OG- Reviews You Up, Nice and Slow!
 

Dead End (Written and Directed by Jean-Baptiste Andrea & Fabrice Canepa; 2003)

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Further proof that Hollywood just doesn't get it right anymore.

When it comes to the horror genre, simplicity is beyond best. It's the one genre where frequently the more feeble the material, the better it can be.

Dead End is an avatar of this principle. The plot is essentially just a concept film; family driving in a car, lost on a road that seems to not end, encountering things beyond explanation along the way. There isn't anything complicated about that and there shouldn't be anything complicated about that. It's a script that builds in on itself, instead of expanding outwards into new terrortory - yah, I said terrortory. It doesn't continue to introduce new elements to the fold, in the first 7 minutes it throws it's hands up and says, "this is what you're gonna get, so take it."

And I applaud the filmmakers for this. It's something seldom done in the genre these days. All too often do horror scripts follow a formulaic plot that spirals outwards instead of simply just constructing a boxed in realm of the film's reality and then letting the character's react realistically within it. Dare I say it is actually rather Shakespearean in this way? Oh, I dare. Shakespeare was known for creating a story, believable characters and then letting the play unfold as if the characters were realistically responding to the world created around them. This is exactly the scenario with Dead End. It avoids the most common pitfall of the genre; characters that act without logic, without interest and without motivation. It's something scriptwriters should pay considerably more attention to. Characters like these possess some kind of magical power that gives a +20 to any cinematic enjoyment. I cast magic characters!

And speaking of those characters, their actions may be realistically responsive, but if it weren't for the remarkably energetic performances of all the cast then all would be for naught. Ray Wise is the man in this movie. He is just badass without being over the top. He has created out of the father a man who is just trapped in an obviously humdrum life and transformed him into someone you just can't help but smile at every time he curses at his family. He is just great. Great, great, great. If I had to recommend the movie for any one single reason, it would be to just enjoy Ray Wise.

The rest of the cast is fantastic as well, Wise doesn't eclipse the few other actors there are, but they all compliment each other like they really were a family. It is the definition of on screen chemistry.

Now, the question you're asking, is it scary? Yes and No. No, it isn't balls-to-the-wall horror. It does fall prey to the optimism of the genre, but it’s excusable and I’ll get to that in a minute. The script is kinetic, always driving ahead and only pausing as long as necessary to make a point or get in a scare. It’s because of this that the film will never scare the **** out of you, but when it wants to it’ll keep your heart rate elevated to the point that you’re aware of it enough to say to yourself, “hey, this movie is kinda freaking me out.” I respect that. It knows it isn’t hardcore, so it does exactly what it should and keeps your blood pumping a little faster than normal throughout. I love that feeling. But I also have a wild imagination and so was consistently prepped for an entry into the negative space of the car windows or emerging ever so slightly from the edge of the woods. And that’ll freak my junk out more effectively than what you do see.

As for the film falling victim to the optimism of the genre. This is true, but it is appropriately so. It doesn’t establish throughout the rest of the movie that it should be taken as the hardest of horror, so no pretending means no disappointment in the end. Oh, and worth an important note for most viewers, there isn't a whole lot of gore, it really does leave a sizeable portion up to the imagination (as it should), but what blood there is isn't over the top and there are no CGI scares. Take that for what it's worth, but it's worth a lot to me.

That said, I would have preferred a different ending. Not solely because I would have preferred a darker ending, but simply because the ending has an air of unreliability to it. It attempts to mollify the question that the movie never asks, but obviously the viewer will (“what exactly is happening here?”) and I felt that wasn’t really necessary. I liked that the movie wasn’t raising question after question. I liked that it turned its back to the whole issue, so when the events of the last two or three minutes of the film hit the viewer, or me at least, they feel out of place.

All in all, this is a movie that strips away the gloss and glamour prevalent to the genre as of late, establishes the concept and then happily throws what it’s got left at the wall. Yes, it doesn’t all stick, but the little things that don’t are more than shadowed by the much larger portions that do. Dead End is worth your time and money. Rent it and watch it by yourself or with a date, but not in a group. A group would kill the pleasant intimacy that makes the film work beyond its bounds.

I'm hesitant to say instant classic, because obviously it won't be universally so, but it deserves that accolade in my book. Check it out.

4.5 out of 5, which on my scale equates to a pretty damn rocking time.

The one sentence review: Dead End is a fun ass genre flick that never pretends to climb Mt. Everest and thus leaves the viewer with more than just a feeling of simple satisfaction, but one of raw enjoyment.

Great review OG. I probably would never pick this up on my own, and now I have to give it a shot.....

I dig the new sig too....

Thanks, you should deffinetely check it out one night when you're looking for a fun 88 minutes. It's available at your local Blockbuster or Hollywood Video.

I didn't even touch on the tremendeous sense of humor the movie has. Initially alot of the jokes come between the chemistry of the younger brother and the sister's fiance, but as immature as they can be they fall perfectly in line and make for some solid chuckles.

or you if you want, netflix probably offers it too :D

It does.

Excellent review, I'm tempted to see this movie now.

Phone
 

You should. :)

Phone (Byeong-ki Ahn, 2002)

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

I'll make this brief because I wasn't very impressed with it. I'm a huge fan of the Asian ghost film. These days they're the only thing being produced that does actually scare me. It's a mixture of the over use of negative space, harsh contrasts and that simple -transcedental across every entry- ghost that is just a blue skinned girl, snow white eye balls, and black hair. That ghost can be thrown anywhere and it's pretty damn effective, especially if it isn't actually moving, which is the first (and what I found to be the second most effective freak out in the film) tension tester in the movie.

But even with the barebones, but proven to work, ghost, the movie doesn't really go anywhere. The plot revolves around an investigative reporter who has just finished a successful piece on sex offenders and is being stalked so she changes her phone number and moves out to a house by herself. The new number is, let's just say special, and she starts recieving calls consisting only of what I can describe as nails on a chalkboard performed by someone who doesn't actually know how to make the sound. The woman starts to "unravel" the mystery around the whole thing as people around her die and/or become slightly possesed. I use quotation marks because the plot really doesn't 'unravel', it kind of just falls apart. The narrative is broken into flashbacks as to what really happened to cause the whole haunting, but often times they're completely out of place and are actually more annoying than helpful simply because they come out of nowhere. And by the time the plot does fully reveal itself to the viewer (though it certainly isn't impossible to discern it prior to), which is of course right up to the end, there isn't too much concern for any of the characters. I found myself not caring at all what was going to happen and simply was waiting out the rest of the running time.

Though the film isn't entirely without benefit. The sound mix on the Tartan USA disc is perfectly balanced, which I found rather enjoyable. And the little girl in it is actually a pretty damn good actress for her age. She shows more range in 60 seconds than any of the actors do throughout the movie. And she has one damn cool fit of screaming in a museum that is enjoyably laughable.

Final say? Don't bother. There are much better entries to the Asian ghost arena.

1 out of 5 stars.

The one sentence review: Screw Phone and rent The Eye instead.

Dead Birds (Alex Turner, 2004)

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

I always check out the quotes they decide to put on the cover/back of a DVD. I had been looking forward to Dead Birds anyway, just because of what I read of it in Fangoria, but I was even more eager when I read on the back, "The savviest American horror flick since Cabin Fever." Cabin Fever is a personal favorite of mine. I think it was a milestone in modern American horror and couldn't agree more as per how "savvy" it was, so imagine my delight to read this on the back. Granted, I've never heard of "Eye Weekly", but hey, anything comprable to Cabin Fever gets a nod in my book.

Not so much with actually watching the movie.

I dug the atmosphere in the begining. I like horror set out of the present and it kicked off to a decent start, though admittedly the believablity of the shootout in the begining of the film was rather low. However, as you can tell from the above picture, the creature design was actually pretty damn good and we actually get our first look at one relatively early in the film. But then it goes away for a while, as do the scares. The film becomes overly reliant on the imagination of the viewer without actually providing a reason for the imagination to take over. This leads to a rather uneventful film, even if things are going on it, everything seems anti-climactic.

But again, the creature design was pretty freaky, HOWEVER, they're actually not that freaky when they're in motion. Get a glance of one in a still frame and it's rather haunting, but once it starts moving it looses it's coolness. And as scary as those creatures are, they never create any sense of dread. There is no fear as to what these creatures are going to do to anyone. I'm actually not even sure the writers had anything in mind when it comes to what the creatures will actually do to people. Hell, at one point a creature causes a person to turn and jump into the air and they actually just dissolve into a green cloud. What the ****? They've got teeth, use 'em.

The cast are all more than capable of their parts. Patrick Fugit is actually rather hard to adjust to initially, due to the charm he brings to the films he has previously been in, but once he has his climax he's pretty solid. That being said, they aren't given a whole lot to do in this movie. It's reflective of the atmosphere the filmmakers are trying to create, but I longed for some dialogue that wasn't an exchange of 10 words between two people.

I did like the ending, probably much more so than I should have. But overall, the movie didn't do much for me. Maybe it is because I had higher than average hopes, but I really think it's just because the film relied too much on "scares" that were unoriginal in concept and lacking in execution.

I'm reminded of a mini-review I read in Maxim years ago of Tool's fantastic CD Lateralus. They (wrongfully, IMO) said that Lateralus "moved strongly sideways, but rarely soared." The same can be said of Dead Birds. It can deffinetely ride what it has going on, but what it has going on isn't anything to write home about.

3 out of 5, it'd probably be more enjoyable if you caught it half way through at 1am on HBO. I'm probably being more harsh than I should, but I was let down by all the potential. It is only 91 minutes, give it a look if you like your horror paced like the beat of an old man's dying heart.

The One Sentence Review: Dead Birds is a film one should only actively seek out if they either live in a farm during the Civil War or scare way too easily.

Cool reviews man. I haven't seen these, but I own The Eye. If it is that much better than these, I will just watch it again, as I love that flick. So...would you recommend some other Asian horror that is on the level with The Eye? You know, I am looking for an OG rating of 3 or above here.... ;)

Sadly I haven't come across one that I found on the same level as The Eye. Ju-On was fairly close and had some pretty concrete tension going on, but The Eye has the scares and the pure enjoyment going for it. I still have yet to see Koma, which is supposed to be pretty good, and when I go return these today I'll probably grab Doppleganger and something else.

IZO (Takashi Miike, 2004)

http://www.animecastle.com/tbimages/21808.md.jpg

This movie is amazing. This movie is stunning. This movie is poetry.

First, let me precursor with, I am not a huge fan of Takashi Miike. I've got a ton of respect for him simply because he can churn out 5 films a year, but I'm not a huge fan of the self indulgent violence. But IZO, IZO is a collosal work of existentialism in its purest form.

To explain the narrative of the film would be redundant. Miike has crafted a film whose viewing experience is like that of a snowflake, no two viewers will ever have the same take on it. This film is intended to be incredibly personal to each and every viewer. Each vignette has it's own meaning, entirely dependent on how the viewer percieves it. Miike establishes a realm in which your emotions and reactions are supposed to exist, but how exactly and the degree of each reaction is entirely left up to the viewer. But man, I really loved what Miike created here. The whole debate of the film as to IZO, what IZO is and how IZO came to be is utterly fantastic. It belongs in a psychology or a sociology class.

That said, the film is not catered entirely to the individual and is suspect, voluntairly, to a universal commentary on humanity. However, the viewers concurrence or opposition to the messages of the film is left entirely up to how they interpret them.

I could literally write pages about each and every vignette in this film. I could write without end about how each and every subtlety snowballs into one grandoise sermon about the corrosive and blissfully arrogant - to the point of innocence - nature of the human psyche. But I won't, because I don't want to influence anyone else's take on the film.

This was a film where I was incredibly tempted to actually take notes while watching it. Take note as to what was on screen in contrast as to how I interpreted it. I simply cannot think of a film in recent memory that has evoked such a response in me. As much as everyone else loved it, I thought Waking Life was an incredibly average philosphical piece and I think IZO beats it to a pulp.

I found the violence to be subservient to every other aspect of the film, which is not characteristic of Miike's work. It's still there, but it isn't the showcase of the film. The violence is not the dressing of each scene, but an actual characteristic of the personality of man kind. I was actually surprised as to how the movie evolved. Initially I thought that two hours of such a broken and seemingly naive narrative would be an endurance test, but it was far from it and I found myself enjoying the movie a helluva lot more than I thought I would during the first 15 minutes.

It certainly isn't for everyone. My bet is that most people will actually hate the hell out of this film, but I dug right into it and devoured it. To see it is to see what the movie says about you.

4.5 out of 5 says I about the IZO.

The One Sentence Review: Though not for everyone, IZO is a remarkable and absolute work of art which will illicit emotions reflective of the temerity of the viewer and if given the proper attention will not fade quickly into memory.

Io non ho paura (Gabriele Salvatores, 2003)

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

I'm Not Scared is not a thriller - not in the traditional sense of the term. It is a tale of adolescent bravery. It is not a tale of innocence lost, but innocence lived. And it is one damn fine tale at that!

Giuseppe Cristiano, who plays the ten year old Michele, is the star of the film - literally. He shines through in every single frame of the movie. For a thirteen your old this actor is just absolutely wonderful. He is an ocean of adorability and the viewer will latch onto him right away. From the moment he finds Filippo at the bottom of the hole to the last shot of the film he is the embodiment of youthful curiousity, of innocence, of times gone by, of the child we all secretly long to be, wandering around the isolated hills of Italy in search of discoveries to fill the vast imagination of a child. And as he digs deeper into the mystery of the frail Filippo we as the viewer become attached to the boys to a degree that is incredibly hard to achieve in a film dealing with such ages. The actors and characters have to bring to the film a level of maturity beyond what we as the viewer are accustomed to and the actors in this film, not just the children, bring it by the truck load.

The charisma and respect for the peace of life this film has is astounding. The family dynamic is fantastic. We are treated to such displays off affection offset by glimmers of frustration, but at the end of the day this is a family we don't just wish to care about, but really do care about. The father is so charming and so paternal to Michele that will plant a smile on your face anytime he mentions arm wrestling.

The "thriller" aspect of the film doesn't come from the kidnapping plot, but from the potential for implosion of the loveable family. We don't want to see anything bad happen to Michele and yet we want him to return to the hole day after day, we want him to risk it, we want him to prove that he isn't scared because if he isn't scared, why should we be? At least I wasn't. I wasn't 'scared' by anything in the movie, but I was distraught by the idea that such innocence shared across the small village would be shattered by this haphazard attempt at making money that we are presented with.

And by God the cinematography is just phenomenal. One must question if it is possible to film an ugly scene in the countryside of Italy. Is that even possible? Judging from <i>I'm Not Scared</i>, I submit that it is not.

This film is just rich with visuals. The attention to detail shows in every frame of the movie. The film never confuses their way of life with poverty, it simply embraces it for what it is. It doesn't beg for sympathy, but causes the viewer to offer their respect for such life without being solicited. This is an accomplishment in and of itself. But above all, Gabriele Salvatores never lets the viewer mistake the films portrayl of unbridled innocence with ignorant bliss, which for me is one of the defining characteristics that makes such tales of youth so loveable. It nails it.

4 out of 5

The One Sentence Review: I'm Not Scared is a showcase of great talent, an exhibition of unshamed innocence and a film that'll massage your heart strings and tickle your desire for the preservation of youth.

Three... Extremes

http://i3.yesasia.com/assets/imgs/vi...1003825737.jpg

I'll review each entry individually, but beforehand I'd just like to say I want to see more compliations like this. It felt like one of those old collections of Scary Stories I read as a kid. These three films weren't scary, but I loved the vibe.

Box directed by Takashi Miike, 2004

http://66.240.136.85/catalog/images/three2_6.jpg

Takashi Miike is certainly one of the most cohesive aueters of the past decade of filmmaking. Enjoy his movies or not, each contains a blend of perversion that is surprisingly unique. I'm not an all accepting fan of Miike, the perverse nature of every film exceeds what I'd accept as entertainment (though if you scroll up you can read my rather cryptic, but ultimately fond review of IZO), so I don't have any bias when it comes to his films. Box sucked. The story is of a woman who dreams of an event in her youth that resulted in the death of her sister, whom she performed with. We as the viewer are treated to this woman trying to cope with this dream, which may or may not be a dream, but by the time of the revelation of it all the story has lost all cohesion. It is an understandable story, it's just a pointless and fruitless story.

The visuals though are worth note. The etheral movements of the camera are perfectly reminescent of a dream. The use (or lack their of) of sound was dead on, creating dread or confusion when it needed to. The look of the short keeps you watching, but the story is incredibly amateur.

1.5 out of 5

Dumplings directed by Fruit Chan, 2004

Easily the best out of the three shorts. Fruit Chan, the only of the three directors whose work I haven't seen before, created a haunting and stomach churning film. I felt it lacked the proper social commentary it kept hinting at, but hey, I don't think the intention was to enlighten people as to the desperation caused by aging and the fixation on anti-aging, I'm pretty sure it was just to gross you out.

The story is about a has-been actress who goes to a woman known for her amazing dumplings. We quickly catch on that these dumplings are intended to keep the eater youthful looking and that there is something not quite right about the ingredients, but I like how the story took it's time revealing it's origins. It didn't draw attention to the fact that a woman was eating aborted fetuses, but it did emphasize that a woman was eating aborted fetuses and didn't care about it. I won't get into the rest of the short because I don't want to ruin the bite it has, but it did not pull it's punches and I respect that. Though just before the end there was a quick scene that had me slightly confused as to why it was in there, but oh well.

I've gotta check out more of Fruit Chan's work, because if it's as unflinching as Dumplings was, I will be a huge fan.

4 out of 5

Cut directed by Chan-Wook Park, 2004

http://66.240.136.85/catalog/images/three2_4.jpg

I think Chan-Wook Park is an amazing director. Oldboy is a helluva stylistic entry to the revenge genre (I'll be watching Symapthy For Mr. Vengeance later tonight, so I'll reserve comment on that for now) and the trailer for Three... Extremes that got me interested in it in the first place was for Cut, but it wasn't anything special.

For American audiences, they'll probably just see it as some kind of rip-off on Saw, but it isn't. A famous director is kidnapped, put on his movie set, where his wife is suspended in front of a piano by dozens of wires. He wakes up and is tethered to the wall by a gigantic band of elastic. The kidnapper goes into his monologue about how he is doing this because he is a poor man, and a bad man, and he hates that the director is a rich man and a good man. I liked this because it wasn't the typical "killer punishes victims for their sins", but was actually "killer punishes victims for their lack of sins". The killer will chop off a finger of the wife every five minutes until the director kills a child strapped to a couch on the other side of the room.

The style is rich and I loved the cinematography, but the story just fell apart at the end. On top of that, before the story even did fall apart, the characters lost my interest and I didn't sympathize for either the child, the wife, or the director. I expected more from Park and was severely let down. But hey, it looked great.

3 out of 5

Overall, it's worth a watch just because it does carry that fun vibe of an anthology of extreme tales, but save for Dumplings, the film isn't anything special.

On a whole, 2.5 out of 5

The One Sentence Review - Not a grand slam as should have been expected, but if you check it out, check it out simply for the well above average entry that Dumplings is.

It should be clear by now my "reviews" aren't actual critiques, just my gutteral responses to the films I watch.

Sin City, directed by Frank Miller and Robert Rodriguez, 2005.

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/im...53/1000868.jpg

Sin City marks the first movie I have ever exited a theater, walked through the lobby and directly back into line to buy a second ticket and watch it again.

Frank Miller has created characters, stories and a style that are deserving of far beyond the feeble praise I can muster up. And Robert Rodriguez has brought to the screen characters, stories and a style that are deserving of far beyond the feeble praise I can muster up. I never read the graphic novels, which is no outstanding claim because I never read graphic novels at all. I thought about picking them up months ago, but wanted to go into the movie fresh. Now I regret picking them back up and feel like a tool because I'm going to be one of those 10,000 kids who goes asking for copies of each at their local comic book store just because of the movie. But **** ego. Either way, this review is independent of the original material, so forgive me if I refer to things as if they existed because of the movie and not because of the novels.

While I thought the Big, Fat Kill segment of the film was the best, Marv is one of the most romantic characters to ever grace the silver screen - in any capacity. And Mickey Rourke is one helluva voice actor. The camera treats him like he is of divine origin and the audience responds accordingly. I haven't been in a theater in which people have responded more positively to a character than they did to Marv. He is the sweetest ogre. Hell, I wish I was half the romantic as Marv. I wish I was half the romantic as any of the characters in Sin City are.

The writing is so absorbent to the slightest of nuance and results in characters, that are in my opinion, deeper than that of any characters written in the scripts for any of the films nominated for best screenplay this year, last year or the past five years! Each and every one, save for the background villains who exist only to unexist, is crafter with such passion that any given five lines of dialogue paint an entire life's story. The economy of words here is frankly unparalled in similar material these days.

The technology used was a vast improvement over the recent attempt and obviously achieved the exact style imagined by Miller, we all knew that from the first trailer. There really isn't much that I can add here which will illuminate anything. If you can't appreciate the style here, you don't belong in the business of appreciating things.

Which brings me to another point. Sin City is one of those movies where I walk out of the theater and listen to the audience's reactions and think to myself, "wow, 80% of these people are morons." I don't care if you didn't enjoy the movie as much as I did. I don't care if you wouldn't watch it twice in a row. But when I hear bull**** such as "you could so tell Quentin Tarantino had alot to do with that movie" and "I don't get it, what was it about?", I wish for the ability to erase people from the fabric of time and space.

"I don't get it, what was it about?"?!?! It was about life you twit. It was about love. It was about loss. It was about passion. It was about dedication. It was about respect. Apparently It was about everything unrecognizeable from your own life. I always come off as some hateful, egotistical prick in my rants about the idiocy of some people, but I really am a nice, accepting guy; some people are just stupid.

I haven't even talked about the cast as a whole, but if the sheer volume of chemistry exploding at the scenes in this wonderous test-tube of a movie needs to be pointed out, then read a couple sentences back.

5 out of 5

The One Sentence Review - Clearly the culminated birth child of minds actually concerned with cinematic appreciation, Sin City is and was the birth and death of a singularity of perfection that will remain peerless in the world of cinema until the end of time.

"Hey! There is no settling down! This is blood for blood and by the gallons. This is the old days, the bad days, the all or nothing days. They're back!"

Not a fan then?

Maybe so, but they are great reviews :). I can't say I agree with you on Sin City, but great reviews. Actually I have been bothered by the fact that after greatly anticipating that movie I ended up not really liking the film and I am left wondering what I missed that everyone who loves the movie saw in it. please don't erase me! :(

Hehe blib, that sentence was rather cryptic. I loved the hell out of Sin City. I'm actually going to do another write up on it soon, which hopefully will be more enlightening for you, Strummer. :)

As an afterthought, I am now finding that as I think back on the movie I can appreciate it more. It was like a punch in the gut in the and it was one of the best looking movies I have ever seen, and I did like how Bruce Wilis' story tied together at the end, I just wasn't enamored with the characters the way you were but the film does fulfill its purpose well. Don't you think that Michael Madsen should have had a bigger role? IMO he showed in Reservoir Dogs that he is great as the type of character that this movie was overflowing with.

PS: damnit! I can't get IZO off of blockbuster.com, but I can and will get The EYE. Perhaps you could recommend some other movies you would consider similar to Sin City in some way, because I like its concept and would like to see if i could get into movies like it, or if they are just not my cup of tea in general. Also you said you do not really like the indulgent violence of Takashi Miike's films but to me the violence in Sin City was quite indulgent. Did you not see it that way?

GREAT review of Izo. I've got a copy, it's sitting here waiting for me to watch it.

I do agree that he was great in Reservoir Dogs and would fit right in in the universe of Sin City, but I don't think his character should have had a bigger role; although I'm pretty sure you ment that he should have had a character with a bigger role because he can play 'em like they should be played. I really didn't like Madsen in Sin City. The film wore it's cheesyness (or as Holden put it best, it's B-movieness) on its sleeve, but Madsen felt like he was just punching in the clock here. To me it felt like he was a stage actor in a high school play, spouting out his lines with rehersed, but poor delivery. It didn't ruin the movie or anything and I'm sure it was intentional, but it rubbed me the wrong initially.

As for movie recommendations like Sin City, I'll have to put some more thought into it and get back to you. Holden or other members would be better at recommending the classic noir film or films with such self-contained passion and vibrancy. Though it doesn't fit the bill perfectly, if you've got a good sense of humor I recommend checking out Palmetto, which is a hilarious para-noir that should provide some solid entertainment (though not anywhere near the level of Sin City).

And as for the violence in Sin City... It was chock full of violence and dismemberment, but it was so stylized that it wasn't vulgar or perverse. The violence in it functioned as either a source of humor, shock or to show the viewer the roots of a character. Whereas in a Takashi Miike film the violence harps very directly on the intensity of it. If someone gets stabbed in a Takashi Miike film, we don't just see a quick cut of a knife going into someone, we see the knife slowly penetrate the skin and hear the sound of every blood vessel spilling open and every skin cell ripping apart. It really is far, far more graphic. Miike does this because one, it's characteristic of him and his films, and two, to not pull it's punches when trying to make the point that mankind is a violent, raping species. But frankly, it's just gross.

Thanks and awesome man, you'll have to let me know what you think of it. You and I share remarkably similar taste in films... :D

Right, that's what I meant.

Yeah, I guess it was an expression of violence as high art, and I liked that concept in Kill Bill, but here it didn't do anything for me, besides make me laugh at the outrageousness a few times. In Sin City they just seemed to be trying to hard to hard to make extreme violence cool. I loved the setting of the story and visually it was as stunning as Jessica Alba ;) , but I wasn't too keen on the characters most of whom I couldn't help but see as bland run of the mill archetypes. I guess that was somewhat intended as it is basically a B-movie or genre film or whatever you would like to call it but maybe they could have developed the characters to be a little more three dimensional. Sorry if my comments are harsh, but I am still bothered by this situation, never before have I so badly wanted to like a movie that I didn't actually like. I know there must be more to it than I picked up on but I can't put my finger on it.

Cryptic like a fox! .......(I don't know what that means.)

;)

The only thing I can possibly deduce from what you have said is that you were unable to really sink into the dialogue. Maybe you were too mesmerized by the look of the film. Maybe you were with friends that wouldn’t shut the **** up. Who knows? What I do know is this: The people I’ve talked to have all said basically the same thing; if they loved the film, they talked about the amazing depth and richness of all the dialogue. If they didn’t like it a lot; they never mentioned the dialogue or thought it was corny or stupid. The heart of the film is certainly Miller’s pen. What his characters say always has more meaning and power than their actions.

While I was watching the film, I was so blown away by the lavish dialogue which I wasn’t even close to being prepared for. There were times when a character would say something in ten words that could easily encompass ten years worth of life and its lessons. I found it humorous and a little sad sometimes while I was watching it because there were times, especially with Marv, that what was said was so moving and powerful that my eyes would begin to tear up. Yet, half the audience laughed at these moments. All I could do was sit and think, “All those people don’t get it.” If they got it, they wouldn’t be laughing, because there was nothing even remotely funny about what was just said. They just weren’t prepared for that kind of depth, I guess. I dunno.

If you get the chance to see it again, please do so. Pay closer attention to what these people say as they are introduced and how nearly everything has meaning and significance. You’ll understand what I mean if you really listen to the opening sequence when Hartnett is there to kill the girl. He literally tells us a terribly sad love story. He is not just a heartless killer at all, but a hopeless romantic who offers peace and love to his victims. His heart bleeds alongside theirs, but in the end, he knows he is still a professional. Either that, or he is lost in his own world of make believe, and he is nothing other than cold and ruthless and it’s all a game to him. Either way…what he says and does…IS NOT A JOKE!!! Yet, nearly everyone in the audience had this big guffaw, like it was a punch line or something. There were only two or three times throughout the film, where there really was a gag going on. But, think about it…how many times did you hear the audience laugh throughout the picture? I bet more than two or three times. I did laugh though, When Madsen ends what he’s saying with, “…and you got a bum ticker.” Because that was just so damn silly the way he delivered it. :laugh:

Anyway…I love, love, love, this film. I want to see it twenty times before tomorrow. I want to see it fifty times before the week is over…but I know I’ll have to settle for a couple more times. Sin City is amazing. It has the best use of CGI I have ever seen in a mainly CGI film. It has some of the most exceptional acting in this type of film that I’ve ever seen. It has incredibly powerful, poignant, and heartfelt dialogue. And above all, it’s mostly Miller with a splash of Rodriguez…any other way and it would have likely failed.


I forgot to mention that I liked your review of this one. I haven't seen any of the other films you've reviewed so far, but this one I have...and we felt basically the same way about it. Great suspense film, and great review. This is one of my favorite threads now, and I really hope you keep it up.

At times like this I wish we all lived close to one another so we could each have other people around who also wanted to see the film 10 more times before it leaves theaters. I am going to try to go out and catch it again tomorrow night if possible.... To add to what others have said, this **** was spot on to the source material, and the viloence was portrayed as it was in the comics... This film is really Sin City come to life....


Also, after all this time at MoFo, I had finally found an avatar ifelt worth changing over to, byt Slay already has it going.... Maybe there is a Yellow Bastard avatar out there somewhere ;)

In Your Face!!! :D

You can use this one if you want to.

Aye, Aye cap'n! I've actually been pretty much writing the reviews immediately after I watched the movie. I really like doing it, but I fell into a lull after Sympathy For Mr. Vengeance, so I'll write that one up today and head on over to Video 21 to see what else they can manifest from my hopes. :)

And word up, Sedai and Slay, I feel like watching Sin City until I pass out. I've only seen in twice so far and feel inadequate because of it! That movie is heroine.

We're so alike sometimes...it's downright scary. It's like you're my little sister, or sumptin'.

Weird.

Can't wait to hear your thoughts on this one, considering your love for Oldboy.

Wow thanks Slay! You got it. You hit the nail on the head. I was too distracted by everything else to closley follow the dialogue. I will definitley have to see this again(probably many times). I get it now! You have made my day. :D :D :D

I have reached enlightenment :)

Sympathy For Mr. Vengeance, Directed by Chan-Wook Park, 2002

http://www.basement-films.net/Peter/images/sympathy.jpg

The first entry in Chan-Wook Park's revenge trilogy (the second being Oldboy and the third Sympathy for Lady Vengeance) is actually rather estranged from it's successor. It's not as kinetic and fun as Oldboy, ultimately leaving me with a feeling of emptiness. I can't say if this is a direct result of my expectations, but it probably was.

Which is why I'm torn on this film. I respect the hell out of it and in form and function it is actually a better film than Oldboy, however, it's not a film I could watch repeatedly for entertainment. I love the art of filmmaking, but at the end of the day I want a movie to either mean something to me or at the very least entertain the hell out of me. Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance isn't a depressing movie and it isn't necessairly a shocking film (though I'm sure many will find moments rather cringe inducing), it's a lecture on how revenge completely consumes a person. It may be a much more profound lecture than that of Oldboy, but Oldboy is a much more enjoyable one. I have a feeling those who didn't like Oldboy outright will love Sympathy.

I want to say I enjoyed it, but I'm really not sure I did. It's a damn fine film, it really is, but it was missing something crucial to bump it up more into my memory. I can't exactly place my finger on it considering how incredibly well constructed it was, but it's been bugging the hell out of me. It's like when you're walking through an art museum and you see a painting or sculpture and you're truly impressed by the skill that went into making it, you love the aesthetics of it, you like everything about it, but you just don't care that much and move on to the next piece after 20 seconds.

This film really will make you feel sympathy for the vengeance consumed man. Well, I should say vengeance consumed men as the plot focuses on two individuals seeking revenge. The first being the deaf and dumb Ryu whose sister needs a kidney transplant and the second being the father of the little girl Ryu kidnaps to hold for ransom to afford said kidney transplant. You become instantly sympathetic for Ryu, who from the first minutes of the film is clearly and blissfully isolated from the world around him. He is ignorant of the bureaucracy of the world and tries his hardest to get things done despite his obvious limitations. So when things start going horribly, horribly wrong for Ryu you really do feel for him.

The film is packed to the brim with nuance, both in acting and set design. One particular thing I really liked were several bedroom shots of Ryu and his girlfriend sitting adjacently on the bed with a mirror between the two. It took me a bit to actually realize that the mirror was there so that they could look into it and see each other doing sign language. It's not very important, but it's details like that that introduce a whole new level of mastery, in my nerdy opinion.

Another thing I did love about Sympathy and about Oldboy is that the cause for revenge isn't treated like it is in most films. Extreme events occur in the films, but they're not treated as such. They aren't over glorified and it's a huge boon for the film. Neither film treats the viewer like a moron who needs everthing spelled out or bolded for them. It presents them matter of factly, just as they would be in real life, which gives the film a surreal feeling that nature is just unwinding itself.

It's a very sad story and watching it is like watching a trainwreck in slow motion. But just like a passenger in a car passing that trainwreck, once it's out of sight it's out of mind.

A bold 3.5 out of 5

The One Sentence Review - Sympathy For Mr. Vengeance is a wonderfully made film with a story that'll beat your emotions to new levels of empathy, but, unfortunately, in the end I was rather indifferent to the whole thing.

Arahan, directed by Seung-wan Ryoo, 2004

http://i3.yesasia.com/assets/imgs/vi...1003738908.jpg

There was a subtitle for this film, something along the lines of Suburban Action Masters or something, but it's not on the title of the box and seeing as you can't skip the previews on the disc, I don't have the energy to look it up again.

I love martial arts films. There is just something about watching someone beat the hell out of someone else with extreme skill that gets my blood pumping.

But I'm sick and tired of seeing people fly across the screen on invisible wires. I don't want my fighting to be a carefully choreographed ballet. I want it to be a raw beat down. I want bones broken and I want blood.

I picked up this movie just because the guy who writes the blurbs for the back of the cases at Video 21 (since most of their Asian section is imported) wrote that it was a "beastly action flick". I'm all for a "beastly action flick", but screw this. If it's not going to be even moderately serious it needs to be so over the top that it's just funny (see Stephen Chow films). I have a feeling that in Korea this film would be marketed to the young teen audience, so it isn't a fault of the film, but it just didn't do anything for me.

The CGI used was actually above average for the CGI used in such fantasy-fight flicks, but it still was rather laughable at times. But it was chock full of cliche camera movements and fight choreography. The only thing original about it was the story of Tao masters working normal jobs in the inner city because no one has an interest in martial arts anymore. Hell, even that may not be all too original (though it was the first time I had seen it).

And my god was the hero of the film innnnnnnnnncredibly annoying. He was playing the bumbling idiot who can never get things right, always rushing in etc, etc, but it just went past the line and became nails on a blackboard anytime he opened his mouth.

1 out of 5

The One Sentence Review - Rent it for your tweens, Arahan isn't even a joke enjoyable by adults.

Ong-Bak: Muay Thai Warrior, Directed by Prachya Pinkaew, 2003

http://images1.moviemarket.co.uk/lib...ers/503470.jpg

I had to watch some real ass kicking after the dissapointment of Arahan and I knew Tony Jaa would supply, though not so much the second time around as the first.

Some crazy old guy with an electronic voice box has a fetish for collecting the heads of statues from villages. Ting's (Tony Jaa) village falls prey to this odd collector and Ting heads into the city to return the head before the village falls into incredibly bad luck and everyone gets the clap or something.

But you don't need to know that, just know that the rules of gravity do not apply to Tony Jaa. The man is a machine. I know someone who was training in Muay Thai, so I'm familiar with the style, but it never ceases to be a source of awe. To my knowledge there was not a single wire setup in this entire movie. If Tony Jaa dashes down the street on people's shoulders, he's really doing it. None of it looks fake and the timing is perfect. On top of that, several of the films key fights take place in doors and the obvious lack of proper and consistent lighting setups gives the film another ace up its sleeve when it comes to continuing reality.

Though towards the end chest padding becomes more noticeable as it seems like Jaa is kicking people wearing kevlar vests, but who cares? I'll take someone really getting kicked in a padded chest over someone faking a kick to the chest any day of the week. The double edits (highlighting impressive moves twice in a row) can be kind of annoying some times, but any annoyance instantly vanishes because then you realize he just jumped 8 feet in the air.

Oh snap!

3.5 out of 5

The One Sentence Review - It's not my favorite martial arts movie, that title goes to Jet Li's Fist of Legend, but if you like your action raw Ong-Bak will more than deliver.


Oh and Edit: If Tony Jaa is going to be the villain in the new Die Hard, as is currently rumored, that is going to be one crazy ass flying knee to the head.

Great reviews of Sympathy For Mr. Vengeance and Ong-Bak.

Side note: I'm eagerly awaiting Sympathy For Lady Vengeance. Any idea when it's supposed to be released?

Thanks :) And nope, dunno. IMDB doesn't even have a listing for it yet. AICN did, however, recently post a translated Q&A about it, but no release date mentioned :-\
http://aint-it-cool.com/display.cgi?id=19798

The best part of Ong Bak was that retarded Aussie wannabe-pro wrestler, with the greasy-mop hairdo:

"C'mon, Thailand, I spit on your national passtime and let my dingos sleep on your flag. G'daaaay Mayte."

I guess it's not really worth commenting on the stupidity of the story and characterizations. The ghettoized soundtrack on the localized version was whack though.

Sympathy for Vengeance is pretty good. My only complaint would be that it gets a bit boring to watch, they could have been a bit more imaginative with the camera, rather than just situating it some place and waiting for the actors to do something in front of it. Like you said though the revenge plot is really frustrating to watch in a good way. I don't think I cared about any of the characters, really, but I liked how most of the characters have no idea what's going on or see things but are just unable to stop it from going bad. I think the ending worked out nicely and the guy who played the deaf mute was great. Don't think I'd watch it again though.

I saw that Joint Security Area seems to be playing in N.Y. last weekend, but saw Steam Boy and a couple Marx Bros. movies instead.

Nice reviews, -Og. Keep em coming.

A Boy And His Dog, Directed By L. Q. Jones, 1975

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

I loved the hell out of this movie. Holden recommended it in passing years ago, but as usual I didn't heed his advice with any speed. I knew Video 21 had a VHS copy, but I don't have a VCR at my apartment, however the other day I went to go return some movies and thought to myself, "man I hope they have A Boy and His Dog on DVD." And bam, there it was on the shelf! Haven't seen it there since as long as I've been going there. I willed it into existence.

What a great, great movie. It certainly is my favorite post-apocolyptic story. It is a perfect blend of fantasy and destroyed reality. It's got every miniscule detail required for enjoyment completely nailed. It's the perfect length and the perfect laughs.

Blood, the dog, was turned into a better actor than half the child actor's I've ever seen. Seriously kids, get it together or dogs will take your place! The voice acting was great and Don Johnson was surprisingly very charming and gave a spot on performance. Reminded me alot of a young Matthew McConaughey.

The bleak portrayl of the future wastelands was as expected, but there is just something incredibly charming about little shanty towns set up in the middle of nowhere. Obviously it's anchronistic to say that it reminded me of my all time favorite computer game, Fallout (listen to the opening for Fallout 2, I love it and hits me with a wave of nostalgia any time I listen to it), but it did. And I have a huge emotional attachment to those god damn games, which just doubled my enjoyment of this film. They share the same great sense of humor and sense of innocence in the new world order after the bombs drop.

I actually don't feel like writing up much else because it wouldn't be productive. It'd be like interviewing a 7 year old as to why he likes the taste of candy. Or a crack addict why he smokes rocks.

Crack ain't gonna smoke itself, sheeeit.

4.5 out of 5

The One Sentence Review - A Boy and His Dog is an absolutely wonderful tale of a very special relationship between, well, a boy and his dog and is perfectly quirky and remarkably enjoyable for anyone with half a brain.

great review OG, I haven't seen this movie yet but its on the list...

More people should listen to me.

Yah, yah, yah. The little kid never listens to the old man. Lesson learned. :p

The Blue Planet - Seas of Life - Part 2, Open Ocean / The Deep, 2001

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

In the interest of full disclosure, this is one of my all time favorite DVDs to watch, it is my favorite documentary, the Baltimore Aquarium is one of my favorite places on the planet and I am completely consumed with a fascination strong enough to categorize as an addiction when it comes to the oceanic, especially concerning any kind of cephalopod.

The Blue Planet series, a co-production between the BBC and the Discovery Channel, took five years to make and cost over $10 million dollars to make. That is an epic dedication to capture things only a handful of people know even the smallest information about, and hell some things were even seen for the first time ever during the filming. It is the most extensive production of its kind ever attempted and probably will stay that way for years to come. It is quite litteraly peerless in respect to the detail paid, the film captured, and top notch quality of presentation. Narrarted by the wonderful David Attenborough with a score worthy of an oscar nomination, these two segments focus on just what their titles say; life in the open ocean and the creatures of the deep. It is a must see.

The entire Blue Planet series is phenomenal, but these are by far my two favorite entires. You will see things in both of these episodes that you have never seen before in your life. You will see footage that is simply awe inspiring. If you're ever feeling disillusioned or disconnected from the daunting, inhuman nature of modern life, watch this DVD. It is inspirational. It always puts me into a good mood. The opening footage of the angelic giant Manta Ray, and when I say giant I mean it, soaring through the ocean with a wingspan of 15+ feet is just an appetizer of things to come. You will see animals in this DVD that defy all logic and reasoning, but more of that to come later.

Open Ocean contains a plethora of smile inducing relationships. From the backwards looking Sun Fish's relationship with the Half-Moon fish it uses to eat off the parasites living on it, who also rests himself on the surface of the ocean so that gull's can partake in the cleaning as well. To the super-pod ( hundreds+) of Spinner Dolphins and everything in between. You'll be witness to a battle for food between dolphins, tuna and birds that is truly epic:

http://basement-films.net/Peter/images/epic.jpg

Yes, those are birds battling tuna underwater for control of the swirling mass of fish.

And The Deep. Holy crap. I said you will see animals that defy all logic and reasoning, this is where it is. You'll see the inspiration for the facehugger in Alien and you'll even see a fish, the Hatchet fish, that makes the Predator's stealth technology look weak. The Gulper Eel is one of my favorites they have in there just because it looks menacing as all hell:

http://basement-films.net/Peter/images/gulper.jpg

You'll see shrimp that ejaculate exploding bio-luminescent glue onto the faces of attackers and you'll see proof that aliens do live in the deep:

http://basement-films.net/Peter/imag...lyfish-ufo.jpg

What other explanation is there for a jellyfish that vibrant and that highly evolved? That's a mothership right there.

I'm not going to post a screenshot of it because I don't want to ruin the impact for when you do see it, but they even captured on film an underwater lake that was discovered off the coast of the Gulf of Mexico in 1990. Yes, an underwater lake. It looks exactly like a lake should, it has a shoreline and everything, it just happens to be at the bottom of the ocean. It's astonishing.

This documentary is magnificent, even if you don't love the marine life as much as I do. It has stories of heartwarming scope. You'll see those relationships that make you smile and you'll even see life existing completely indepedent of sunlight, which 30 years ago was thought impossible. You'll get an incredibly intimate look at the bottom of the world. More people have been in space than have been where this documentary goes.

And it even has a great sense of humor! It's a must own. Amazon's marketplace has it for less than ten dollars, you're out of excuses at this point.

5 out of 5

The One Sentence Review - The Blue Planet isn't just a documentary series, it's a shimmer of a glimpse into a universe many of us are ignorant of that exists right next to us; there isn't a single reason for someone to not own this series.

My Sassy Girl, directed by Jae-young Kwak, 2001

http://basement-films.net/Peter/images/mysassygirl.jpg

Normally I wouldn't have picked up this movie. Not because I don't like romantic comedies, but just because the box at Video 21 had no translation, no blurb and the cover isn't very revealing. But I finally met the guy at Video 21 responsible for their great Asian section, chatted with him for a good while about our favorites etc and then he recommended it with the precursor that it was "the best romantic comedy he has ever seen." After watching it, I have to agree 110%. This movie was wonderful in every sense of the word.

I've gathered that this is actually based off a true story, which just makes it all the better. The story follows a struggling, effeminate student, Kyun-woo, who by pure chance happens to meet a very drunk girl on the subway one day. He pulls her back from the edge as the train is pulling in, but then doesn't pursue her because "drunk girls disgust him." On the train the girl shows her sassy side, which continues to show for the rest of the movie, forcing a guy to leave his seat so an older man can have it and then proceeding to vomit all over said old man. As she's passing out she points to Kyun-woo and calls him "honey", giving everyone on the train the impression that they're together. The shy and reluctant Kyun-woo is then forced into the position where he has to take care of this drunk girl so everyone doesn't think he is a jackass and thus begins their love story.

It's the kind of love story that is obviously engineered towards the female crowd, as the love interest (whose name we never learn) never makes a single attempt to salvage love, is fiercely demanding and at often times just a bitch, while the man is left to suffer and burden the relationship on his shoulders. It isn't a sexist film, that's just the type of story it tells. We eventually sympathize for the girl and her inability to be loving towards Kyun-woo. And of course we sympathize for Kyun-woo because he is constantly being beaten by the predicaments he is put on for the girl. It's win win!

Every action in the film is heartfelt. It's motivated and brings with it vast quantities of empathy for the characters. It's chock full of failed attempts and embarassing situations. But it isn't weighed down by them as some films tend to be. As rediculous as it can turn some times, it's never absurd for the sake of being absurd. Everything has a meaning. It may be based on a real story, but there is a strong craft behind the storytelling here. It hits the highs and the lows with flawless precision and timing.

It's a gorgeous film as well. Not just because often times the scenery is gorgeous, but the camera work is fantastic. It's not nearly as intimate as something like In The Mood for Love, but somehow manages to maintain the same level of beauty and simultaneously be incredibly kinetic and energetic.

My only complaint about all 137 minutes of screen time, which goes by remarkably fast, is one minor annoyance in editing when the frame rate would be sped up for a few, small moments. It's like old episodes of Clarissa Explains it All when the family would chase each other around the couch. It isn't so much that it completely didn't belong and distracted from the film, it just seemed that there was a better alternative.

Most romantic comedies these days bank on a lot of sexual references and low-brow jabs for their humor, but My Sassy Girl is a return to form for romantic comedies of yester-year in which the humor was genuinely funny and derivative of the romantic predicaments. This alone gives it a degree of honesty absent in romantic comedies of late. This is Breakfast at Tiffany's, Sleepless in Seattle and Before Sunrise/Sunset all rolled into one. It doesn't matter if you're a guy or a girl, My Sassy Girl is a tremendeously wonderful film that shouldn't be missed out on.

A very strong 5 out of 5

The One Sentence Review - My Sassy Girl isn't just a lovely romantic comedy, it's the best romantic comedy these eyes have ever seen.

I can't find a region free copy online, but there is a VCD of it available for only 8 bucks.

Primer (directed by Shane Carruth, 2004)

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

I've only seen it once and if I was asked to explain every intricacy of the plot to someone I simply could not do it. I don't know what the hell happened in this movie, but I loved the hell out of it.

I never care for tag lines of movies, but this one couldn't be more appropriate: "What happens if it actually works?"

Don't ask yourself the question of the technology in the movie, ask yourself that of the movie itself. If you can figure out every detail of this movie's plot the first time around, you are a far better man (or woman) than I. I was left with only a handful of understanding, but it wasn't the type of movie that leaves you think, "well that was full of plot holes" or "that could never happen", it's the type of movie that leaves you thinking, "no clue what just happened, but I know it was freaking great!" If I sat down and meticulously looked at every detail of this movie's plot and read over the script 10 times and came to the conclusion that movie is full of **** and really does just have a plot that intentionally makes no sense, I wouldn't care, because the question you should ask yourself is "What happens if it actually works?"

This movie doesn't need to work to actually work. In fact, it banks on misunderstanding. It invests itself in confusion. But it isn't a movie that comes off making no sense, it actually makes perfect sense, it's just slightly beyond comprehension. Which is an utterly perfect reflection of the film's two main characters. They build it, they don't know what it does, why it does what it does and how to stop what it's doing - but they know that something is happening and that something is special. I'm going to watch the commentary soon as word has it that it explains everything, but resolve is something that isn't a crucial cog in the machine of cinematic acceptance.

The movie goes out of it's way to keep the reader in the dark. Most noteably is the use of sensory overload. The script doesn't want for someone to finish talking before it can explain a crucial piece of information, it'll jumble it right into the conversation. Complex dialogue that would normally be dedicated to the audience's undivided intention in any other mystery is in a constant battle with background noise. Missed what the hell the machine does because you couldn't hear the conversation over the sound of traffic? Too bad says the director. Fantastic says I.

It's a story of regular guys trying to understand beyond their means. This isn't just about reaching your goals, this is about reaching other people's goals. This isn't an inspirational story where the kid with Down's Syndrome becomes the quarterback, this is the story where the kid with Down's Syndrome invents a ray gun and shoots himself in the face with it. I LOVE IT!

But the story and director's efforts to camouflage it aren't the only things that make the movie work, because it'd fall flat if it weren't for the spot on performances that headline it. Shane Carruth (who also wrote and directed) and David Sullivan are wonderful. They're completely average in every sense of the word. They are us if we were in this movie. This movie emulates the reality of this what if question so perfectly that sometimes it's creepy.

The stark aesthetics of every setting were a great semblance of the engineer's bleached lifestyle. The blocking goes hand in hand with the audial overload by means of visual defficencies. The edits bouncing forward in not only time, but space as well wonderfully compliment the aforementioned story hiding tactis. This movie has got everything going on, but unlike other movies where the pieces just conviently fall together this is a movie where the craftsmanship that went into painstakingly detailing every frame seen, every decibel heard and every line spoken is visible to anyone who isn't legally blind.

Even if I never figure out this movie, I'll still love it. Even if I do figure out this movie only to find out it doesn't make even a shred of sense, I love it. Even if I do figure it out, it makes sense, but it's just mediocre, I'll love it. All because the question asked in the film and of the film; "What happens if it actually works?"

This is Asimov, Clarke, Sagan and Crichton all rolled into one. If you like science and you like fiction you will like this movie.

5 out of 5

The One Sentence Review - Figure it out or don't figure it out, it doesn't actually matter because Primer is a remarkably elusive film that should not escape your attention.

I'm sold. Another stellar review, bud.

Thanks, I tried to make it as spoiler free as possible (not that I could successfuly spoil it anyway). :p

Videodrome
 

Videodrome (David Cronenberg, 1983)

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

There is a lot about this movie that I really, really liked and a lot about it that I just didn't care for.

The first half is absolutely great. Setting up television is treated as the bringer of the new day and the goodnight kiss was perfect. The world of the media pirate was treated just as it should have been. The scene of life in the first half of this movie is like the modern day scene of the Stile Project. Violence and eroticism are treated with little discourse, as if they're so common place that they don't even need discussing. However the casual handling of such socialy decadent material isn't a reflection of the laxing of modern man's standards, but a fetishistic portrayl of their needs. It's like smoking a cigarette. Those who are smokers don't need it pointed out with a heavy hand, but they need it in their life and the method they go about satisfying that addiction is so specific and so detailed that it could be considered a fetish.

That's how Cronenberg treats the role of media in man's life. And I loved it. But then the film starts getting weird. I like weird, to a degree. And though it wasn't actually nonsensical, it started to come off that way. The message of the film starts to become buried right as it should actually start shining outwards. It isn't that it is too weird to understand, it all makes sense, it's just that the movie takes a turn into the realm of oddity, as opposed to the first half of the film which is viewing the oddity by proxy. I liked that the film started off with the social commentary that we all have a fetish for the weird, for the violent, for the pornographic. I liked how it began to mirror its own commentary, we'd gaze at the cathode ray tube with a fixation equivalent to that of the on screen characters. However, once the character's fixation on the analog pleasure provider was removed, so was mine.

I found myself loosing interest in any resolution to the film. The film broke me away from the point it was trying to make. Which doesn't really make sense because I actually liked everything that was going on in it. I absolutely loved the visuals. I loved the makeup and 'creature' effects that were used. It subscribes to the same school of alter-reality, almost Lovecraftian, multipersonality makeup. Basically, the effects of the film are not hyper-realistic, but they're realistic enough that we accept them as being real only in this alter-reality that exists simultaneously with our reality. I love that stuff. John Carpenter used it very heavily in In The Mouth of Madness and Cronenberg does the same here.

So why did I loose interest? I'm not sure. I think it's because the movie shifts away from the self-indulgent nature that requires the viewer's participation to complete itself and starts to remove the viewer from the equation, perpetuating itself entirely within the realm of the film. The first half bleeds into the reality of this world, but the second half destroy's the reality of this world. While it works in context of the story I felt it didn't really work in actual execution, cinematically.

Either way it's a great movie about the trend of man kind to become completely addicted to the cathartic nature of media. It's good commentary on the subconscious addiction we have to our television. How they begin to boss us around when we think we're really in control (which is quite literally the first thing shown in the movie as the television commands the awakening of James Wood) But I definitely liked the first half much more than the second half.

4 out of 5

The One Sentence Review: Videodrome is a great exploration of the psyche of man consumed by media and while it doesn't fall apart in it's second half, it becomes somewhat dissatisfying.

That said, "Long live the new flesh." is a line I have engrained into my library of film quotes.

Yes but how did you like James Woods' giant, throbbing abdominal vagina?

Have you seen eXistenZ?

Haha, it wasn't as good as the enormous moving and salivating Vagina at the end of Starship Troopers. And nope, I haven't seen eXistenZ yet, but it's been on my list for a while. I actually forgot about it, but now that you've reminded me I'll have to pick it up next time.

You definitely should. In some ways it's kind of a more accessible Videodrome, which if I read you right would improve it. I love em both.

EDIT ~ (i love em both) BUT, Debbie Harry and James Woods push Videodrome up higher for me.

I'm not a fan of Cronenberg. His films are way too...organic for me.

I reviewed eXistenZ in my thread if you guys are interested.

Excellent writing OG, great reviews. I still need to see Videodrome.

Nice eXistenZ review, Sedai. I probably won't check it out for a week or so. I've got a backlog of films going on right now. I want to write some epic reviews of the original Dawn of the Dead and Starship Troopers, my two favorites films of all time. And I borrowed the Herzog Kinksi collection from a friend, so I've got those to pour through and this upcomming week is finals week and I'm trying to finish up the second draft of a script. It'll all get done after I go play a couple hours of Counter Strike. ;)

Yeah, I saw that cut too. Thought that was about the best aspect of the film, overall ;). Guess there’s only so many hick-kicks-city-into-shape storylines that we can forgive eh? ;). The lead guy with the solid elbows (and fireproof legs) was certainly spry tho.

What? And get tobaccy juice in their ear? Lord no, it’d be unhygienic. (tho dammit, my to-watch list is far too unwieldy coz of you, you unrepentant recommender you)

Oh well hell, then you definitely need to see these guys…

http://www.newscientist.com/data/ima...9/rolling.mpeg
http://www.newscientist.com/data/ima...9/walking.mpeg

(info courtesy of this aritcle: http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/dn7194)

Doesn’t even touch Blue Planet, but frickin great nonetheless.

Nice reviews on the filmic front by the way ;). I’m gonna have to check out a few of those (Damn it, another Pike in the Mofo seas :rolleyes: )

Finally had time to catch up… great job OG… thanks for sharing… :)

Great reveiw on Primer OG. You captured the feeling that this film leaves with the veiwer perfectly. It is such a great film and I can't wait to see how much my mom's boyfriend hates it. ;)

I'm such a slacker. I'll write some more at some point, I was on a roll there for a bit...

I havn't posted a review for almost a year. If your'e a slacker, then i am disabled.

It's been a while and not feeling like a good writer right now, but...
 

Shutter, directed by Banjong Pisanthanakun and Parkpoom Wongpoom, 2004

http://basement-films.net/Peter/images/shutter.jpg

Once I actually bought it, it took me a while to get around to watching it, but it's worth the wait. I'm a huge fan of the new wave of Asian cinema, but admittedly my knowledge of the Thai scene is extremely limited so when I heard that their take on the now cliched Asian ghost story was pretty sturdy, I decided to check it out.

While I've taken in my share of the Asian ghost story, a new genre in and of itself, and while I openly gobble up entries, few are very satisfying. I find movies like The Ring or Ju-On, while they often deliver on the freakyed freak, empty because their stories are just boring and uninteresting. Shutter, not so much. It follows a photographer named Tun who starts to see apparitions in his photos, the same person over and over. The departed starts to stalk Tun and his girl, tracing over the familiar territory of the living trying to figure out what they need to do to get the dead to leave them alone, but while the ground may be familar and the scares a little cliched, it stands remarkably strong by the time the credits roll.

It takes all of the ingredients of ghost story predecessors, gathers 'em all up together and plays with that hand and actually wins. It isn't a movie that takes all the preconcieved notions about the genre and turns them on their head, but it pays them enough respect that if anything is cliched it's not bothersome. You won't crap your pants out of fear, but it'll certainly tweak your nerves throughout

The acting is actually very enjoyable and Ananda Everingham who plays Tun is a great alternative to the estrogen driven ghost stories of the past 5 years or so. The difference is incredibly subtle, but there is a sizeable difference in choosing the sex of a ghost story's protagonist. Going with a female as the lead, which is the trend these days, banks on fragility for fear. However, going with a male throws fragility out the window and you're left with more of a feeling that the character must have done something to deserve this, whereas a female leaves you thinking that she is innocent and just being tortured. This isn't an arguement about males being stronger than females, it's just the economy of character choice that I see consistent in ghost stories as of late. The film has a story and characters that you'll actually find investment in, as opposed to something like Phone or the broken narrative Ju-On series.

Shutter, while not the best bet when it comes to the tried Asian ghost story field, is certainly worth your time. I put it in a second place as my favorite in the arena, shadowed only by the highly enjoyable and scary as The Eye. It subscribes to the thought that build up scares aren't as scary as fragments of things that are just plain creepy, which I don't agree with, but it works well with what it's got going on.

4 out of 5

The One Sentence Review - Shutter walks on cliched ground, but unlike handfuls of it's predecessor's works very well and is worthy of your attention.

And people say blibbloblib is hard to say :rolleyes:

Wick review dude, this sounds great, i hadnt heard of it. I really need to see The Eye as well.

How comes ya aint been around much of late Oggy?

Thanks. :) As for being gone, my girlfriend came down to my apartment in Florida for the past couple weeks, so while I still had access to my computer I was happily occupied. ;) But now I'm back in VA and into the swing of summer working etc, so I'll have more time to be active again. :)

Jumeogi Unda/Crying Fist, directed by Seung-wan Ryoo, 2005

http://basement-films.net/Peter/images/cryingfist.jpg

I'd of hoped my return to reviews would be more triumphant than this, but it's hard when a movie is as uninteresting as Crying Fist was.

I've sat here for several minutes, just thinking about what to write about the film, but nothing worthwhile comes to mind. I can't muster anything substantial to write about. It is long, the first hour crawls by slower than a sloth with down syndrome and a broken leg. The characters are dry shells of stereotypes. The situations in the film become more and more bland as the film goes on. Oh, and apparently going to jail in Korea for assault and robbery that results in a person's death means you get to go to boxing camp and if you have a relative die while in "prison", they'll just let you leave for a bit - no biggie.

The music isn't appealing at all. The cinematography is highly enjoyable in the first half, but then you're reminded that although it looks pretty this movie is not about anything enjoyable, thus reducing you to sadness again. The actual boxing segments are about as intense as a coma. Bah, the entire film is just anticlimactic!

It is as if every single person involved with the production of this film had never actually watched a boxing match or even a movie about boxing. Save for boxing gloves, nothing in this film even resembles what boxing is all about. Actually, I take that back for the 135 minute run time is more of an endurance test than 12 rounds in the ring.

1 out of 5

The One Sentence Review - Crying Fist is all swings and no punches; the worst boxing film that isn't even remotely about boxing, boxers or even human beings.

Memories of Murder, directed by Joon-ho Bong, 2003

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...CLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

I can and often do judge a movie by its cover. Why not? And that right there is one amazing piece of cover art. I also like to see what statement they choose to put on the poster/cover and who said it:
I'm sure it is the American in me, weened on serial killer pics like Se7en and Silence of the Lambs, but a quote like that puts one grimm expectation in my mind; sick, mutilated bodies a plenty. Now, I didn't watch this movie with the morbid hope I would see some intense gore, I wanted to see it simply because that cover art is rather stunning. If I could have a large print of it, I'd frame that baby on my wall.

But that right there is a defining characteristic of this film. It is beautiful, but my expectation was for something Se7en-esque - which it isn't. It is a far cry from an American styled serial killer film and I wish I hadn't had that expectation going into it; I'd of appreciated the begining much more without such expectations. There is no glorification of the detective process. The detectives in this film are so human and bareboned in nature that I initially faulted the film for it. In the begining I simply didn't buy the characters. They didn't fit in with my cultured schema of what a serial killer seeking detective should be. They provided me, the viewer, with absolutely no thought of comfort, which is what police officers should be doing. The things they did, in contrast to how I as a westerner expect police officers to behave, that seemed like the film was overtly going for a cheap laugh when in retrospect it was just being human.

It really is rather amazing what this film accomplishes by not adhering to the commonalities of the serial killer genre. There is no persistant threat created throughout the entire film. The serial killer isn't portrayed to the viewer (either directly or by proxy through the victims he leaves) as the penultimate evil doer; the killer is simply just a taker of life. When a victim does loose their life to the killer, it isn't over played or over acted, it is just taken at face value. The death portrayed in the film was masterfully handled. We are witness to a coroners examination of a rather decayed body, but the camera doesn't draw attention to the simple fact that it is a dead body despite the astounding makeup job that was done in creating the body. This is a common trait throughout the film. The things we (or at least I) expect to be glorified in a serial killer film (the killings, the killer, the inspection of the mutilated bodies) are indeed created with glory in mind as is evident from the detail put into them, but they're included only as background in the film. Rarely does the camera pay close attention to the details of the death and this trait alone is one of the chief things that I think makes this movie a resounding success.

It is very refreshing to watch a serial killer movie where the focus isn't specifically the serial killer, the victims or the case, but the handful of people trying to live their lives as detectives. It removes the forced expectation of a grand climax, a struggle between good and evil and replaces it with a real world, not some cinematic fantasy, and I applaud the film for it. It maintains a high level of humanity, though not necessairly morality, throughout. It is beautifully shot (one more film that convinces me Korea is one of the most beautifully photographed regions in the world) and wonderfully scored. The actors are all more than capable in their roles. Hell, even the extras are spot on. I really find little that I can hold against the film, it is just a stand up picture, highly enjoyable and highly recommendable. The 123 minute runtime was daunting at first, considering it isn't exactly the thriller that one may expect, but it breezed on by and managed to be interesting every step of the way. And the ending...The ending is all too human; perfect for the film.

Hats off, Joon-ho Bong, you've created a film that miraculously succeeds by being consistently inoffensive, despite the fact that it does have a very dark seam running through its fabric.



The One Sentence Review - Memories of Murder is probably the overall most pleasant serial killer film I've ever seen and certainly worth a watch to anyone with an open mind.

Thanks for the review OG- I love the art work as well. :yup:

Banlieue 13, Directed by Pierre Morel, 2004

http://basement-films.net/Peter/images/banlieue13.jpg

I was first introduced to David Belle a year or two ago by the open-ended athletic arena he invented, parkour. You've seen parkour and probably don't even know it. You've probably even seen David Belle in a commercial or two and don't know it. He is the guy who can go from the bottom of a building to the top of the building without ever going inside the building. And then he'll jump onto the roof of another building just because he can.

Banlieue 13 is his first vehicle as an action star and this movie will cause him to break out onto the action scene faster than this breakout from the movie. David Belle and his co-star Cyril Raffaelli are at the top of their game in this movie. The athleticism displayed in this movie by these two is practically peerless these days (in westernized cinema at least). Jet Li and Jackie Chan are certainly capable of it, but the type of action films they do these days are so painfully choreographed that it limits their abilities. Tony Jaa displayed it in Ong-Bak, but the movie had its fair share of flaws.

But unlike Ong-Bak, this movie actually has interesting characters. The plot? In the future the French have developed such a problem with crime areas that they have created designated ghettos outside of Paris, where all the inhabitants are trapped inside by gigantic walls. So yes, the plot may not make a whole lot of sense, especially once a neutron bomb is introduced into it, but the characters create an interest in the story that the plot dumbs down. David Belle plays Leito, an inhabitant inside Banlieue 13 (borough 13) who is one of the few inside who aren't criminals. He gets put in jail on the outside for trying to do the right thing on the inside. Six months later, Damien (Cyril Raffaelli), a special forces commander, is forced to take Leito back into the ghetto to disarm the stolen bomb. Summarizing the story like that makes it sound even more generic than it is, but it is perfectly manageable and watchable in context to the film. Either way, people don't watch movies like this because of the plot. They want to see these human columns of muscle barrelling through walls. They want to see necks and windows alike being broken left and right. Banlieue 13 more than provides the broken limbs and adrenaline action movies must come with.

Luc Besson, the film's producer and co-writer, is a fan favorite in the action genre and this film is just another stellar example of why people respect him so much. He has a nack for cutting through the fat. There is no bull**** in this movie. There are no wires. There are no mats. Just raw talent.

The cinematography is slick. The sound editing is spot on. The soundtrack is typical of these types of films (generic sounding techno), but towards the end I was hoping for a change in musical pace. I'm not positive, but the same song may have just been looped throughout the whole movie. But you really can't complain too much about the music when David Belle is soaring through the air. And David Belle can actually act. I'm sure his whole being in this movie was because of his athletic ability, but he is actually very capable of doing things other than kicking someone in the face while hanging out of a window. And Cyril Raffaelli is damned beast in this film. I've dropped Belle's name more often than Cyril's in this review, but that is simply because I'm more familiar with Belle. Cyril probably kicks even more ass in this film than Belle does. They are certainly one of the greatest duos to fight onscreen in years.



The One Sentence Review - What Banlieue 13 lacks in solid, logical plot it more than makes up for in good 'ole fashion ass kickery.

Oh, and I gurantee the wheels are already in motion to have these two team up against Tony Jaa from Ong-Bak for some kind of extreme battle to the death. Count me in!

Thanks for the review, it sounds interesting. :D

Wow, great thread OG, nice choice of movies to review and great reviews. Looking forward to having more time when i can give them a proper read.

Thanks you two. :)

I try to write up stuff on movies that most people probably wouldn't normal watch or hear of. I personally don't think I'm a very good reviewer, but I'm glad some people are reading them. :)

Everyone better have rented Dead End by now!

Damn, I had missed some...

Good work!!

Battlefield Baseball, directed by Yudai Yamaguchi, 2003

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...CLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

If I was 11 when I saw this, this movie would be the epoch of cinematic history. I am not 11 and should be shot for renting this movie.

Billed as being of the highest grade of cheese, Battlefield Baseball performs just like you'd expect the cover to. I actually watched about 95% of the film at 2x speed because I didn't feel like dedicating 90 minutes of my life to it, but I'm sadistic enough to dedicated 45 minutes. I'm ****ing retarded.

There is baseball. There are zombies. There are zombies playing baseball. There are innocent people being killed. Said people are reconstructed miraculously a la the Million Dollar Man. There are robots. There are robots playing baseball while fighting zombies. Those few sentences just about sum up the entire movie.

I didn't know anything about this movie except having seen the cover on the back of an issue of Fangoria. I was hoping it would be about some future sport of extreme death. I like future sports of extreme death. But no, it is about a high school baseball team starving for the championship. The first team they have to play on the way there is team Gedo, consisting entirely of zombies who play in a field where they are legally allowed to kill. Gedo massacres our hero team, Seido, but the star player, Jubeh, comes back from the dead and destroys team Gedo. In fact, everyone comes back from the dead. Everyone dies in the movie and everyone comes back to life in the end from a tear shed by the diefied Jubeh. Oh, except then an old man dies of alcoholism.

Sorry about the spoiler, but if you read that far and still had an interest in seeing the movie with actual intent to enjoy it unspoiled, you deserved it.

But ya know what, reading back over everything that happens in the movie it is pretty funny. Though had I not being watching practically the whole thing at double speed, I'd probably have a few quarts less of blood right now.



The One Sentence Review - Watch it at double the speed, Battlefield Baseball will instantly become twice as good!

I've heard about a few of the films you've reviewed, and been planning on getting them, hence most the interest. Keep it up chuck

Thanks for the review, I may give this one a miss :yup:

I think your last review has had the opposite effect on me, i actually really want to see it!

Haha, I was telling a friend of mine about it the other day and it explaining everything that happens makes the movie sound genius (especially the ending). It is mildly enjoyable, and probably even more so if you watch it with a bunch of friends, but it's just too wacky for its own good sometimes.

Well, the cover doesn't look so good, but the plot elements sound funny. Are there any zombie or robotic cheerleaders?

There are some cheerleaders, but they aren't robotic or zombies. Though if I remember right, at one point they do die as well.

Memories of Murder is ever so close to the number one slot on my NetFlix queue... :)

Awesome, I hope you like it. :) At first I found it rather strange, but it really builds on things that normally go unloved in the killer realm and works wonderfully in the end. And the cinematography is stunning.

And you need to add in Dead End!!! I know it isn't your normal kind of film, but it is a highly enjoyable flick even with its flaws. I've shown it to probably 20 people now and they all fell for its vibe. And Ray Wise is just the freaking man in that movie.

I just got Izo and Dead End.

I so almost got Memories for Murder but the R2 cover sucks balls compared to the one in the review.

Awwwwwesome. At this point everyone knows how much I enjoy and respect Dead End and IZO is just a complete work of art. It is fantastic, says I. I really hope you like both of 'em.

Watched Izo, i'll get a review down later in the week. Very interesting film, it's a shame IMDB rates it as one of Miike's worst films, like it or not, it's a still his most polished and intricate work.

Last Life in the Universe, directed by Pen-Ek Ratanaruang

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...CLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

Ride this film out and you shall not be dissapointed. To say this movie is slow would be considered a lie, but I feel it is safe to say that the movie may seem largely very uneventful. At first, the style and pacing of the film is a little daunting as it made me question whether or not I was currently in the mood for a film that was...well...quite lofty. But I'm glad I didn't turn it off because this is one helluva film.

Kenji, handled masterfully by the always enjoyable Tadanobu Asano, is a lonely man who seeks to end his own life. A few unfortunate things happen along the way and by pure happenstance Kenji is introduced to a girl, Noi. It reads like a typical story of loner's life is given new meaning by a chance meeting with a girl, Noi, but this film is playing on a level far above that. The story, which plays out secondary to many other aspects of the film, isn't of as much concern as the characters are and the way in which Kenji and Noi interact with each other. It is an intriguing people film that has an ending that is just magnificently crafted.

I wasn't a big fan of Lost in Translation. I felt it was bogged down heavily by the need for subtlety and quirkness (hey look, isn't Japan just kooky!) and as a result any meaningful interaction between the two visitors was lost. The two films couldn't be more different, but while watching it I couldn't help but think that this is what Lost in Translation should have been. It should have handled two people's dopey-eyed exploration of the unknown as this movie handled it, by not drawing attention to the incompatibilities, to let them play themselves out. Last Life in the Universe doesn't put anything on the frontlines that is a distraction from the relationship between the two people. Even if Kenji is standing in a room all by himself, which happens quite often in the film, he is existing on a level that Sofia Coppola just couldn't conjure up. Then again, Tadanobu Asano is one helluva an actor when it comes to just not saying anything.

Though I will admit that initially I thought the movie was going to draw too much attention to the half irony of the situation at hand, such as Kenji tripping on his suicide rope after a failed attempt and that it'd come off as cutesy, but it lost this feeling very, very early on.

And who can ever complain when Christopher Doyle is behind the camera? The cinematography is a feast for the eyes and the sound design is top notch (I'm all about the things the filmmaker doesn't let us hear that we may expect to hear). The score isn't anything memorable, but it is certainly appropriate for the film and compliments the etheral feeling the film as perfectly.

Last Life in the Universe gets a hearty recommendation for me, but only on the condition that you are a patient viewer. The minutes may coast by, but if you are craving a film that doesn't have chunks of time in which nothing is ever said then this film isn't for you - not just yet.



Last Life in the Universe is a wonderfully sweet, sweet film that evokes a floating feeling in the viewer as the frames just dance across the screen as if they were on clouds.

EDIT: I forgot to mention it has Takashi Miike in it. Seriously now, how can you pass up a movie that Takashi Miike and Christopher Doyle were involved in? They are two of cinema's most staunch auteurs, their mere presence on the same film must have created some warp in the fabric of time.

it sounds really interesting thanks for the great review :yup:

Thanks for the review, t'is another film i've had my eye on.

Btw OG, saw Dead End, shame about the ending i thought.

Yeah, the ending is a pity, but it's such a fun flick in all other aspects that I can forgive it. Hope you had as good time watching it as I have, that movie is a hoot!

D'oh! My local blockbuster had a copy of that, and i was so surprised i forgot to pick it up. I just ran. It was all too freaky.

Must watch.....!

Nice review OG*







* - the '*' stands for 'star' ;)

Man, it is freaky how good that movie is. I'm craving to watch it again and I don't know why... It just sucks you in by letting so much happen without ever actually having anything huge happen. Now I'm sad I already sent it back to Netflix.

Hope you guys enjoy it..

And thanks for the star Golg. :)

Funny, after 5 years on these forums I'm finally starting to feel like I actual can form some kind of coherent post about movies. Today was the first day anyone ever PM'ed me asking for a movie recommendation. Brought a tear to my bitter eye... :p

Sounds like a winner.
THanks for your thoughts, OG. :)

"Veronica Mars", created by Rob Thomas, 2004

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...CLZZZZZZZ_.jpg

The first season of "Veronica Mars" is so damned good it hurts. If you try to deconstruct the influences on the show, which are certainly a plenty, you could easily bill it as a homogenization of "Twin Peaks", "Buffy", "90210" and even "the X-Files", but while all are obviously loved by the show's creators and writers, Veronica Mars is perfectly capable of standing on its own two feet with pride.

The first episode of the show sets up the entire season, in a very Twin Peaks way: who really killed Lilly Kane and why? The structure of the show is formulaic in the sense that essentially every episode is the same - Veronica is hired by classmates to solve some kind of mystery while secretly trying to unravel as many clues as possible as to who killed Lilly, why they killed Lilly and even where the hell her mom is - but it maintains a refreshing and brisk pace throughout the whole season.

The show is peppy, quirky and perfectly cast. Each character goes through an arch that is just wonderful to observe. The plot doesn't get stale and towards the end gets to be absolutely fan-freaking-tastic, to the point where I was often throwing my hands up in the air, completely giving in to the show. I think I even got close to crying at one point. It is that good.

My only criticism is that it doesn't really have episodes that are remarkably memorable, it is the overall connecting nature of the show that is memorable. Each episode contains so much plot development that they all blend together. Or maybe that's just because I watched the entire season in a span of maybe 4 days.

I never knew UPN was capable of producing a show that was this damned good. I don't think anyone did.

I love "Lost", I saw the pilot a few months before it aired and was instantly hooked, but pound for pound season 1 of "Veronica Mars" may be a better show simply because they introduce the mystery and across 22 episodes they actually resolve the mystery. Imagine that? 25 episodes of "Lost" and not a damned thing was ever resolved....

However, in the interest of full disclosure..."Veronica Mars" is moronically slotted against "Lost"'s possesed hour, but as season 2 has just started for both, I will watch "Lost" as it airs and watch VM later - "Lost" is crack.

Anyways, it gets my absolute highest recommendation. See the first season, it is phenomenal. It works on levels 98% of the other shows on network TV simply do not. It is funny, crazy, dark, mysterious, sexy and just all around polished - especially as the episodes progress.

I don't think this show is here in Australia :nope: thanks for the review :yup:

3-Iron, Directed by Kim Ki-Duk, 2004

http://basement-films.net/Peter/images/3iron.jpg

This is one of the best films I've seen all year long, if not the best. I consider it an absolute masterpiece. The gauntlet has been thrown.

This was actually my first introduction to Kim Ki-Duk after hearing nothing but high praise for Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter...And Spring I knew he was supposed to be a fine director, but I had no idea he was this good. The way he tells this story is just jaw dropping. It is a beautiful story of forbidden love between a simple man and a trapped housewife. The relationship forged in this movie is one of the most beautiful on screen relationships I've seen in I don't even know how long and throughout the films 90 minute running time the words exchanged between these two could be counted on one hand. Transforming silence and inaction into love is no easy feat and yet Kim Ki-Duk treats it like it is just second nature. I'm sure it wasn't the case, but this movie hits such a perfect stride that you'd think making the movie was almost effortless, yet thinking about each scene and the set up of each shot one can only imagine the thought process behind it all. I am in awe.

It is a movie about sacrifice and insecurities, about taking hold of your world and about becoming untethered to what you know. It takes nothing for granted and manifests every emotion it has all by itself. I couldn't help but think of Vincent Gallo's The Brown Bunny while watching 3-Iron and think to myself that he wishes he could make a movie that was an eighth as good as this movie is. The two films have nothing in common in terms of story, in fact they're wildly different, but Gallo tried to create tenderness out of silence between strangers and he fell on his face, whereas Kim just dominates.

I don't even want to get into any more of a description of the film's events or story arch, I just implore that you take my word for it and see this amazing film as soon as possible. It is just beautiful.

3-Iron is flawless.



And the music!! My, God, the music!!! This film will woo you and sweep you away. Do not wait.

Thanks for the Veronica Mars review......I've heard a lot of good things about it, but still avoided it because I fear all UPN original programs :D and I enjoyed your 3-Iron review and hope to watch it soon :yup:

Argh!! Post number 666!! :bawling: :scream: :down:

Thanks for the review of what sounds like an interesting movie :D

Thanks you two. :)

And Misirlou, I felt the same way about Veronica Mars but was stunned by how utterly fantastic of a show it is. It comes out on DVD next week and while it heartily gets my endorsement as a blind buy, at the least you (and everyone) should definetely rent it. You'll get sucked in.

And everyone should get their hands on a copy of 3-Iron as soon as is humanly possible.

why don't dvd's on amazon have croatian subtitles? answer me that!

6ixtynin9 (Ruang talok 69), directed by Pen-Ek Ratanaruang, 1999

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0...1.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Pen-Ek Ratanaruang is really starting to earn a high spot in my list of directors whose works I'm trying to track down. Last Life in the Universe was beautiful and 6ixtynin9 is just a subdued riot.

A recently unemployed woman, Tum, accidently recieves $25,000 at her doorstep, due to the constant slipping of the number on her door, dropping from room 6 to room 9. While in the process of trying to decide if she should give the money back or not, two gangsters force themsevles into her door...two dead bodies later and our gal now has $25,000.

The violence is peppered throughout, but isn't over the top though there is often a decent amount of blood on display. One area where the movie really shines is through the great humor and the, fairly Elmore Leondard-esque, remarkably clever script. It just gets better and better as it goes along, introducing a surprisingly wide variety of subplots and characters who for the most part wind up on the floor in some capacity or another. And the movie just gets funnier as the bodies start piling up around our hero and she still keeps her cool, defiantly pursuing her new found fortune.

The same craft mastered in Last Life is clearly in the developmental stages here, but Pen-Ek still knows how to work silence and above all his actors in this early work of his. Lalita Panyopas is really great as Tum, never going over the top, playing it serious the whole time and still eliciting a plethora of smiles with her actions. All of the supporting characters are fantastic, especially a sex-obsessed, nosey, house-wife neighbor and her clique of middle aged girlfriends.

It's just an overall great flick. It certainly isn't flawless or the first of its kind, but it maintains a lot of originality throughout and enough nuances to keep you coming back for more. It's the small things that really make the movie worth it. The small plot points and the small tricks and tweaks that Pen-Ek uses to make us flinch or laugh. I particulairly liked the subtitles for a deaf character's sign language that were just a black bar, hehe.



6ixtynin9 may not be a one of a kind, but it is a gem - highly enjoyable and a nice early entry from a fantastic director.

I'd highly recommend a two night viewing of 6ixtynin9 and Last Life in the Universe, it'd be a great night.

Sounds good :yup: Thanks for the review :D

The Descent, directed by Neil Marshall, 2005

http://www.thedescentthemovie.com/wa...480/poster.jpg

What a freaking headache.

I'm not the worldest biggest fan of Dog Soldiers, I think it is a decent enough flick, but I thought buzz was very solid about The Descent...

Maybe it was, the movie is a piece though. From the get go it is very trying. The characters were resoundingly uninteresting and wooden, not to mention unrealistic. I've met a good deal of women in my short life span, dare I even say a good deal of very attractive women, but not a single one that is not only very attractive, but a mountain climbing, white water craving, spelunker. Seriously, Neil Marshall, cast some people who at least fit the bill. This is in no way a dig at women by saying they typically don't seek the extreme 'sports' or me saying that one who does has to be ugly. If you're going to have a movie that abandons realism in regards to the plot, you either need to have painfully real characters are monumentally absurd ones.

But not only are the characters wildly unrelateable, they're barely given any development and introduction. Once people start dying, save for the two or three who did get something that resembled an introduction, you can barely tell who is actually dying - they're all the same.

I'm no geologist, but I do know that there are still an unknown amount of caves to be discovered. But why in hell would some random chic, who of course has zero backstory, have knowledge of a cave that no one else has ever explored? That just doesn't make any ****ing sense.

The camera work was only half inspired and often times just annoying. Not to mention the score that just stabs sharply at the brain. Bah!

The only, only, place this film exceeds is with the creatures. They're crafted and introduced with a skill and understanding of how to do so that isn't evident in any other aspect of the film. They look great and move fantastically. But that is about as far as they go and as far as the movie goes.

I have to go take some Tylenol.



The One Sentence Review - I've seen Sci-Fi channel original productions that are better than The Descent.

I absolutely loved Dog Soldiers and will be checking this flick out.

Thanks for the review OG- :D

I agree with most of your comments regarding The Descent but end of the day, it is a horror film and i didn't go in looking for character development or a high degree of realism. Plausability is always good but it's not a complete necessity considering the topic matter though some of the character's actions did seem a tad too off. As it stood, i thought it had a tight pacing and a unnerving atmosphere with some good action. It didn't suffer the cheese which lots of horror does, i thought it was an unflinching and graphic experience and i actually found myself scared, which is a rarity as most films tend to make you jump opposed to actually scared. So yeah, i liked it and am sorry you didn't. I also adore Dog Soldiers, though maybe i'm biased towards it's British origins......