The same old story keeps on repeating - tell don't show. Delhi 6 suffers from same and another major issue - protagonist being passive. The film trying to be well-meaning becomes preachy and tries to be too cute for its own good.
A young American Indian, Roshan brings her grandmother back to Delhi since she wishes to die in her 'home'. And the cliche pour all over - aunties doting on the man, men being the masters, a girl not wanting to be tied down to marriage, the angel (and poet) of a man being the mentor for Roshan and Hindu-Muslim living together having fun, till...some thing strikes!
It's not bad to have such a 'picture', however the point is - what's the story? What does Roshan want? He is happy observing things and of course they are all 'cute' stuff - the bane of Indian films, and of course, he falls in love but...the momentum builds in late second half. Till then the world is supposed to be a wonder, sometimes negative too and we are supposed to be go all along with the story.
But the point is - where's the story?! The film endeavors to do too many things - trying to show different characteristics (of Delhi presuambly), however it doesn't flow; the focus is missing. You have an alien entering a new world. You have an ambitious girl in a traditional dad-dominant family. And...religion to play around with. Sure there are cliches but they could have been dealt with much better if the conflict was pronounced, if we could relate to the characters.
Delhi 6 is a brilliant example - no actor can save a film. It has a great assortment of 'character'-actors, who are highly skilled and...do a great job, but...if the story is supposed to be funny courtesy their antics, sorry, it can't flow. 'A protagonist wants something, takes action, meets with conflict...' - This is the mantra of a good story; a character maybe inherently passive, but...he needs to 'act', not be an observer and feel 'good' about it. Characters are made interesting by the story, not the other way around.
What was unbelievable is the music scene used in the climax - it is the same climax music of Insider. Coming from Rahman and Mehra this was least expected, but just goes to show the ways of the world. It tries to play on metaphors (the big one - monkey-man scare Delhi story) and typically explain it, a drilling-down that's again a norm.
The principle is - our audience needs to be explained things lest they do not understand. But...one should really wonder if the audience is as dumb as the characters portrayed in our films. And the other side is - it's always tougher to show things visually; it's always easier to mouth dialogues and preach - tell don't show.
Writers: Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra, Prasoon Joshi, Kamlesh Pandey
Director: Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra
Rating **
[Max ****]
[Viewed at home on 29th March, on laptop over two days]
Monday, March 30, 2009
Friday, March 27, 2009
Viewed: GONE BABY GONE
Some films intend being well-meaning and touching and sentimental and more. Gone Baby Gone tries to be all that and...that's where it falters - you need to tell the story as it is - not get into exposition about what you feel. It's a tricky lane since this melodrama seems effective and it can work for many, but eventually it robs the film of an authentic story-telling and that's how this film is.
A story about a detective and his girlfriend taking a case of a missing girl changes their life. It tries to show a society that is living on fringes. It takes a peek into the lives of cops - good ones and bad ones and 'mixed' ones. All that is good, but the telling has to 'show not tell'. There is good amount of 'visual action', however the moments seem contrived at times. The lead characters are well fleshed-out, though when major emotional shifts occur they are not too convincing; the problem is more with other characters where the majority are made to be 'cute' and that never works.
Ben Affleck directed the film. He wrote the screenplay, like he did for 'The Good Will Hunting', for which he won a lot of acclaim. Well both these films are over-rated. When you tell than show, the film is never very effective.
Based on a novel by Dennis Lehane
Writers: Ben Affleck & Aaron Stockard
Director: Ben Affleck
Rating **1/2
[Max ****]
[Viewed on 26th March at Hampden, courtesy rental DVD; the day the crazy blizzard came to Colorado! Thankfully, didn't last as long as it was expected to]
A story about a detective and his girlfriend taking a case of a missing girl changes their life. It tries to show a society that is living on fringes. It takes a peek into the lives of cops - good ones and bad ones and 'mixed' ones. All that is good, but the telling has to 'show not tell'. There is good amount of 'visual action', however the moments seem contrived at times. The lead characters are well fleshed-out, though when major emotional shifts occur they are not too convincing; the problem is more with other characters where the majority are made to be 'cute' and that never works.
Ben Affleck directed the film. He wrote the screenplay, like he did for 'The Good Will Hunting', for which he won a lot of acclaim. Well both these films are over-rated. When you tell than show, the film is never very effective.
Based on a novel by Dennis Lehane
Writers: Ben Affleck & Aaron Stockard
Director: Ben Affleck
Rating **1/2
[Max ****]
[Viewed on 26th March at Hampden, courtesy rental DVD; the day the crazy blizzard came to Colorado! Thankfully, didn't last as long as it was expected to]
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Interview: Charlie Kaufman, screenwriter-director
"I always take projects that I don't know how to do. I always go in and say, 'This is what I'm going to try to do; I haven't done this before.' And I accept the fact that it may not come out well. And this is a continuation of that.
"I think we see failure as a negative thing in our culture, and I don't see it as a negative thing. I think failure is a sign that you tried to do something that is challenging and you didn't know how to do, and that to me is a good thing. That's bold, that's adventurous ... you can actually come up with something new and interesting, which you can't if you keep doing the same thing over and over again."
"I don't write for an audience in mind, ever. I don't ever think about an audience, because then I'd be writing what I think they want me to write, so that I can be successful, as opposed to writing what I feel, which is brave and risky."
Read on...
Kaufman reflects on his directorial debut
"I think we see failure as a negative thing in our culture, and I don't see it as a negative thing. I think failure is a sign that you tried to do something that is challenging and you didn't know how to do, and that to me is a good thing. That's bold, that's adventurous ... you can actually come up with something new and interesting, which you can't if you keep doing the same thing over and over again."
"I don't write for an audience in mind, ever. I don't ever think about an audience, because then I'd be writing what I think they want me to write, so that I can be successful, as opposed to writing what I feel, which is brave and risky."
Read on...
Kaufman reflects on his directorial debut
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Article: The new great American director
Roger Ebert's Journal:
"After finishing this film," he said, "I was just very depressed and I didn't understand what was going on in the film industry, or how do you make a film. I was very dark for two or three months; I was like, what am I gonna do? And then I read that that Herzog interview, where he told you that if the world were ending tomorrow, he would start a film. And I said, I'm gonna make a film."
Read on Ramin Bahrani
"After finishing this film," he said, "I was just very depressed and I didn't understand what was going on in the film industry, or how do you make a film. I was very dark for two or three months; I was like, what am I gonna do? And then I read that that Herzog interview, where he told you that if the world were ending tomorrow, he would start a film. And I said, I'm gonna make a film."
Read on Ramin Bahrani
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Article: Underdogs have it tough + Thoughts
Bhumika forwarded me this brief article, which I think does a pretty good job of talking about the reality on getting (acting) roles in the industry and following is my (not-so-brief!) spiel.
[ Underdogs have it tough ]
Breaking-In into a World of Stars
The industry is made up of jerks - the 'commercial' angle is what they are concerned about, which is valid, but it gets murky when they assign completely subjective values on the 'commercial-potential' of scripts, actors et al. I have some idea on how many of these films work having seen the (commercial) results at the plexes.
But...they are blind to that. Living like Alice in Wonderland. It's amazing how good they are in conning themselves. Though I haven't interacted with many, I think the majority believe that they are the prophets and know what works. Where do we see this? Well...in practice, where else!
I have been talking to some of our pals about this, especially Mr. (Actor) Khanna - take the films that have come out over the years and make a list of non-entities, people with no connections. who came out of the blue and made their mark. When you do that, you shall find that the list is very small and even now...these guys are not the preferred ones.
I think after years, and with low-budget films perhaps being the best model to play around, guys like Irrfan Khan and Kay Kay managed to make it. There could be more, but...these two guys come to my mind. I was a fan of Manoj Bajpai but...he has vanished. I think Jimmy Shergill is there too; he is good but then the other two chaps are at another level. And there's a new breed coming it seems.
The point is - there is a tremendous belief (and application of it) in the industry that you need 'stars', 'known-faces'; talent could be good et al, but...we need to sell our films. What doesn't matter, though they perhaps in their pseudo-philosophising do stress on - script / story.
Truth be told - even the so-called good 'masalas' are fraught with flaws; they can get away by at least getting some stuff right. But it's amazing how they ignore guys who are good in their job, who don't have some 'star' value, especially when it comes to acting.
I think finally some (fresh) directors are stepping-in and getting opportunities - Kashyap, Bannerjee (Khosla ka Ghosla, Oye Lucky...), Rajkumar Gupta (Aamir), Navdeep Singh (Manorma 6ft Under), Neeraj Pandey (Wednesday) and there would be more. Even if they have been hired for commercial reasons (they perhaps would come cheap), the fact that they have done a decent job of telling stories, they are preferred now, since...these films get in the money.
Guess what - these guys are the ones who have stayed away from the 'stars'. Perhaps they didn't have the money, but...I think this is where the best road lie to do decent stuff.
BUT...what the article didn't mention and what I have believed for years - there is only one way to break-in (and...you still may not be able to break-in as the jerks, the powers-that-be could always be closing the doors) - you need to be highly skilled and....deliver tremendous performance. If on a scale of 10, good is 7, you need to perform at 8-9, only then you can hope for something.
You sure can get lucky, but...turn around and see how many guys made it. I think of an excellent actor - Pawan Malhotra, and it's only now the young guys/directors have brought him back. That way - I love Kashyap - he is the guy who works with the finest of talent all the time. And now...it seems he is getting completely unknown guys and throwing them at the world and with their solid performances the world is talking about them.
One of the stunning performances in the past years has been Deepak Dobriyal's character in Omkara; people don't realize how good Saif Khan looks (and he acts superbly no doubt) due to his side-kick. The moment the two come together, the screen starts to dance! You just want to see those guys interact and play around. I had no idea about this guy, but today it feels very good to know that he is getting solid roles and people are talking about him.
Can he take on the stars? In terms of performance, he would be much higher. In terms of 'power', well no, and guess what - that won't be his fault. The biggies have decided he doesn't have the looks and size, so their attention will be on others. But...take a story, where you think you can fit him in, and if you can tell it well, it will shine much better than any masala. And by 'shine', I do mean it would make more money.
The other reality is - all these guys (including SRK being a self-driven dude) have taken years to reach where they are, literally. Irrfan, Kay Kay and the breed have been at it for years. Not just come in, get a lead role and reach the top (if that IS the top.) The 'rulers' of the field don't look at you and that critical component - media, definitely doesn't; it may make a remark or two, but eventually it's all about the honey, which only the stars provide as apparently the audience loves them. Well...that's how it works in the (real) world.
I have been reading recently interviews of people / writers / cinematographers / directors, and them taking on the 'Auteur' theory (which the French guys - Truffaut, Godard et al had championed) - director is the sole driver of a film. It perhaps was true when they worked and how they worked, but even then it may not have been true. You need others and their value-addition is essential.
Yet...you never hear of the 'others'. You only hear of stars, or directors (in the media). As...that's the nature of the media - it's not in their best interest to focus on a writer or DP or someone else. They need a 'face' and these guys since ages have been built as 'Gods' and that's who they seek.
I believe it is possible to focus on others and if you throw enough spotlight, they become stars too. It happens rarely but...it sure is possible. Though media have their own agendas and getting to the 'truth' isn't likely to be one of them.
I felt thrilled for that guy, Pookutty - now he would be a star back home, thanks to the Oscar. Just by one event, he now brings in 'added' value. It's interesting that he believes he has done much better work before and only now he is being noticed; of course Oscar is not about the the best, after-all even that's a subjective deal. Point is - finally he gets recognition and he seems pretty good at it (of course.) Sure...the limelight will waiver, but within the game at least his value gets much more, though he had already been working with the big boys like Bhansali.
It also seems that the road to stardom is changing for people who are not from some high-profile 'family'. Good performance / work is the only way. In fact, here's another thing - make a new list - of all the 'family' contacts who came into the industry in the past years, people who got the breaks because it was easy for them. Guess what - that list too would be extremely small. Point being even if you are Saif Khan or Hrithik, you need to be good at what you do. You may get a break, but you can't survive if you can't deliver.
If you don't have any contacts, then there's no alternative but to be exceptionally good. And you won't become that if you are not focused and not working on your 'passion'. And even if you are, it's likely you may never make it ;-)
So...where do you find the solace or...the material success that one strives for? Hmm...
In the end, (here's my favorite dialogue - mine ;-) - Life is about numbers. Or...hours. You need to put them in. Else...you may value-add lives of others - papa, mummy, uncle, aunty, wife, husband, bhaiya, bhena...which if it works for you is great. But...if the amount of time you need to put in is less than the threshold, then...forget it. Of course, only you should know what the threshold is and...one may never know!
The underlying thing remains - master your damn domain....keep working at it...don't get carried-away...keep slogging...keep practicing and then maybe...you will churn out some good work. Likely it may not get the required 'release', but...you would perhaps justify your potential, at least do something good that would satisfy you.
Though yes, within the rules of the world, you could still be a flunky. You may not be able to buy a car - you may have to stick to your 8-yr old Pulsar. Yeah...that's one for me ;-)
[ Underdogs have it tough ]
[ Underdogs have it tough ]
Breaking-In into a World of Stars
The industry is made up of jerks - the 'commercial' angle is what they are concerned about, which is valid, but it gets murky when they assign completely subjective values on the 'commercial-potential' of scripts, actors et al. I have some idea on how many of these films work having seen the (commercial) results at the plexes.
But...they are blind to that. Living like Alice in Wonderland. It's amazing how good they are in conning themselves. Though I haven't interacted with many, I think the majority believe that they are the prophets and know what works. Where do we see this? Well...in practice, where else!
I have been talking to some of our pals about this, especially Mr. (Actor) Khanna - take the films that have come out over the years and make a list of non-entities, people with no connections. who came out of the blue and made their mark. When you do that, you shall find that the list is very small and even now...these guys are not the preferred ones.
I think after years, and with low-budget films perhaps being the best model to play around, guys like Irrfan Khan and Kay Kay managed to make it. There could be more, but...these two guys come to my mind. I was a fan of Manoj Bajpai but...he has vanished. I think Jimmy Shergill is there too; he is good but then the other two chaps are at another level. And there's a new breed coming it seems.
The point is - there is a tremendous belief (and application of it) in the industry that you need 'stars', 'known-faces'; talent could be good et al, but...we need to sell our films. What doesn't matter, though they perhaps in their pseudo-philosophising do stress on - script / story.
Truth be told - even the so-called good 'masalas' are fraught with flaws; they can get away by at least getting some stuff right. But it's amazing how they ignore guys who are good in their job, who don't have some 'star' value, especially when it comes to acting.
I think finally some (fresh) directors are stepping-in and getting opportunities - Kashyap, Bannerjee (Khosla ka Ghosla, Oye Lucky...), Rajkumar Gupta (Aamir), Navdeep Singh (Manorma 6ft Under), Neeraj Pandey (Wednesday) and there would be more. Even if they have been hired for commercial reasons (they perhaps would come cheap), the fact that they have done a decent job of telling stories, they are preferred now, since...these films get in the money.
Guess what - these guys are the ones who have stayed away from the 'stars'. Perhaps they didn't have the money, but...I think this is where the best road lie to do decent stuff.
BUT...what the article didn't mention and what I have believed for years - there is only one way to break-in (and...you still may not be able to break-in as the jerks, the powers-that-be could always be closing the doors) - you need to be highly skilled and....deliver tremendous performance. If on a scale of 10, good is 7, you need to perform at 8-9, only then you can hope for something.
You sure can get lucky, but...turn around and see how many guys made it. I think of an excellent actor - Pawan Malhotra, and it's only now the young guys/directors have brought him back. That way - I love Kashyap - he is the guy who works with the finest of talent all the time. And now...it seems he is getting completely unknown guys and throwing them at the world and with their solid performances the world is talking about them.
One of the stunning performances in the past years has been Deepak Dobriyal's character in Omkara; people don't realize how good Saif Khan looks (and he acts superbly no doubt) due to his side-kick. The moment the two come together, the screen starts to dance! You just want to see those guys interact and play around. I had no idea about this guy, but today it feels very good to know that he is getting solid roles and people are talking about him.
Can he take on the stars? In terms of performance, he would be much higher. In terms of 'power', well no, and guess what - that won't be his fault. The biggies have decided he doesn't have the looks and size, so their attention will be on others. But...take a story, where you think you can fit him in, and if you can tell it well, it will shine much better than any masala. And by 'shine', I do mean it would make more money.
The other reality is - all these guys (including SRK being a self-driven dude) have taken years to reach where they are, literally. Irrfan, Kay Kay and the breed have been at it for years. Not just come in, get a lead role and reach the top (if that IS the top.) The 'rulers' of the field don't look at you and that critical component - media, definitely doesn't; it may make a remark or two, but eventually it's all about the honey, which only the stars provide as apparently the audience loves them. Well...that's how it works in the (real) world.
I have been reading recently interviews of people / writers / cinematographers / directors, and them taking on the 'Auteur' theory (which the French guys - Truffaut, Godard et al had championed) - director is the sole driver of a film. It perhaps was true when they worked and how they worked, but even then it may not have been true. You need others and their value-addition is essential.
Yet...you never hear of the 'others'. You only hear of stars, or directors (in the media). As...that's the nature of the media - it's not in their best interest to focus on a writer or DP or someone else. They need a 'face' and these guys since ages have been built as 'Gods' and that's who they seek.
I believe it is possible to focus on others and if you throw enough spotlight, they become stars too. It happens rarely but...it sure is possible. Though media have their own agendas and getting to the 'truth' isn't likely to be one of them.
I felt thrilled for that guy, Pookutty - now he would be a star back home, thanks to the Oscar. Just by one event, he now brings in 'added' value. It's interesting that he believes he has done much better work before and only now he is being noticed; of course Oscar is not about the the best, after-all even that's a subjective deal. Point is - finally he gets recognition and he seems pretty good at it (of course.) Sure...the limelight will waiver, but within the game at least his value gets much more, though he had already been working with the big boys like Bhansali.
It also seems that the road to stardom is changing for people who are not from some high-profile 'family'. Good performance / work is the only way. In fact, here's another thing - make a new list - of all the 'family' contacts who came into the industry in the past years, people who got the breaks because it was easy for them. Guess what - that list too would be extremely small. Point being even if you are Saif Khan or Hrithik, you need to be good at what you do. You may get a break, but you can't survive if you can't deliver.
If you don't have any contacts, then there's no alternative but to be exceptionally good. And you won't become that if you are not focused and not working on your 'passion'. And even if you are, it's likely you may never make it ;-)
So...where do you find the solace or...the material success that one strives for? Hmm...
In the end, (here's my favorite dialogue - mine ;-) - Life is about numbers. Or...hours. You need to put them in. Else...you may value-add lives of others - papa, mummy, uncle, aunty, wife, husband, bhaiya, bhena...which if it works for you is great. But...if the amount of time you need to put in is less than the threshold, then...forget it. Of course, only you should know what the threshold is and...one may never know!
The underlying thing remains - master your damn domain....keep working at it...don't get carried-away...keep slogging...keep practicing and then maybe...you will churn out some good work. Likely it may not get the required 'release', but...you would perhaps justify your potential, at least do something good that would satisfy you.
Though yes, within the rules of the world, you could still be a flunky. You may not be able to buy a car - you may have to stick to your 8-yr old Pulsar. Yeah...that's one for me ;-)
[ Underdogs have it tough ]
Re: Videos: Last Pentamester
The lighting video is kinda messy - it runs too fast a la Chaplin film. I deleted the video and uploaded another one; yet the problem persists on this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKGdkyIlSJg&feature=channel_page
I tried it in Facebook and succeeded, which has anyway better quality and thankfully the complete file got uploaded. We had tried another way to create silhouette, which is seen in this video.
This is the link:
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=58443464762&saved
I wonder if you can see it. If not and if you are keen, then login and check my profile and hopefully you shall see it.
Hmm...I should anyway upload the Raging Bull scene on Facebook considering the good quality.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKGdkyIlSJg&feature=channel_page
I tried it in Facebook and succeeded, which has anyway better quality and thankfully the complete file got uploaded. We had tried another way to create silhouette, which is seen in this video.
This is the link:
http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=58443464762&saved
I wonder if you can see it. If not and if you are keen, then login and check my profile and hopefully you shall see it.
Hmm...I should anyway upload the Raging Bull scene on Facebook considering the good quality.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Videos: Last Pentamester
Last Scene with Actors at CFS
My last film at CFS was made in Dec (In A Minute); now...this is my last (proper) scene with actors, the final 'exercise' we had to do in our Directing Workshop class. My first (proper) exterior / outdoor scene, first 'fight'...overall a good learning exercise, well, yes...provided the lessons are applied in the future!
It's been my (regular) observation that one tends to learn from making a mistake than doing thing right! As typically, if you mess-up, you are pointed out the error, and the point made more often than not stays with you. The key is - whether right or wrong, it should be pointed out and discussed. Else...
It's the scene from Raging Bull (De Niro and Joe Pesci.) Now whatever scenes / films will happen, will happen back home. Till then, this is it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WltO6Dd1xMU
Final for Lighting Class
I also uploaded the final exercise of our Lighting class; it's quite basic stuff - some folks had done properly-acted scenes, while we (my partner, Laurent and me) just focused on getting the light right, which we struggled with :-)
Hmm...I think we took around 3 hours to do these set-ups; we had more time but as the equipment was to be checked-out late, we made with whatever we had - lots of tungsten and 'ellipsoidal' (which is basically the spotlight used on stage); we were helped by a great 'grip' (who helps in setting up lights and also electric connections, though the term for that tends to be - best boy! in fact, i have noticed that recent Hindi films are going for the same terminology.)
Decent learning, I would say...whatever that is!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5dndY4PP7U
My last film at CFS was made in Dec (In A Minute); now...this is my last (proper) scene with actors, the final 'exercise' we had to do in our Directing Workshop class. My first (proper) exterior / outdoor scene, first 'fight'...overall a good learning exercise, well, yes...provided the lessons are applied in the future!
It's been my (regular) observation that one tends to learn from making a mistake than doing thing right! As typically, if you mess-up, you are pointed out the error, and the point made more often than not stays with you. The key is - whether right or wrong, it should be pointed out and discussed. Else...
It's the scene from Raging Bull (De Niro and Joe Pesci.) Now whatever scenes / films will happen, will happen back home. Till then, this is it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WltO6Dd1xMU
Final for Lighting Class
I also uploaded the final exercise of our Lighting class; it's quite basic stuff - some folks had done properly-acted scenes, while we (my partner, Laurent and me) just focused on getting the light right, which we struggled with :-)
Hmm...I think we took around 3 hours to do these set-ups; we had more time but as the equipment was to be checked-out late, we made with whatever we had - lots of tungsten and 'ellipsoidal' (which is basically the spotlight used on stage); we were helped by a great 'grip' (who helps in setting up lights and also electric connections, though the term for that tends to be - best boy! in fact, i have noticed that recent Hindi films are going for the same terminology.)
Decent learning, I would say...whatever that is!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5dndY4PP7U
Viewed: Brick Lane
The story, per se, is good of a young Bangladeshi girl coming to England as she is married to an elderly person. The only bond she has with her village is her sister with whom she communicates regularly through letters. She has two daughters and a husband who is self-centered.
Amidst her 'normal' life, she finds a young man, and going against her timid nature, she has an affair with him. Though she refuses to marry him and leave her husband, she opens up, realizes that her true love is her husband and children. As her husband decides to go back to his country, she gathers her guts to stay in the (new) country to which she and her daughters belong.
The problem in the flick is that it doesn't have the required momentum. It seems contrived at places and though the story moves forward, it's slow; the pacing should have much more in the first half. And the key problem being a passive protagonist. With conflict not pronounced, it doesn't grip though in the second half it gets better.
Based on the novel by Monica Ali
Writer: Laura Jones & Abi Morgan
Director: Sarah Gavron
Rating **1/2
[Max ****]
[Viewed on rented DVD at Hampden on 20th March, 2009]
Viewed: I'VE LOVED YOU FOR SO LONG
Slow and steady the film moves but it grips you as gradually the story unfolds of Juliette and the unravelling of mystery behind her past years. It's a story of two sisters, how Juliette after being separated from her for 15 years comes back in her life and shapes her life adjusting to her and her family.
Kristin Scott Thomas is in top form. The story set up in a small town has a sweet, leisurely pace and Philippe Claudel creates a great atmosphere that focuses the film on Juliette. Elsa Zylberstein, as the sister also gives a stunning performance.
Rating ***1/2
[Max ****]
[Max ****]
[Viewed on rented DVD at Hampden on 16th March, 2009]
Viewed: DOUBT
In the world of God, suspicion arrives and stays till it ends up leaving events and a life of all those involved very much changed. It's a world where self-belief strikes reality, where perception raises questions, where morality is challenged.
By setting up a story amongst the nuns and a father, Shanley opens the door into the a life less extraordinary being loved by the people of the church. They are nice people, with strong conviction and yet...some people break, some don't and some can't help being lost in the middle.
Streep is as good as ever and Seymour Hoffman shines again highlighting the fact that he is as good as anyone in the game. A gripping drama with superb performances.
Based on a play by John Patrick Shanley
Writer: John Patrick Shanley
Director: John Patrick Shanley
Rating ****
[Max ****]
[Viewed on 16th March, 09, 2.15 pm show at Regency Theatres on Tamarac Square]
By setting up a story amongst the nuns and a father, Shanley opens the door into the a life less extraordinary being loved by the people of the church. They are nice people, with strong conviction and yet...some people break, some don't and some can't help being lost in the middle.
Streep is as good as ever and Seymour Hoffman shines again highlighting the fact that he is as good as anyone in the game. A gripping drama with superb performances.
Based on a play by John Patrick Shanley
Writer: John Patrick Shanley
Director: John Patrick Shanley
Rating ****
[Max ****]
[Viewed on 16th March, 09, 2.15 pm show at Regency Theatres on Tamarac Square]
Viewed: OSCAR SHORTS (Live Action + Animation)
It is great to be able to view all the shorts at one glance. And the quality is pretty solid. It is also an interesting mix since it has films from all across the globe, not just USA stuff.
Live Action has some high level stuff; the first flick, a German movie (On The Line) was very moving. A security man having a crush on a woman and...due to misplaced jealousy he is part of a scene where he lets her brother unknowingly die. One could have set this film in any country and it would work.
New Boy, was a pretty nice and touching film from Ireland about an African boy's first day in school. What followed was another story based in Nazi-occupied Europe, the German film, Toyland was a good one, but I didn't find it too amazing; it won the Oscar. Again executed at a solid level.
Live Action has some high level stuff; the first flick, a German movie (On The Line) was very moving. A security man having a crush on a woman and...due to misplaced jealousy he is part of a scene where he lets her brother unknowingly die. One could have set this film in any country and it would work.
New Boy, was a pretty nice and touching film from Ireland about an African boy's first day in school. What followed was another story based in Nazi-occupied Europe, the German film, Toyland was a good one, but I didn't find it too amazing; it won the Oscar. Again executed at a solid level.
Besides New Boy, the Danish film, The Pig was a very simple story, a comedy about a man who lands in a hospital and becomes fascinated & obsessive about a painting of a pig, which creates complication.
And then a very interesting French Film, Manon on the Asphalt. A young woman has an accident, is apparently dying and we see her (new) perspective on things - what things were, meant and what could be.
The animation level was over all good and some were top of the league. In fact, we watched around 8 films, not just the Oscar and the one I found best, was perhaps not even in Top 5. There was a lot of fun. The Japanese one (Pieces of Love) that won was more on the serious side and quite a touching story and super-animation. Of the Oscars, the one I found very impressive was 'This Side Up, an English film I think, which was a lot of fun. However a film that was sweeping in its magnitude was about a world that was ending. And...i don't recall its name!
Viewed: THE DARK KNIGHT
Batman takes on the Joker. And for once is willing to give himself up. The weakness perhaps adds a dimension to his character yet it seems to raise certain questions. It's a decent thriller with the usual support-team of Caine and Freeman. The romance angle doesn't seem to work great, though it's interesting that the love triangle is made stronger by building a positive character.
Based on characters created by Bob Kane
Writer: Jonathan Nolan & Christopher Nolan
Director: Christopher Nolan
Rating ***
[Max ****]
[Viewed on 13th March, Hampden; rented DVD]
Based on characters created by Bob Kane
Writer: Jonathan Nolan & Christopher Nolan
Director: Christopher Nolan
Rating ***
[Max ****]
[Viewed on 13th March, Hampden; rented DVD]
Friday, March 6, 2009
Viewed: RACHEL GETTING MARRIED
The film portrays a union of a family on the occasion of a wedding but besides having joyous moments they revisit past ghosts and as such move forward.
The story chiefly revolves around Kym, an ex-addict trying to overcome her problems but still simmering with trouble visiting her beloved sister's Rachel's wedding. Her arrival brings joy to the family though they are also unsure of what may happen as Kym can be brash and her unpredictability is an issue.
The wedding is a mix of various cultures; the wedding dresses of the bride and her 'maids' are sarees; there is a lot of different kind of music - rock, jazz and Arabic/African; there is bonhomie - singing, and praises for the loving couple. The story is 'located' in the home of Rachel and her father and within this place of warmth there is Kym, who can be genuinely affectionate or tormented dealing with her hassles.
As the story progresses one discovers the secret that wrecked Kym and the one that perhaps split the family even though they are together. The family is made up of 'good' people and attempts to highlight their affectionate moments and the pain that they deal with.
It's basically the story of Kym who wants to find meaning by making amends but...as her fragile mind keeps struggling, it results in conflicts with her sister and mother. Yet, as she and her sister confront their demons by talking & taking it out, they connect by their deep bonding for each other.
Anne Hathway who plays Kym was nominated for Oscar for the role plays a struggling person effectively bringing out her angst, her desire to be wanted, to connect & to find her family. Good ol' Debra Winger, as the mother does add a lot of meat with her small role.
The entire film is hand-held and shot on video. Though at times it seems kind of jarring, more than that, the pace seems to slow down, too much for comfort. Certain interactions within the family seem contrived; the pain has been dealt with, the affection is obvious, yet it feels at times, that it goes on somewhat unnecessarily.
However, the film is a decent watch, with pretty touching moments; it's a family that wants to be together, has a hard time but the bond gets stronger as they come together to celebrate this special event of Rachel's marriage.
Screenplay: Jenny Lumet
Director: Jonathan Demme
[Max ****]
{Watched in parts on torrent, on 3rd-4th March at Hampden}
The story chiefly revolves around Kym, an ex-addict trying to overcome her problems but still simmering with trouble visiting her beloved sister's Rachel's wedding. Her arrival brings joy to the family though they are also unsure of what may happen as Kym can be brash and her unpredictability is an issue.
The wedding is a mix of various cultures; the wedding dresses of the bride and her 'maids' are sarees; there is a lot of different kind of music - rock, jazz and Arabic/African; there is bonhomie - singing, and praises for the loving couple. The story is 'located' in the home of Rachel and her father and within this place of warmth there is Kym, who can be genuinely affectionate or tormented dealing with her hassles.
As the story progresses one discovers the secret that wrecked Kym and the one that perhaps split the family even though they are together. The family is made up of 'good' people and attempts to highlight their affectionate moments and the pain that they deal with.
It's basically the story of Kym who wants to find meaning by making amends but...as her fragile mind keeps struggling, it results in conflicts with her sister and mother. Yet, as she and her sister confront their demons by talking & taking it out, they connect by their deep bonding for each other.
Anne Hathway who plays Kym was nominated for Oscar for the role plays a struggling person effectively bringing out her angst, her desire to be wanted, to connect & to find her family. Good ol' Debra Winger, as the mother does add a lot of meat with her small role.
The entire film is hand-held and shot on video. Though at times it seems kind of jarring, more than that, the pace seems to slow down, too much for comfort. Certain interactions within the family seem contrived; the pain has been dealt with, the affection is obvious, yet it feels at times, that it goes on somewhat unnecessarily.
However, the film is a decent watch, with pretty touching moments; it's a family that wants to be together, has a hard time but the bond gets stronger as they come together to celebrate this special event of Rachel's marriage.
Screenplay: Jenny Lumet
Director: Jonathan Demme
Rating ***
[Max ****]
{Watched in parts on torrent, on 3rd-4th March at Hampden}
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Viewed: THE READER
It flows with a leisurely pace. Takes you on a unique journey. Spans a time of over 35 years. And gives you a lot of moments that are moving. Eventually, it's a touching story of a man who finally learns to deal with himself and open himself up.
The Reader is about a young boy, Michael and spans his life from teenage to a time when he has a teenage daughter. His story revolves around a woman, Hanna with whom he has an affair when he is 15. He discovers sexuality thanks to her and in the process experiences affection. Though the affair lasts only a summer, it changes his life forever.
Almost the whole story unfolds in flashback except for the ending, as Michael tracks his life defined by his relationship with Hanna. She loves to be read books by him and he becomes her 'reader'; getting new books all the time and reading to her. Till this time the films works more of a romance between a young boy and a woman but when they separate the story goes up a level and keeps ascending.
By staying close to the character of Hanna, it deftly creates a situation that deals with morality. Michael, who becomes a lawyer is put directly into the spot when he finds Hanna again, on a trial. But he is a person who is diffident, perhaps a normal ordinary man who is impotent in moments of crisis, and yet....he finds a way to connect with her and becomes her 'reader' again even though she is in jail.
Michael is a man who admittedly never opens up and in his later years as he realizes his flaws more, he takes a step forward by aiming to connect more with his daughter. There are some big 'secrets' in the film, about Hanna, which as they unfold keep touching you more and more as they directly impact Michael.
By spending a lot of moments in the early affair between Michael and Hanna, a special bonding is created that sets up the entire story. Kate Winslet, who won the Oscar, goes out all the way; she keeps the soul intact of Hanna despite her behavior that would be deemed immoral by the world and as an actress goes nude for many a scenes. Hanna's closed-personality is really opened-up by her effortless love-making and tender intimate scenes with Michael.
Daldry paces the entire film in a lesiurely-manner, and though at times, it feels like too slow you keep moving forward and by gradually revealing the history of Hanna he takes you more into his characters and story. Eventually, though the film has it's sad moments and looks like having a down-ending, he resolves it on a positive note.
Based on the novel, Der Vorleser by Bernhard Schlink
Screenplay: David Hare
Director: Stephen Daldry
[Max ****]
{Watched on 4th March, 3.30 pm show at Southlands Cinema. Audi capacity: 147. Attendance: 5}
The Reader is about a young boy, Michael and spans his life from teenage to a time when he has a teenage daughter. His story revolves around a woman, Hanna with whom he has an affair when he is 15. He discovers sexuality thanks to her and in the process experiences affection. Though the affair lasts only a summer, it changes his life forever.
Almost the whole story unfolds in flashback except for the ending, as Michael tracks his life defined by his relationship with Hanna. She loves to be read books by him and he becomes her 'reader'; getting new books all the time and reading to her. Till this time the films works more of a romance between a young boy and a woman but when they separate the story goes up a level and keeps ascending.
By staying close to the character of Hanna, it deftly creates a situation that deals with morality. Michael, who becomes a lawyer is put directly into the spot when he finds Hanna again, on a trial. But he is a person who is diffident, perhaps a normal ordinary man who is impotent in moments of crisis, and yet....he finds a way to connect with her and becomes her 'reader' again even though she is in jail.
Michael is a man who admittedly never opens up and in his later years as he realizes his flaws more, he takes a step forward by aiming to connect more with his daughter. There are some big 'secrets' in the film, about Hanna, which as they unfold keep touching you more and more as they directly impact Michael.
By spending a lot of moments in the early affair between Michael and Hanna, a special bonding is created that sets up the entire story. Kate Winslet, who won the Oscar, goes out all the way; she keeps the soul intact of Hanna despite her behavior that would be deemed immoral by the world and as an actress goes nude for many a scenes. Hanna's closed-personality is really opened-up by her effortless love-making and tender intimate scenes with Michael.
Daldry paces the entire film in a lesiurely-manner, and though at times, it feels like too slow you keep moving forward and by gradually revealing the history of Hanna he takes you more into his characters and story. Eventually, though the film has it's sad moments and looks like having a down-ending, he resolves it on a positive note.
Based on the novel, Der Vorleser by Bernhard Schlink
Screenplay: David Hare
Director: Stephen Daldry
Rating ***1/2
[Max ****]
{Watched on 4th March, 3.30 pm show at Southlands Cinema. Audi capacity: 147. Attendance: 5}
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Interview: Bobby Moresco, Screenwriter
Bobby Moresco, Writer + Producer of Crash.
"I spent about five years just reading the great screenplays, great plays..."
On writer's block
Moresco + Mark Harris (Producer) (a long one - 45 mins)
- Write what sucks
- Writing is rewriting
- Get rid of the burden of Oscar
- Go to the desk and write
"I spent about five years just reading the great screenplays, great plays..."
On writer's block
Moresco + Mark Harris (Producer) (a long one - 45 mins)
- Write what sucks
- Writing is rewriting
- Get rid of the burden of Oscar
- Go to the desk and write
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Viewed: THE CLASS
This one's a special flick - highlighting the struggle of a teacher, François and going into the depths to give a peek inside the students. It is a remarkable film that depicts innocence and a future that is perhaps unsure considering how the future generation grows.
The French film is set in a school, chiefly focusing on a relationship between a class of teenage students with their teacher. The story is of a young teacher who deals with students of different backgrounds and teaches them French. In the process there are moments of ups and moments of downs; incidents when students become too difficult to handle and times when the teacher is almost losing it.
The film has no music. It's chiefly shot in a small class-room; you keep shifting from close-ups of different students and teacher. You start by noticing different students and by the end of it, you know everyone, or what they reveal of themselves in the classroom. Just like François. You see his interactions with the students and his colleagues and his endeavor to do his best for his students but...he is a human too.
The best thing about the film is the realistic feel - it's almost like a documentary and you see the teacher's journey not being an inspiring hero, which a typical teacher-film does; in fact, the film uses the real names of the actors as the characters. François Bégaudeau is the lead, who was also part of the screenwriting team, a story based on his book.
The conversations shift from basic to extremely conflicting; from François explaining stuff to dealing with their open criticism of him. It definitely makes for captivating viewing. Indians will not be able to personally relate to such a classroom, since the 'order' is more set back home; it's more 'disciplined'. Yet...we all can identify with the struggle of the kids, not to mention with François.
By being so realistic, the film doesn't necessarily have those typical 'rising and falling' moments, though the film has plenty. It's a film that sinks into you as it moves along and leaves you with a strange feeling in the end - you watch a world that has been opened to you, like a spectator, and a world that you also belonged to once. The Class is definitely in a special class.
Screenplay: François Bégaudeau, Robin Campillo, and Laurent Cantet, based on the book by François Bégaudeau
Director: Laurent Cantet
[Max ****]
{Watched on 2nd March, 4.15 pm show at Esquire on Downing and 6th. After the film had grub at Gunther Toody - their 'Original Hamburger' with a gawd-awful thick chocolate milk-shake! Sure was tasty but...gotta watch the damn sugar and fat :-( But it was a fantastic not-so-cold evening.}
The French film is set in a school, chiefly focusing on a relationship between a class of teenage students with their teacher. The story is of a young teacher who deals with students of different backgrounds and teaches them French. In the process there are moments of ups and moments of downs; incidents when students become too difficult to handle and times when the teacher is almost losing it.
The film has no music. It's chiefly shot in a small class-room; you keep shifting from close-ups of different students and teacher. You start by noticing different students and by the end of it, you know everyone, or what they reveal of themselves in the classroom. Just like François. You see his interactions with the students and his colleagues and his endeavor to do his best for his students but...he is a human too.
The best thing about the film is the realistic feel - it's almost like a documentary and you see the teacher's journey not being an inspiring hero, which a typical teacher-film does; in fact, the film uses the real names of the actors as the characters. François Bégaudeau is the lead, who was also part of the screenwriting team, a story based on his book.
The conversations shift from basic to extremely conflicting; from François explaining stuff to dealing with their open criticism of him. It definitely makes for captivating viewing. Indians will not be able to personally relate to such a classroom, since the 'order' is more set back home; it's more 'disciplined'. Yet...we all can identify with the struggle of the kids, not to mention with François.
By being so realistic, the film doesn't necessarily have those typical 'rising and falling' moments, though the film has plenty. It's a film that sinks into you as it moves along and leaves you with a strange feeling in the end - you watch a world that has been opened to you, like a spectator, and a world that you also belonged to once. The Class is definitely in a special class.
Screenplay: François Bégaudeau, Robin Campillo, and Laurent Cantet, based on the book by François Bégaudeau
Director: Laurent Cantet
Rating ****
[Max ****]
{Watched on 2nd March, 4.15 pm show at Esquire on Downing and 6th. After the film had grub at Gunther Toody - their 'Original Hamburger' with a gawd-awful thick chocolate milk-shake! Sure was tasty but...gotta watch the damn sugar and fat :-( But it was a fantastic not-so-cold evening.}
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Must Watch: Sita Sings The Blue
If you can, watch this film. Don't miss it.
I think it will never get released in India, since it goes anti-Ram. A lady's real story was made 'around' Ramayana. And...all by herself...the entire animation.
Never got a release in USA except fests courtesy the music (songs by Annete Hanshaw) rights issue, but likely the film would have made it into Top-5 oscar for animation, and this is just 2-D, made by Nina Paley who took around 4-5 years. (She got ditched by her boy-friend, who went to Trivandrum and she made this 'fun' story.)
http://www.thirteen.org/sites/reel13/indies/indie-sita-sings-the-blues/241/
(Even the torrent is now available.)
My favorite song is at 1.05 (sung by luv-kush; listen to the lyrics and you know what the film is about :-)
So watch...hope you have good connectivity.
http://www.sitasingstheblues.com/
Tagline: "The Greatest Break-Up Story Ever Told."
" Dear Audience,
I think it will never get released in India, since it goes anti-Ram. A lady's real story was made 'around' Ramayana. And...all by herself...the entire animation.
Never got a release in USA except fests courtesy the music (songs by Annete Hanshaw) rights issue, but likely the film would have made it into Top-5 oscar for animation, and this is just 2-D, made by Nina Paley who took around 4-5 years. (She got ditched by her boy-friend, who went to Trivandrum and she made this 'fun' story.)
http://www.thirteen.org/sites/reel13/indies/indie-sita-sings-the-blues/241/
(Even the torrent is now available.)
My favorite song is at 1.05 (sung by luv-kush; listen to the lyrics and you know what the film is about :-)
So watch...hope you have good connectivity.
http://www.sitasingstheblues.com/
Tagline: "The Greatest Break-Up Story Ever Told."
" Dear Audience,
I hereby give Sita Sings the Blues to you. Like all culture, it belongs to you already, but I am making it explicit with a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike License. Please distribute, copy, share, archive, and show Sita Sings the Blues. From the shared culture it came, and back into the shared culture it goes..."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)