THEMED ESSIESPICS? WHY NOT?

I seem to have had a little brainwave about this weeks entries.

It's just that I honestly just spew whatever I have watched the previous week and I realised that I had watched alot of old black and white movies this week. So I decided to call them the Black and White soiree entries. I may do this "theme" thing every once in a while. It won't be a constant thing though. I mean, where 's the fun and spontaneity in that?

Oh and just incidentally, Merry belated Christmas and Happy New Year! ^_^
Essie

BLACK AND WHITE SOIREE 1 : A TRUE CLASSIC "CITIZEN KANE"

So, the first black and white classic I want to discuss with you is one I think every cinephile should have watched at least once. And it actually sits rather well after the previous weeks entries – you remember I was griping about directors who play the lead in their own films, right? Behold Orson Welles and / in Citizen Kane. Surely one of the best films ever made, Mr. Welles wrote, directed AND played the lead in it (talk about multitasking). But I need to stress one thing though, THAT was Orson Welles – a cinematic genius. Not all of us are or ever can be Orson Welles. Just so you all know that even though I think this film and The Town were good, I am NOT contradicting myself. I am not (just for clarification) comparing Ben Affleck to Orson Welles either. I have every respect for Mr. Affleck but there is a VAST difference between his directing and his new film and Mr. Welles and the film discussed here (there are FAR too many “and”s here and my Mom (who is an English teacher) will probably murder me when she reads this, just in case you were wondering). The similarity is of course that by the time he made his debut as a director (aged 25 to be fair), Mr. Welles was an acting SENSATION (imagine that spelled out in bulbs on Broadway) in the theatre. Which kinda, you know, gives you clout and artistic freedom. Oh and money. That, however, is another story.

Citizen Kane is a man in the US of A. He is a media tycoon, a grand public figure and he has just passed away. Now, the newspapers all agree that there are many things to say about Mr. Kane, and all are fixed on finding “a new angle” on the matter. One newspaper chief hits on a true mystery: Mr. Kane’s last words. Or rather word: Rosebud. No one can make head or tail of it; it is a bona fide mystery. “Talk to everyone who ever knew him!” orders the chief. “Find this Rosebud”. So off we go along with the reporter on the job. With him, we interview his ex-wife, school friend, business partner, legal guardian, household staff and many, many more… They all have truly fascinating stories about Mr. Kane but still no one knows who or what Rosebud is… Is there a way of discovering Rosebud? Or will Mr. Kane take his secret to the grave with him?

Ok, so it doesn’t take much to realize that this is actually a very VERY good detective story. But it isn’t just that. Yes we track clues, interview people and search for Rosebud, but there is a second story, delicately poised within the story of “Rosebud”; the life of Citizen Kane. Now, the film in its day caused a grand furor for many reasons. First, the technical inventions and innovations brought by Welles to the cinema. I will not go into those very technical details – it’s hardly the point of this blog but there is AMPLE material on the internet on this subject if you are interested. Secondly, there’s the genre. The film was actually a “film noir” which came as a bit of shock in 1941 seeing as the genre hadn’t been invented yet. Thirdly, the story of Kane’s life bears marked resemblances with the life story of real-life media tycoon of the 30’s William Randolph Hurst. The resemblances were so great that Hurst tried desperately to actually stop the film from being aired so sure he was that the film was about him. Honestly, the list of resemblances is rather staggering, but the point is that at the time the film gave the feeling of almost being a documentary a “true story” kind of effect. You should watch this film because it is brilliant, way ahead of it’s time and a damn good yarn. You will leave the proverbial table replete whether you are a scholar of the trade or just an attentive viewer in search of some good quality entertainment.

P.S. interesting footnote : I was struck when watching this film by Mr. Welles’s good looks. I was therefore rather amused to find out later that Mr. Welles complained bitterly about how much he had been “made up” to play the young Mr. Kane and that he had to “live down” the fact that he never looked that good for years to come… Such, my dears, is the acting trade for you!

BLACK AND WHITE SOIREE 2 : THERE'S NO BUSINESS LIKE SHOW BUSINESS! "ALL ABOUT EVE"

There really is no business like show business… Honestly. On stage, the PERFORMANCE is sheer magic. The stars truly shine. Then, they gracefully float out of sight, the grease paint comes off, the claws come out and production assistants and runners are thrown flying through the air like toys (I can personally vouch for the last part being true metaphorically true and wouldn’t swear that it didn’t occasionally happen physically as well). Now, it is almost exactly 10 years after Mr. Welles turned the world cinema stage upside down. We are now in the hands of quadruple (counting his win with this film) Oscar® winning director Joseph L. Mankiewicz. Ok, he was a bit before our time so what else might you have heard of that he did? The Barefooted Contessa? Yeah, come on, you’ve HEARD of it even if you haven’t actually watched it. Anyway, Mr. Mankiewicz takes us backstage. Not to the backstage of his own movie (DVD’s, Extras and “Behind The Scenes” wasn’t invented in 1950) but backstage in the theatre. Come, come, the real “drama” is just beginning…

Margo Channing (Bette Davis) is a diva. There is no other way to describe her and she would tear you to pieces if you tried. She lives in that rarified atmosphere – “the art circle darling” – populated with playwrights such Lloyd Richards and his wife Karen who is “theatre by marriage”, theatre critics such as Addison DeWitt, directors such as Bill, Margo’s long suffering boyfriend. Margo is so famous and such a success everyone puts up with her “ways”. She brings in such big crowds she’s allowed to play parts of 25 year-olds even though she’s pushing 40. And she has fans. Oh hundreds of fans but none so devoted as Eve Harrington. The mousy young woman attends ALL Margo’s performances, every single one, rain or shine. Karen is touched by the young girl’s attitude and devotion. And she is very old friends with Margo so she decides to do the poor little thing a favor and introduce them. Well Eve even melts Margo’s heart and soon she is living with Margo as her personal assistant. She has so many qualities, is so efficient… She’s just the perfect assistant for Margo… Or is she?

Now, I am a movie buff. I have worked in television, I am still heavily embroiled in the media and hope to become even more so. I love everything to do with showbiz and “behind the scenes”. I, therefore, watch one heck of a lot of this sort of thing. Rarely in my life have I seen a film where the intrigue was so cleverly constructed, Plot twists fall out of thin air, Bette Davis is brilliant, Anne Baxter who plays Eve is brilliant, everyone is brilliant. Everyone, incidentally, includes Marilyn Monroe who has a small part in it. Small, but brilliant. Like a diamond. The other thing is, of course, this movie is chiefly about acting – and I don’t just mean the topic. This was 1950 people, no special effects, no 3D, no HD, no adrenalin-pumped car chases or whatever. There is, however, acting. Bucket loads of the stuff in the best quality as well… Which is very fitting seeing as the topic is, basically, us. Even in your average office, all of you will know, there is intrigue, back stabbing, plots… Ok, put it in a theatre and showbiz, glam it up, it becomes more “dramatic”, but this is basically the kind of thing that happens all the time. You witness it and partake in it every single day. This is precisely why this film is a timeless classic. You’ll know what I mean when you watch it. And you will “recognize” the story. Immediately…

P.S. Ok, I love a bit of trivia. And I want to share this little morsel with you simply to show you how true to life this film is. When this film was shot, Bette Davis was a star, Anne Baxter was just starting out. And apparently Miss Baxter actually managed to influence the authorities into nominating her as “Best Actress” along with Bette Davis. The word is, this move divided the votes and definitively prevented Bette Davis from winning an Oscar ®. So there you are. I told you the film was realistic ;)

BLACK AND WHITE SOIREE 3 : "BICYCLE THIEVES"

Ok, I may not exactly be an esteemed critic, but I am a movie buff. An “amateur academic” as it were, a student of the trade. This is why I try and vary the type of film I watch as much as I can. This is also what has prompted my new “themed week” – black and white classics. Well, to understand a story fully, you must start at its beginning and persevere to its end. Naturally, watching every single thing is impossible but I am trying to broaden the spectrum as much as possible and you all seem to have tagged along with me. (For which, incidentally, I am eternally grateful.) Anyhow, this film I watched mainly as part of an educational process. I liked it a lot and I quite see how and why it became – and is – a classic. It also is, however, tough viewing in one sense. I enjoyed it and found it fascinating for instance but it isn’t your average Saturday night entertainment. You should watch it however. I mean there is more to movies than just “entertainment”, right?
Our last film of the week is not so much the work of a great artist (well it is of course but there’s another side to it) it is an excellent showcase for Italian neorealism. This was an almost extreme form of realism, aiming at portraying life as it was and finding the beauty therein as opposed to the escapism provided by Hollywood. The storyline itself is a good example of the genre. Antonio Ricci is a poor father of two. He lives in post WW2 Italy, he is not an educated man and he has been out of work for almost a year. Just when both his hope and his meager resources are about to run out, his luck turns: He gets a job. It is not “great” but the pay is good. He must take his bicycle around town putting up posters. He must provide the bicycle himself and he simply cannot work without it. On his very first day however, his bicycle is stolen. Antonio is in the depths of despair – the police aren’t helpful; neither are his new employers. He is, basically, on his own (apart from Bruno his young son) in his quest to get his bike back. He is hungry and desperate. And he is ready to do anything, simply ANYTHING to get the bicycle back…
This is a story of economic hardship and desperation. It’s especially pertinent in modern times, the market crash, people losing jobs… And I mean the story of how poverty and desperation can push men to extremes is as old as the hills, think of Les Miserables by Victor Hugo. Same difference. Here Antonio literally puts everything on the line for a bicycle. But this is not just a bicycle of course; it is hope for his young family… Anyone who has reached the point in their lives where they must budget for themselves cannot fail to sympathize fully with the film and be moved to the roots of their boots.
Technically speaking however, the neorealists are a tough bunch to deal with. Crude filming, natural light and real locations being used... All well and good and all integral parts of most of the realist movements (from the Dogme 95 group in Denmark for instance) and I’m fine with that. I mean I like the idea that films should be similar to real life – though I personally would throw a “sometimes” in there. I LIVE a real life I don’t necessarily need to see it on TV the whole time as well. Anyway, that is not my gripe, my gripe is the actors. You see the other “signature” of the movement – and most movements like it - is the use of amateur actors. Such is the case with this cast, a reporter who stopped by the set to talk to the director, a kid who was lolling around to watch the filming… All thrown in willy nilly to form a cast. To be fair, Lamberto Maggiorani who thus made his acting debut as Antonio Ricci and went on to star in no small number of films does “warm up” as the film goes along. I knew very little about the film when I started watching it though and it took me all of five minutes to realize it was an amateur cast. Now I have boundless respect for amateur actors. I don’t even have the talent to act even as an amateur – who am I kidding ? However, even just being at your ease in front of the camera requires a certain knack, never mind actually acting. I am not saying Mr. Maggiorani didn’t posses that knack nor have I seen him in anything else he starred in, however… I don’t know… I missed watching the “acting” if that makes sense. There were a lot of times I frankly found him awkward not just him the whole cast had “their moments” and that decidedly pulls you away from the film. Which is just as well really; because the aim of the film is to make you think about poverty and inequality and the desperate situation of those who are more unfortunate than us… It certainly succeeds but see, it isn’t a “movie” either in one sense. In another sense, it’s an absolute classic. I don’t know it’s a strange experience, watch it and decide for yourselves…
P.S. I mean, I know I sound kinda lukewarm about this one but please don’t let me put you off, the film was nominated for an Oscar ® for Best Foreign film and won a BARREL LOAD of prestigious awards, it’s not that weird…

THIS COULD ACTUALLY BE “THE” FUTURE : “SCOTT PILGRIM VS. THE WORLD”

I love “feel good” movies. Come on, admit it, we all do. Sometimes, you just need it – you don’t have the mental energy or the enthusiasm to take on something heavy and / or depressing. But the trouble I find with feel good movies is that they tend to be a little too… You know… Light. I mean, finding an actual good quality film that will give you a barrel of laughs and make you feel brilliant is in fact no mean feat. Just think about it, you’ll see what I mean… This is why I say that Scott Pilgrim might JUST be the future on that count alone. Excellent quality, brilliant actors and a hilarious movie that doesn’t take itself too seriously. You’ll feel light and warm and bubbly at the end – plus the stomach cramps from laughing. No kidding folks, I am in LOVE with this movie! I mean, I loved Michael Cera anyway – you probably had that one figured. Kieran Culkin I was curious about – like a lot of people of my generation I was crazy about Macauly his older brother (shame he burnt himself out eh? I reckon he could have been great… Oh well he might do a comeback I suppose but we’ll probably never know…). Mary Elisabeth Winstead, our female lead, I had never heard of but oh well… The director? Edgar Wright, director of such British classics as Hot Fuzz and Shaun of the dead (and if you’ve never heard of them fear not; reviews are coming your way VERY soon). I should now get on to what I’m actually raving about, right? Right. Here’s the story.

Scott Pilgrim (Michael Cera) is a normal 22 year-old living in Canada. He is in a band, he lives with his gay roommate (and landlord)Wallace has a pretty average life. His love life,however, is complicated (does that sound familiar or what?). Ever since his BIG ex dumped him, he has been unable to get his love life back in gear. There is progress though; he can just about get himself to date 17 year-olds. But then Ramona breezes into his life. She is mysterious, charismatic and beautiful; Scott doesn’t stand a chance so to speak. Even better, his feelings seem to be mutual. There is, however, one problem. To get to date Ramona, Scott must defeat her seven evil exes in battle. For the quiet and mild mannered Pilgrim, this is going to be interesting…

Ok, I will not go into great detail and give the “game” away. But you may have gathered from that short summary that the film has quite a few “fantastic” elements. First, there are the special effects. Dear God, the film has some of the best / cutest special effects you EVER saw. Then there is the editing. Very quick, very funny, VERY witty. It was pretty much the same story in Hot Fuzz if you saw that one. I mean, it’s fast but not like Magnolia where your head starts to churn after a while. Still, the editing is so damn clever it has an actual presence in the film along with the special effects. You’ll get what I mean when you watch it. (Yes, even if you’re not sure what editing is….)
This film has two very obvious aims, to amuse and entertain; boy do they succeed – down to the smallest touches and details (AGAIN for those of us who saw Shaun of the Dead or Hot Fuzz). And naturally, no opportunity at getting a laugh is missed as far as the characters are concerned either; these are some of the funniest characters I have ever seen on the big screen. The straight faced and sarcastic Wallace as portrayed by Kieran Culkin was by far my favorite. (I seem to have a “thing” for side characters this week). Scott’s 17 year-old girlfriend Knives Chau – priceless. One might of course (quite rightly) say that Michael Cera is getting slightly typecast. This part is almost identical to Nick in Nick and Nora’s infinite playlist. The two films, however, could not be further apart stylistically. And besides, Cera is so damn good at the part anyway; it won’t do anyone any harm to see him do it a second time… This film is worth it…

(P.S. You may need basic knowledge of video games to “get” one of the plot twists, have someone like that handy if you don’t. It’s not rocket science either however, I mean even I figured it out without help and I’m computer-game illiterate… )

EVERYONE IS TRYING TO GET OUT OF "THE TOWN"

Have you noticed everyone’s a director these days…? Actors, producers, screenwriters, film critics… I find that slightly annoying because sometimes it works but quite often it doesn’t. I don’t mean people shouldn’t write and direct like Tarantino or someone, no, what I mean people who have acted – for instance – for years, and who suddenly decide to make a go of directing. And guess who will be playing the title role? Themselves of course! Polanski or Tarantino in side roles of their own movies, Alfred Hitchcock and his obsession about being in the film, OK, I can take that. Not the TITLE role though. It comes across as if they wrote the bloody thing for themselves personally. And that annoys me – most of the time. It was with this particular prejudice I sat down to The Town by (written – collaboratively – and directed and acted in by) Ben Affleck. I was actually getting ready to sit down and tear it apart but I actually have to hand it to the guy. OK, he may not be (and in fact isn’t) my favorite actor in Hollywood, but he CAN direct…
“The Town” is Charlestown, an area in Boston. It is infamous in the U.S.A. because it has single handedly produced the largest number of bank robbers and car thieves in the entire country. The focus of our film is one such gang. Doug MacRay (Ben Affleck) and James Coughlin (Jeremy Renner) are childhood friends. Their current area of expertise is bank robbery though they have been in and out of trouble their whole lives, especially Jim. They work for a big boss, Fergie the florist and lead pretty routine, albeit pretty unlawful lives. Until one bank job, where James insists on taking Claire Keesey, a young pretty bank manager, hostage. They let her go, but then become rather afraid she might be able to identify them when it turns out she actually lives pretty close to where they do. Doug decides to follow her and “finish her off”. Instead however, he falls in love with her. They start a relationship – Claire of course doesn’t know she’s dating one of her captors – and Doug is so deeply affected by the whole thing, he decides to change. He likes his new life and his new persona. The thing is he has to get rid of the old one first…
Now, when you look at the subject matter you can see why I didn’t have much hope… It isn’t the most original story in the world. But there are true gems in there, James for instance. He’s just a side character, true. He is violent, he is a thug. But in his own way he loves Doug as if he was his real brother, and is doggedly loyal to the bitter end, I adored the entire story line never mind the acting. FYI, I am not the only one who is impressed with James – Jeremy Renner has just been nominated for a Golden Globe for this performance. The other thing is, Mr. Affleck has learnt well from all his action movies; the robbery sequences, the chases… Phew, talk about adrenalin! Well planned, full of just the right kind of surprises… And then there’s Doug and Claire’s blossoming relationship it’s just sweet… I mean yes, it is basically the story of a “bad man” finding the “right path” and searching for “love, acceptance and redemption”. Yawn? No. There are A LOT of bad films that are made following those lines but this ain’t one of ‘em. Yes, we have to admit it is not so “deep” but exciting. Gripping, even. Perfect to kick back to on a Friday night – I really wouldn’t miss it if I were you…
By the way I forgot to mention, all you Mad Men fans - check out Mad Men’s Don Draper John Hamm as the F.B.I. agent who is hunting the gang down! Oh, oh and check out Oscar® winner Chris Cooper as Doug’s ne’r do well father.

CAUTION - NOT FOR EVERYONE'S TASTE! "MY SON, MY SON WHAT HAVE YE DONE?"

Ok, let me come clean, I am not all that familiar with the works of Werner Herzog. I saw one film of his – Rescue Dawn and“Grizzly Man”, a documentary on the life of grizzly bear activist Timothy Treadwell. This was an excellent and fascinating documentary, and all this gave me very little to go on as far as Mr. Herzog artistically is concerned. I heard that he is into “dark” films and that he is a director you either love or hate. You may have guessed by now that I was full of curiosity and enthusiasm when I read this. And that I was TRULY excited to get my grubby paws on “My Son, My Son What have ye done”. Not only did I love it (even though I was half asleep when I started watching I woke up pretty fast!) it also qualifies as the “true story” of the week (Ok, I haven’t actually been keeping tabs but they do pop up quite often). So here we are.
Now, this is based on a true crime. A young man from San Diego who was “heavily” influenced by his part as Orestus in a play murdered his mother with a sword. This is the basic story of the film. This young man (Brad) then proceeds to barricade himself into his house, claiming he has two hostages with him and demanding things such as pizza and a getaway car. We watch the proceedings and listen to the police interviewing the young man’s loved ones who try to explain how things got to this point and how, well, ever since he came back from Peru he was… Different…
I honestly don’t know how much of the rest of the film is based on actual fact. The story the film tells however, is hilarious in a very dark way, if you like that kind of thing. Brad is, from the start, a psychologically underdeveloped young man whose relationship with his mother is complicated enough within itself without the added influence of Orestus. There is then the addition of his fiancé Ingrid who is understandably baffled by the same relationship, and as time goes by, their own. Plus there is the events of Peru of course, the real place the whole thing begins. Then there are the flamingos. And God, who has taken up residence in Brad’s mother’s kitchen. When you add a samurai sword and a Greek chorus to all this, tell me honestly, how can a person not be driven to murder? And how can two cops or even a whole swat team make head or tail of it?
It sounds like absurd comedy right ? No. Dead pan. And not “in your face” either, there are so many minute details and hilarious characters, I agree with other comments I have heard / seen that it warrants a second viewing at least. I have discovered, I feel, “something” (albeit rather dark) in Werner Herzog’s style and look forward to exploring it further. Stay tuned to hear my progress ;)

YES, PEOPLE RANT ABOUT IT FOR A REASON! I GIVE YOU "RAIN MAN"

Now, come on you know this film… I mean, I was “re-visiting” the other day and it occurred to me; even if you don’t know the film you surely know its soundtrack… So many of the songs from the soundtrack are famous now in their own right and completely independent from the film! And I’m SURE you have all heard some variation of the phrase “Dustin Hoffman was BRILIIANT in Rain Man”. You may even be slightly jaded by the phrase – understandably. The fact that he actually won an Oscar ® for the performance however, should make y’all reconsider. A blast from the past (one doesn’t get more 80’s than 1988!) with multiple awards, world class acting, a VERY young Tom Cruise and a wonderfully touching story, what more do you want… I mean, really…
Charlie Babbit (Tom Cruise. He’s good in the film and a good actor but apart from Interview With A Vampire I somehow never warmed to him… He IS good looking but… I don’t know… Anyway, moving on…) is a car salesman. He is driven, egoistic and interested in no one and nothing except himself and his own well-being. Even his girlfriend is more of an ornament than a companion. His bugbear is his father, they never got on and they haven’t spoken for decades. Then, his father dies. And leaves his fortune to a mysterious “trustee”. After some digging Charlie finds out that he actually has a brother, Raymond (Dustin Hoffman). A brother he neither remembers meeting nor has heard of before. But the real sting as far is Charlie is concerned is the fact that his brother is actually a high-functioning autistic with no concept of or use for money… In desperation Charlie “kidnaps” his older brother and starts bargaining with the authorities. Half the money or they don’t get Raymond back. However, as the two brothers spend time together, Raymond, as maddening and unable to communicate as he may seem, starts “getting through” to Charlie… However, will this be enough to turn him into a “human being”?
You may think that the saga of the great capitalist who grows a heart and conscience has now grown rather old. But the thing you have to remember is that when Barry Levinson (director of Sleepers who also won an Oscar® for this film) shot it, the saga was still quite fresh. The “yuppies” had just been born and quite apart from a touching movie, there is criticisms of this err… Institution? You may say “Oh but that was in the 80’s”, well, yes, but are we so different from the yuppies now? Are we, in fact, still yuppies? Consumerism, capitalism they are both still going strong, it’s good to see “the other side” from time to time, even if Besides, forget about the rest, the film is WELL worth watching for Dustin Hoffman’s sake alone… No wonder his performance in this film keeps coming back to “haunt” us, it’s just such great acting, how can you not want to talk about it! And besides, shall I tell you something else? Charlie’s transformation (that’s hardly a spoiler come on now…), long lost brothers reuniting and a plethora of other subtle touches throughout the film simply tug at everything in us that cherishes soppiness… You’ll love it. And you’ll rant about it. Stop resisting and join the club =)

TRUE LOVE CAN COME IN ANY FORM... "M. BUTTERFLY"

Now, this film is one I had to watch for a completely separate project I was working on. But the film BOWLED ME OVER. I had high expectations of the film (David Cronenberg is by far one of my favorite directors and Jeremy Irons is… Well, Jeremy Irons) and trusted the opinion of the person who said I should watch it but I really did NOT expect it to turn out to be one of the most striking love stories I have ever watched… Add to that, although I couldn’t verify it 100%, this seems to be inspired by real events – and Madame Butterfly.

Rene Gallimard (Jeremy Irons) is a perfectly average government official working in the French consulate in Beijing. The year is 1964; China is still “the mysterious orient” albeit with slight communist tendencies but nothing too serious. Rene has a very average life. He is in accounts; he is known as more of a pen pusher than anything else, is married and attends consulate events, pretty much like everyone in the French consulate. But then, one such event introduces him to the opera and a quite extraordinary diva. A Chinese artist, Mademoiselle Song, sings excerpts from Madame Butterfly. Rene later snatches a moment to talk to her – her beauty, her voice and her independent spirit charm him. He goes to the Beijing Opera to watch her perform, finds out where she lives… And she seems to respond to his feelings in the same way… Rene will be transformed; his love for Mademoiselle Song makes him confident and strong. She has strange and rather backward views on sex, (she will not let him see her naked among other things) but her feelings are without a doubt real… However, there are many things about Song that Rene doesn’t know… One of them is that in traditional Chinese theatre female parts are principally played by men… But it is not the secret concerning Song’s body that will be Rene’s downfall…

If you thought that this seemed similar in topic to “The Crying Game”, you would be right. Indeed that is the other film the same person advised me to watch. I did watch The Crying Game when I was younger and I was deeply affected by it but not as much as M. Butterfly. Irons brilliantly portrays the straight-laces Gallimard who is first transformed by love but then transformed again as he finds out the person he loved never truly existed on more levels than one… And John Lowe (who you surely will remember as the adult emperor in The Last Emperor) is stunning as the enigmatic Song Liling. It is this sense of lies and loss, of truth and illusions, that makes the film a true rollercoaster. I mean yes the sexual tensions, the acting, the whole atmosphere of the film were all absolutely stunning but the thoughts and feeling it left me with at the very end were the things that truly bowled me over... What is real? What is illusion? Does what makes us actually happy matter more than either sometimes? A film with great depth that I most strongly recommend…

Oh and by the way, if you reckon by hinting at one of Song’s many secrets I have ruined the film for you, do not be fooled. I knew this before I started watching as well… And it still succeeded in bowling me over…

WELCOME BACK TO RICK'S - IN "CASABLANCA"

“Here’s looking at you kid”; “We’ll always have Paris”; “This could be the start of a beautiful friendship”; “Play it again Sam”… Even if you haven’t actually seen Casablanca I’m sure you’ve heard all these quotes before. It was the case with me when I first watched it. I jumped at the chance at re-visiting Rick’s the other night (funny how we all seem to end up there, no?) And frankly, before we even get down to brass tacks, if you haven’t seen it, you simply HAVE to see it. If you have seen it, see it again. It’s the kind of thing real cinema is made of…
Casablanca 1941… Port in Morocco and one of the last footholds of free France. Although, of course with the Vichy government and the Nazis breathing down their necks, it’s not as free as one might wish… Escapees from all over occupied Europe flood here and wait… What do they wait for? A rite of passage to Lisbon. From Lisbon they will head to America: Land of hope and new beginnings, far from the horrors of war. Of course rites of passage are hard to come by and sometimes the wait might take years, yes years… Luckily, there is plenty to do to occupy one’s time, and the most prestigious place to pass one’s time is Rick’s. Rick (Humphrey Bogart) runs the place, he is charismatic and mysterious. He has his own rules and rule he does, like a king. He is however, a king in exile, he can never return to his native America… That doesn’t matter though because the world comes to him… And one day a rather special part of the world comes to him: A Czech resistance fighter and hero – Victor Laszlo - trying to make it to the U.S.A. with the Nazis hot on his heels. With him, is Ilsa Lund (Ingrid Bergman), his wife. The “problem” is this is not the first time Rick and Ilsa have met… Lives are at stake and enemies are all around as the two face their past… And a very difficult decision…
This film is, in a word, breathtaking. There is a reason a film from the 40’s is still up in the imdb TOP 20. I’m not even going to begin about the acting. Bogart and Bergman, Jesus what a pair… What a couple… Bergman’s beauty and Bogart’s charisma… I am, as you know, quite loony about a lot of modern day actors but these two are true legends for a reason… And I mean, the story is quite original too, I mean yes it is a WW2 film but it’s about an aspect of the war none of us run of the mill folks know much about. (Come on, admit it, when someone says Second World War, Africa is NOT the first, second or third thing you think of). But I really REALLY don’t think you need a reason to watch Casablanca. I mean, OK it’s not AVATAR. No 3D no HD no “D” s at all except for “Delightful” . You may or may not be a fan of old black and white movies. You may simply not be familiar with them. I cannot think of a better way of getting introduced… So, step on down to Rick’s… You’ll like it there – and you’ll be back. I promise.

MILK - NOT THE KIND YOU DRINK!

Now, this one has been on my mind for a while. It’s quite a phenomenon of a film to watch – Sean Penn shines in his role as Harvey Milk, the first openly gay politician to be elected in the U.S.A. and one of the founders of the gay rights movement. The story is truly one worth telling and Sean Pen does do a brilliant job but I will say it again and again, Mickey Rourke should have got Best Actor that year. Really. Not that anyone actually listens to me and I try not to bang on about it but I think he deserved some kind of accolade for bringing himself back from near self-destruction and addiction to Oscar® nominated acting. I think the effort alone deserved an award, never mind that fact that he was brilliant. Oh well though, life goes on and so must my blog entry, so I will now reign myself in and concentrate solely on Sean Penn and Harvey Milk.
“Today” says Harvey to the young man he has picked up at a subway station and has decided to spend the night with “is my 40th birthday. And I have realized that I have achieved absolutely nothing.” He is a government official in the Water Board, he has an OK career, a life with nothing to complain about but nothing to gloat about either. So when moving to San Francisco with the young man (Scott Smith who will actually become his lifelong lover albeit with ups and downs and histrionics and tantrums) and starting all over again comes up Harvey just says “why not”. And does it. They open a camera shop in the Castro area of San Francisco all seems to be going well. But the year is 1972 and even in San Francisco (that was considered one of the more liberal cities even back then) anti-gay feeling is rife. Harvey being gay takes this very personally. And decides that the time has come to do something about it…
The rest is, of course, history. Now, we live in a world of multiculturalism and openness or so we claim but still prejudice of many kinds is rife. I mean, I’m sure you or I are not particularly prejudiced. But the thing is most of us don’t do anything to prevent prejudice spreading either… That’s why it’s important to honor and remember the people who do. And Harvey Milk was a first. He may have done “nothing” until he was 40, he then went down in history… By the way, I like that kind of story – people who “become” something later on in life, gives one hope if you see what I mean. In the same way, Beethoven didn’t finish his first composition until he was 30. Mozart, who met him, deemed him a waste of time. Haydn was the only person who realized the young man had talent and well, he was right… Good Heavens I’m off on one again but surely you see how it was vaguely connected?
The film itself is absolutely brilliant. (It did NOT win the Oscar® for Best Screenplay for nothing). It transports you back to the 70’s… And it’s not just Harvey Milk, all the characters are brilliant, the actors as well but the characters themselves – hats off to Gus van Sant, some do say that his films are slightly “themed” but this one’s a good-un. It’s really a story worth finding out about. I mean it is true, the likes of you and I don’t actively do anything to prevent prejudice – but at least we can be well informed about such things… That in itself is something too you know…

FIND OUT HOW ALL THE FUSS BEGAN : "INTERVIEW WITH A VAMPIRE"

Now, I don’t know what your stance on this matter is, but I am personally glad the whole “Edward” craze is finally subsiding. I don’t particularly dig vampires, and although Robert Pattinson is an admirable young man I don’t find him drop dead gorgeous. Well, when I say I don’t dig vampires, that isn’t strictly true – I just don’t dig those particular vampires. And before you say anything, nor am I a fan of Buffy the Vampire slayer or Angel – I don’t dig those vampires either. But there are a group of vampires that were particularly cool. Old school stuff, with real classic actors playing them. You surely remember Interview with a Vampire? Now, Old Moon, New Moon; Second Hand Moon - not my thing. Anne Rice? Interview with a Vampire Trilogy? (Yep, THREE books, Interview with a Vampire, The Vampire Lestat and Queen of the Damned) NOW you’re talking. The classic movie I want to talk about today (I assume you have at least heard of it!) is based on the first book. Rather a good adaptation I may add. There was also an adaptation of the third book, Queen of the Damned a TOTAL disaster as far as being faithful to the story is concerned… (just possibly because they skipped the second book and moved to the third because there was a sexy lady (the afore mentioned Queen of the Damned played by the late Aaliyah) in the story and they thought it would be a better crowd pleaser). Now, my view, stay away from that one, but watch Interview With A Vampire. Then read the book – there are a lot of details in the book that are overlooked in the film – an understandable situation, the book is a tad long – but I say do both. It is a classic in its own genre and I would hate you all to think Edward and Bella are the best modern fiction has to offer as far as vampires are concerned…
Louis de Pointe Du Lac (Brad Pitt by the way) was 24 in 1791. He is the owner of a large plantation but having lost both his beloved wife and newborn baby in childbirth he has lost the will to live. One night, as he is sharing this predicament with a chance drinking companion, he is faced with a bizarre choice. His companion – Lestat De Lioncourt (Tom Cruise just incidentally) is a vampire. A vampire who has not had his dinner yet and would be only too glad to kill him and put him out of his misery. However, Lestat has taken a liking to Louis; therefore he will give him a choice, for Lestat can turn Louis into a vampire. A new life as a creature of the night leaving all mortal toil behind him is tempting to Louis and he accepts. The new life is good. It is complicated, as Louis finds it almost impossible to kill people even though that means being almost starved or living off rats but it is good. Heightened senses, immortality and Claudia (a pint sized Kirsten Dunst), a little girl Lestat “turns” for Louis to assuage his loneliness… Louis and his new family are happy; the sky seems to be the limit… Unfortunately, Louis is about to discover that there are other things that don’t have limits: the darkness in Lestat’s heart and his greed…
Now, this is indeed a vampire film. It is not, however, merely a silly time filler either. Authorities back in the 90’s took this film so seriously they nominated it for not one but two Oscars ® and although the big names in the movie are admirable it wasn’t for the acting but for the score (music) and art direction. So this, my children is a “bona fide” film no moony nonsense here; new or otherwise, (sorry Mom – and any other fans - I know you love the series but they just GET ON MY NERVES!!). And the whole story itself is wonderfully constructed. It’s like a good romantic novel, will just sweep you off your feet, back to the 18th century, you will live with vampires for 200 years then be back in time to get the supper ready and the dishes washed. The acting is good, as you might well expect and the film is seriously good quality. Oh and by the way, the director of the movie is Neil Jordan, Oscar ® winning director of “The Crying Game”… We are, as you can imagine, in the domain of good quality entertainment. Your life won’t be changed by this, but then again I assume you don’t expect your life to be changed by a movie about vampires. I recommend this film to all vampire lovers despite my scathing words about the series. Think of it this way, if you like this genre so much, you might as well know a bit more about its “history” and classic examples. And who knows, after you watch it, maybe you’ll see what I mean even if you don’t agree.

TAKE A MOMENT TO CONSİDER THE "LIVES OF OTHERS"

I occasionally check out the “IMDB Top 250”. I mean, not that often every once in a while, it changes with votes that’s true but not THAT often… Anyway, I saw this little gem as number 56 in said list and my hear t literally jumped for joy. I remember being on an absolute emotional rollercoaster as I watched this film. It’s a funny little European number with quite a political sub text but I really don’t care. The human story in it is just so touching and the overall message so powerful I simply couldn’t let it slip by. The Oscar® committee certainly didn’t it won the Oscar® for Best Foreign Language film in 2006 among other prestigious accolades. Oh yes, for those of you (Mom, I’m talking to you too you know) who think watching films in any language except English is just “too odd” you will have to get over that one. Apart from the fact that you are missing out on what is in my mind at least 50% of all films that are worth watching, this particular film is in German. So there.
The Lives Of Others is the story of life in Easter Germany. It is the year 1984 and Gerd Weisler is a Captain in the Stasi – the East German police. He is loyal to the system and very dedicated to his job, to the point that his job is his entire life and world. Everything he does is tainted by his job and that’s why when he is detailed to set up a full-scale surveillance of a prominent East German playwright Gregor Dreyman he thinks of it as nothing but duty. He sets up “shop” in the playwright’s attic and is soon in possession of the intimate details of both his life and the life of his long-term partner Christa-Maria. However the more Weisler listens, the more confused he becomes. The playwright and his partner aren’t the “dissident artists” he thought they would be. Christa-Maria seems to be trying to fight off the unwanted attention of the Minister of Culture himself. And the minister seems to be intent on destroying Dreyman at all costs… Added to that, the lonely Weisler has grown fond of the couple. With his new “friends” under increasing pressure from the government and faced with the fact that he is actually no more than a pawn in a political game centered round the ministers libido Weisler is faced with a tough decision. Close his eyes and be the dutiful public servant he has always been or destroy a shining career built up over a lifetime by doing what he has a terrible feeling may actually be “the right thing”…
Now, you may see this as blatant anti-communist propaganda, and sure there is some of that thrown in. However, you will not find it hard to see past it once you sit down to watch this one. You are drawn into Weisler’s personal drama pretty quickly, you watch him transform from a caricature of a political officer to an actual human being. The braking down of habits and ideas that have surrounded him his whole lifetime, his loneliness and his discovery that he has in fact possibly been on the wrong side all along… It is also a brilliant allegory of shyness. Watching and observing “the lives of others” down to the minutest detail without being able to participate in them. Actually wanting to participate but being faced with insurmountable barriers. And change. Changing oneself and the pain that sometimes brings…
On another level, the film was actually general culture for me as well, I knew very little about East Germany and the Stasi and the film gave me ample chances to “brush up”. This is a film though, principally I feel, about the fact that there is something human that unifies all of us, even if we seem to be on completely opposite sides. And even though it may be, in some cases, painful and surprising to realize this.

POSSIBLY ONE OF THE BEST TURKISH FILMS EVER MADE : “MUSTAFA HAKKINDA HER ŞEY”

My job means that I watch many different films from many different countries. Turkey isn’t famous for its cinematic prowess as a general rule but in the last couple of years some truly world-class works have begun to emerge – take singer turned director Mahsun Kırmızıgül’s latest work “Five Minarets in New York” – there was a massive gala opening in New York and everything, it was ALL OVER the news… A couple of months back Semih Kaplanoğlu’s film “Bal” was honored at the Cannes Film Festival… That is why I decided to share with you “Mustafa Hakkında Her Şey” – translated as “Everything About Mustafa”. It’s quite a bit older than the “Five Minarets” and it’s not a showy action movie with special effects. However, anyone who wants to steer clear of flashy effects will tell you that THIS is one of the true masterpieces of Turkish cinema heralding many more great works to come…
Mustafa is, all in all, a happy man. He is the successful owner of an advertising agency. His marriage was a love match and he and his wife Ceren are very happy with their young son Kerem. At least, this is what Mustafa thinks when, on what starts off as a perfectly normal day, his wife Ceren is killed in a traffic accident. This tragic event proves a Pandora’s Box for Mustafa – his wife is killed returning to İstanbul from some distance away from the city; from a place where Mustafa had no idea she had any business. There is a young man with her in the car called Fikret that he has never seen and who is gravely injured… Mustafa must know the truth about his wife’s secret life. And he can see only one way of accomplishing this. He kidnaps Fikret out of hospital and takes them to his family’s abandoned summer house. He ties him to a chair and begins questioning him about his relationship with his wife. As the hours go by, the conversation becomes stranger and stranger. Soon, one thing becomes clear. Fikret isn’t the only one with something to confess…
This film is no less than an assorted plate of the best Turkey culturally has to offer. The director Çağan Irmak is one of the most successful Turkish directors to date. The three leading actors (whom you wouldn’t have heard of if you live outside of Turkey but Fikret Kuşkan (Mustafa), Başak Köklükaya (Ceren) and Nejat İşler (Fikret) ) are among the best of their generation and present truly world class performances. Mor ve Ötesi who are responsible for the soundtrack are among the most successful bands of modern Turkey. As for the story itself, it is very cleverly constructed and we are glued to our seats as we watch the strong and successful Mustafa slowly but surely unraveling as both his marriage and his life are destroyed. It is by no means easy viewing but a true-blue psychological thriller. And by the way, don’t worry. This is not the domain of Quentin Tarantino or Saw – no gore. Just the human mind and soul laid bare… And that is possibly more frightening than any number of monsters or missing limbs…