary to what you might expect, the film makers seem to also have pushed the famous, much fabled Bushido code, to the backseat, while it is there of course very much present, but it isn't stiff and forced over, which actually comes off rather well. This might even cause disturbance among some of the die hard fans of the genre, who consider Bushido as "untouchable". However, in this movie, it only adds to the enjoyment of this film, and it still provides a realistic portrayal of the era's strict code of ethics, but it is just done without unnecessary and uncalled "theatrics" that can be used to describe some of the older specimens of this genre.
There are also few other really interesting points in this movie, worth taking a closer look. You might want to take a special notice how meticulously well the wardrobe the actors wear has extremely realistic appearance of clothing actually worn during the 1700s, you can see the dust, sweat stains, tiny patches, and handmade crude stitches, that a poor samurai would use to mend his own clothing.
Besides the costume department, set decoration is the ultimate pinnacle of carefully well thought out and highly detailed period style. Nothing, and I do really mean NOTHING seems to be out of place in this movie. Every single set or prop looks exactly like we would be transported back in time into the 18th century Japan. You can almost smell the fresh lacquer from the wood. Even insects they used look great! The two hour duration is just right for telling an excellent story like this. And you won't be disappointed, the movie is that good, it should well last more than one viewing, without getting bored.
Finally... I must say, that even when this movie isn't an instant classic "masterpiece" in epic proportions, it is still pure entertainment at it's best, and that is what good movies should ultimately be. And most definitely, you will most certainly be better off watching this movie, if you don't try to take it too seriously. Honestly, you'll get much more out of this while watching without any specific expectations. Just enjoy watching a great, entertaining story unfolding right in front of you.
Father Brown
(2013– )
G.K. Chesterton Classic Ruined by Bad Production Choices
14 February 2016
When I first read few years ago that they are going to do a remake of G.K. Chesterton's classic Father Brown, I was simply ecstatic. As Father Brown has always been one of my favourites. After watching the first episode, I could barely believe the mess that they have created. Just about everything is wrong in this production. First, what could be a valid excuse to move the story from it's original 1930's setting to the 1950's? There really isn't one! I understand that they have wanted to create something new, but for the love of all good, WHY? It's as out of place as a fish riding a bicycle. And speaking of fish, there has rarely been as badly miscast series as this one in the history of British television. As good actor as Mark Williams is, he is quite possibly the worst choice to play Father Brown, as he isn't old enough, heavy enough nor does the character he plays, have any of those charming qualities that make Father Brown so memorable from the books. And I really don't think anyone could have given more useless performance as he does in this series. Anyone who has read Chesterton's novels, knows pretty good what Father Brown should look like. This is NOT it. The acting is just that bad throughout the series. And it gets worse... On top of everything else the writing is nothing short of stunningly bad. What were these people thinking? And finally, when they have chosen to play this in the fifties, chose the worst actor in the British isles, got the bad scripts.. they had to choose as a set decorator, someone who doesn't clearly understand that "fifties" means 1950's - not 60's and 70's - as you see A LOT of stuff from both in the series, including cars, watches, furniture etc. It just doesn't work. I'll give it a 5 stars, just for having the guts to even attempt something as bad as this is.
Ryuzo and the Seven Henchmen
(2015)
Takeshi Kitano Right on Beat
11 February 2016
This movie is a 100% guaranteed Kitano style. The satire and comedy contained in this movie, is absolutely hilarious, although at points you aren't entirely sure where this is heading, or why there are some unnecessary scenes that didn't quite fit the set pace. I too would strongly recommend to ignore the poor IMDb ratings for this movie. You shouldn't even pay any attention to it, as the score is so obviously faked (42% of 1??! - yeah, right!) it makes me feel ill to think that there are people who would do that sort of thing. Regardless of that sad attempt to manipulate ratings, this is one of the best comedies by Takeshi Kitano. The seemingly western take on a very much Japanese thing, is actually a refreshing one. What some may miss about the inventiveness in this film, is the simple fact that not every one is, (or will ever be) able to understand one of the most difficult forms of comedy, satire. It seems that Kitano is purposely making fun of his own "serious" Yakuza -movies, with incredibly light touch, that makes everything seem so effortless in this movie. The idea of old, retired men "getting at it" one more time is very often used cliché in movies, need I remind of such movies as "The Bucket List", "The Unforgiven" and of course "Seven Samurai". However it must be kept in mind that Kitano's entire style doesn't appeal to everyone, nor will it never be understood by all. It's also absolute poppycock for someone to say that if you like this movie, or think it's good because you are "asianophilic caucasian" or just because it is by Kitano. I would recommend this movie to anyone, unreserved. It has it's low points, but one thing still makes me smile: The movie is stunningly funny, in the most hilarious way!. Well done Beat Takeshi!
The Most complex Locked Room Mystery faithfully executed
25 November 2014
Gaston Leroux's "The Mystery of the Yellow Room" ("Le mystère de la chambre jaune") is probably the most famous of all locked room mysteries but also one of the earliest examples of this particular type of "who-dunnits". As the novel was originally published in 1908, it is significant enough to note that the novel has been published few decades before the so called "Golden Age" of detective stories. It is equally worth noting that the story is mostly in accordance with rules of the genre codified by Ronald Knox in 1929. Leroux's story only breaks one of those rules, but this is one of those rare occasions where it simply doesn't matter. The importance of the story is also evident, when we know it has been selected as the best "locked room mystery" by detective story readers on numerous occasions, only alternating places with John Dickson Carr's locked room mystery masterpiece "The Hollow Man" (which amazingly has never been made into film). "The Mystery of the Yellow Room" was interestingly the absolute favourite of John Dickson Carr, who undeniably is the master of the locked room mysteries, and Carr often said that Leroux's novel influenced him the most, always making him to push solutions of the locked room mystery to the limits because of the sheer simple brilliance of the solution in Leroux's novel, even it is far from being "simple".
This 2003 film version is the 6th time the classic mystery novel has been made into film, and by far the best on this reviewers opinion, as long as what it comes to how faithfully Leroux's plot is being followed. The story pace is somewhat slow from the start, and doesn't seem to gather up just enough steam until we get to the end climax, and the long awaited solution - where the pace actually turns into rapid cuts and flashbacks alternating with the past and presence due to the requirements to portray the solution in such way that it maintains the needed undivided attention of the viewer. It's also worth mentioning that a viewer who doesn't know the solution, is during the movie given all the important clues and hints needed to solve the crime by themselves, or at least enables one to have suspicions in the right direction if you are an experienced viewer (or reader) of the genre, however even then, most viewers will still be stunned out of their socks upon learning the solution.
There are number of very perceptive scenes in this movie, setting a lighthearted atmosphere, almost like director doesn't want the viewer taking the story too seriously from the very start. An example of this is the opening title scene, with a toy train going on one incredibly long track for the duration of the opening, only to reach the end of the tracks as the actual movie begins to reveal another hilarious scene with a group of gentlemen passengers reading their newspapers on a train in a synchronised manner as they would in fact being intensely following the narrators voice. Because of these small, yet amusing tidbits, the film does have much lighter feel than Leroux's novel which is in fact quite dark, and reads almost like a horror story.
Director Bruno Podalydès as screenwriter has thankfully chosen to follow the original plot to the letter, which holds this movie together just as it is, somehow distant and elusive at points, but still constantly moving on (like a train indeed), however with slightly inconsistent cinematographic style, which ranges from really good to hastily ill- conceived.
The Director's brother Denis Podalydès plays the lead role as the journalist Joseph Rouletabille in highly commendable way, also doubles in the story as the primary amateur sleuth. His appearance as Rouletabille is curiously close enough to Leroux's description of him being "A small, thin man, endowed with unusually large head". Denis Podalydès manages to pull off his lead role with flying colours, including a charming slight lisp in his french accent. The character of Sainclair (routinely played by Jean-Noël Brouté), slightly dimwitted photographer sidekick of Rouletabille, has remarkable tendency not having any kind of presence in any of the scenes, even he is almost constantly behind, or at the side of Rouletabille. Most of the cast is compiled from some of the best actors that France has to offer, including legendary Michael Lonsdale as the old man Stangerson. But there's not much more really to say about the remaining cast, unless mentioning in the same breath the word "routinely what you would expect".
This movie is well worth watching, not only because of the jaw dropping solution (Interesting even if you don't like "who-dunnits"), but because the movie is just balanced enough, regardless of some minor issues with some of the actors and the earlier mentioned slow pace, which does feel somewhat boring at times, but all together very enjoyable watch and in it's own category a definite must see you just cannot afford to miss.
This 2003 film version is the 6th time the classic mystery novel has been made into film, and by far the best on this reviewers opinion, as long as what it comes to how faithfully Leroux's plot is being followed. The story pace is somewhat slow from the start, and doesn't seem to gather up just enough steam until we get to the end climax, and the long awaited solution - where the pace actually turns into rapid cuts and flashbacks alternating with the past and presence due to the requirements to portray the solution in such way that it maintains the needed undivided attention of the viewer. It's also worth mentioning that a viewer who doesn't know the solution, is during the movie given all the important clues and hints needed to solve the crime by themselves, or at least enables one to have suspicions in the right direction if you are an experienced viewer (or reader) of the genre, however even then, most viewers will still be stunned out of their socks upon learning the solution.
There are number of very perceptive scenes in this movie, setting a lighthearted atmosphere, almost like director doesn't want the viewer taking the story too seriously from the very start. An example of this is the opening title scene, with a toy train going on one incredibly long track for the duration of the opening, only to reach the end of the tracks as the actual movie begins to reveal another hilarious scene with a group of gentlemen passengers reading their newspapers on a train in a synchronised manner as they would in fact being intensely following the narrators voice. Because of these small, yet amusing tidbits, the film does have much lighter feel than Leroux's novel which is in fact quite dark, and reads almost like a horror story.
Director Bruno Podalydès as screenwriter has thankfully chosen to follow the original plot to the letter, which holds this movie together just as it is, somehow distant and elusive at points, but still constantly moving on (like a train indeed), however with slightly inconsistent cinematographic style, which ranges from really good to hastily ill- conceived.
The Director's brother Denis Podalydès plays the lead role as the journalist Joseph Rouletabille in highly commendable way, also doubles in the story as the primary amateur sleuth. His appearance as Rouletabille is curiously close enough to Leroux's description of him being "A small, thin man, endowed with unusually large head". Denis Podalydès manages to pull off his lead role with flying colours, including a charming slight lisp in his french accent. The character of Sainclair (routinely played by Jean-Noël Brouté), slightly dimwitted photographer sidekick of Rouletabille, has remarkable tendency not having any kind of presence in any of the scenes, even he is almost constantly behind, or at the side of Rouletabille. Most of the cast is compiled from some of the best actors that France has to offer, including legendary Michael Lonsdale as the old man Stangerson. But there's not much more really to say about the remaining cast, unless mentioning in the same breath the word "routinely what you would expect".
This movie is well worth watching, not only because of the jaw dropping solution (Interesting even if you don't like "who-dunnits"), but because the movie is just balanced enough, regardless of some minor issues with some of the actors and the earlier mentioned slow pace, which does feel somewhat boring at times, but all together very enjoyable watch and in it's own category a definite must see you just cannot afford to miss.
Tell Your Friends