Review of Cloud Atlas

I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. It was the most entertaining film I've seen this year. The intertwining of multiple stories across time kept me rapt with attention until the very end. I am sad to say Cloud Atlas was a flop at the box office. Perhaps it will make up some of the losses in DVDs and rentals. Aside from it's poor performance at theaters, I thought it was a tour de force. The special effects, the editing, the performances, I agree with the New York Times critic that it was the best value for your entertainment dollar.

Yet I find flaw in the ending. If the makers of this film were reaching for a truly grand conclusion, like say in Stanley Kubrick's 2001, then I must say they dropped the ball. The conclusion was flat and totally domestic. It ended with Tom Hanks and Halle Barry as geriatrics with numerous grandchildren. I thought more could be done.

I also agree with the New York Times critic that the film takes on a "term paperish" quality. The scene of futuristic Seoul are all too similar to the matrix. I found the theme redundant, overplayed. Yet, I liked the similarity to Blade Runner of that story line. I like the questions and ideas that it raises; what to do with genetically modified people? What will the future of genetic modification be like? Similarly to Blade Runner they do not have a good end in store. I also liked the criticism of the "corprocratic" regime in Seoul. I think it draws attention to the lack of workers rights in Asia, perhaps this is why the film was pulled from Chinese screens. The Asian mode of productions which is reliant on abhorrent working conditions is overtly criticized in the film. I think it is one of the few films that addresses this topic and I commend the filmmakers for doing so. This ties in to the film's theme of revolution against the powers that be. From abolitionist in  19th century America, fabricants in Korea, or journalist against the Energy companies, the common theme is to speak truth to power, to expose injustice, and create a more just, equal world.

This is why I thought the movie was entertaining. I especially like the story where Tom Hanks played a goatherder and Halle Berry a "prescient." I thought the "devil" in Hanks' conscience was memorable. I kept repeating lines from him days after seeing the film. I think it is also a commentary on the philosophy of Social Darwinism. Throughout the film the saying "the weak are meat, the strong do eat" is repeated time and again. Perhaps the filmmakers mean that the struggle between the powerful and those without power has been a constant struggle over time and throughout the history of man. Only if we overcome our inner instinct to prey on the weak will we truly live in peace and advance along the evolutionary ladder.

This film could be interpreted in many different ways. I only offer some thoughts and ideas the it inspired in me.

Link to Article about Japanese Film

Here is a link to an article about a book about films that were made about Japan. Three abouts, too many?

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/culture/2013/04/21/books/views-of-japan-through-western-films-3/

Review of Doctor Zhivago

Doctor Zhivago is one of the best love stories and historical epics ever made for the screen. David Lean's follow up to Lawrence of Arabia astounds even to this day. Based on the book by Boris Pasternak it is a criticism of the Soviet Union and communist ideology. It has all the hallmarks viewers have come to expect in a David Lean film; great cinematography, great shots, great performances, great adaptation, great, etc., etc..

This is easily one of my favorite films by David Lean. I am also a fan of Warren Beatty's Reds which depicts the Russian Revolution as well as a love story. Reds is one of my favorite movies of all time.

I've seen Zhivago several times and I just can't get over the feeling of loss and sadness the film inspires. The loss of Lara to a Stalinist labor camp is so great I cringe at the image of her walking by the giant wall poster of Stalin. Visually stunning and emotionally gripping I am truly amazed at the writing of Robert Bolt and the direction of David Lean. The shot sticks with you days after you've seen the movie. Zhivago's death is just as memorable. Chasing after Lara. He breaks down, dies of a heart attack in the street. The ending is sad, but hope still survives. Zhivago's daughter naturally knows how to play the guitar. It reveals that natural gifts cannot be stamped out by the party. Some things survive in even the direst environments, this one being Stalinist Russia.

Review of Lost in Translation

I thoroughly enjoyed this film. It was a very good effort on the part of Sophia Coppola. The film lures you into it's feeling of directionlessness of the female lead excellently played by Scarlet Johannson. Here character has no direction in life and feels left behind by her young husband. Even travelling to Japan has not lifted her spirits. It's almost as if it is a comedown for her which I think reflects a bias against Japan and Asian cities. Furthermore in the Bill Murray character this conflict is even more pronounced. He is an actor who is past his prime and has stepped down a level to do whiskey ads in Japan. This clearly reflects a perspective of looking down on Japan as a lesser than country than a caucasian dominant country. Bill Murray's character does not want to be in Tokyo, yet even more it is not clear exactly where Mr. Murray's character really wants to be. He is in turn just as directionless as Scar Jo's character, perhaps even more so because of his advanced age in life.

There are numerous examples of how the movie presents an attitude of superiorty of caucasians of Japanese. The numerous scenes where Bill Murray's character has to meet Japanese representatives of the Whiskey brand leave us with the impression that Japanese are inferior. Yet, there is some celebration of Japan; the scenes of Scar Jo's characters travels to Kyoto, the sequence where they both go out in Tokyo and sing karaoke. This is the highlight of the film. Bill Murray sings Elvis Costello and they both have a good time. However, where are any Japanese characters of substance? Surely Tokyo is more than the prejudices that this movie leads you to believe. How should I know, I 've never been there. It just strikes me as a very superficial portrayal of Japan.

The story was good. It was truely original. It didn't seem derivative from any other work that I'm familiar with. There was an homage to Felini's La Dolce Vita, which, perhaps is where the genesis for Lost in Translation came from. Both are about finding a direction in life, drifting. Lost in Translation, like La Dolce Vita, leaves you with a heavy heart and an unquenched thirst for a more definite conclusion. Bill Murray and Scar Jo never get together. Bill Murray departs and Scar Jo is left to her husband. They both return to bourgeosie lives, unsatisfied, directionless. It is a love story without the culmination.

Review of Science of Sleep

Science of Sleep was an interesting film about an artist who has trouble telling the difference between dreams and reality. It is a film from Michel Gondry, who you might know from his more commerically successful Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. The best parts of the movie are the expressionistic dream sequences which reveal the creative talent of Gondry. The opening sequence where he shows viewers how he makes dreams is excellent. I found myself enjoying the film most when the film went off into these flourishes of Stepane's dream world. The animations and delusions brought the viewer deep into the psyche of Stephane and made you empathize with his plight. Whatever explanation could be put forth about Stephane's delusions; is he schizophrenic? Delusional? Why doesn't he just grow up, etc.?

Aside form Stephane, there are the women in the picture, whom I think Gondry presents as mistreated. Stephanie, played by Charlotte Ginsbourg, suffers the brunt of Stephane's delusions. He breaks into her apartment, he insults her in the last sequence, he lies to her. Stephanie must deal with Stephane's craziness. Stephane's mother also suffers mistreatment from men in the film. First from Stephane's father, then from her current boyfriend, and, finally, from Stephane when he abruptly leaves to go back to Mexico.

The final scene when Stephane and Stephanie ride the horse onto the boat leaves the viewer with the impression that they have gotten together. Like the whole movie we don't know whether this is reality or if it is just another one of Stephane's delusions.

I think this movie is another triumph for Gondry. It has a similar style to Sunshine, but it is more expressionistic. In Sunshine, we know what is dream and reality. In Science the line between reality and fantasy becomes blurred beyond rationality. We don't know when Stephane is dreaming or when he is awake. Yet, both films are similar in the presentation of youth in a nostalgic sense. Both have scenes of the main characters going back to when they were children, like a time of innocence. This is a them used in both movies. They present a realist depiction of contemporary life. In both movies there is a struggle to survive in bourgeosie reality. In Science, Stephane works as calender maker which he hates. This struggle for survial in a professional sense, as an artist, and for a satisfying love life reveals Stephan as an outsider to bourgeosie society. He never fits in totally, so he goes back to Mexico. He finds neither success as an artist nor love in France.

Review of The Geisha

This was a rare film that I bought from amazon. I'm continually learning about Japanes culture, history, and film.This movie gained good reviews in Japn when it was initially released back in the 1980s. I thought it might be interested to learn more about the lives of Geisha and the film didn't dissappoint on that end. There were numerous sequences of Geisha which I found to be sumptuously beautiful. The film, however, was not such a great movie. It really came off as a yakuza film. The conflict between the gang and the family trying to go straight was the major action of the film.

A great film if you want to see Geisha and not a bad film about 30s Japan.

Review of Lawrence of Arabia

I like old movies. I especially like the old, epic films where subjects form history are dealt with extensively. David Lean's Lawrence of Arabia is most certainly a film which falls into the category of an epic film which deals with a subject, World War I, from history.The first time I saw it I was astounded by the cinematography; the shots of the dessert were remarkable. I think a comparison could be made between the dessert scenses in Lawrence and the dessert scenes in the English Patient. Both films use the dessert as the primary setting for the movie. So when someone says that a movie like Lawrence of Arabia couldn't be made today, I would say look at the English Patient. Yet I digress and return to a study of Lawrence of Arabia. As I was writing, the cinematograhy is phenomenal. The acting, editing, costumes, and direction are also excellent.

The film begs many questions about Britain's overseas operations. Why did they want to mettle in the affairs of the Middle East? For territorial acquisition? For glory? The film ends with the Middle East mired in conflict just as it is today. So what makes T.E. Lawrence such a hero when he changed little? Why make a film about him? The back story is too long for a blog. Perhaps a paper? Lawrence was a hero of WWI in the English speaking World. He graced newspaper cover all over the World. He was truly a remarkable man. Yet, what makes Lawrence of Arabia such a remarkable film?

I think it is it's ambitious nature. It grasps at a larger than life hero and shows audiences how he rose to such stature. The opening sequence is an intersting choice by Lean. It begins with the death of Lawrence while riding a motorcycle. Then, we are taken to Lawrence's funeral where he has been place with other British heros of wars past. Peter O'toole, who is one of my favorite actors, plays Lawrence, and I must say his eyes could not be any bluer and his hair could not be any blonder, this is perhaps alluding to the rumor that Lawrence was a homosexual, yet the film was made in 1962, well before it was accepted to be openly gay. Yet I digress again. The performance of O' Toole I thought was masterful. We see Lawrence change froma bookish, intellectual type working in the "home" office into a guerilla fighter fighting to bring down the Turkish Empire, making promises to tribal leaders in Arabia, and showing off for newspapermen. Yet, the cast is replete with good performances, which makes this movie an incredible tour de force. Alec Guinness, great as Prince Faissal, Omar Sharrif as Sherif Ali, and Anthony Quinn as the tribal leader. I even like the stiff, British army officers.

Perhaps my favorite scene, apart from the first dessert sequence wher Omar Sharrif's character rides out from the mirage, is where Lawrence walks into the British army's quaters dressed in an Arab Sheik's clothes with a small Arab boy and orders lemonade. Immediately they draw a crowd. I think this present a quandary about Lawrence which serves as a theme throughout the film. As I have already mentioned, why did Lawrence want so much to take Aquaba? He is a peculiar character. he doesn't seem to be totally enamored with British nationalism, with the expansion of the Empire at the beginning. I suppose his character changes over the course of the movie. By the end he has become a demoagogue who believes in his own bloated reputation.

I am not done with this. I will return to expand on this film.

Which is the better film; Apocalypse Now or Blade Runner?