Eternity of Dream

In the Land of Blood and Honey: Live Angelina Jolie Q & A

2012-01-08T16:48:00.000+02:00

&lt;p&gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/iframe&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&lt;/p&gt;

In the Land of Blood and Honey (2011) is a directorial debut of AngelinaJolie, who also penned the screenplay. The picture has scored a GoldenGlobe nomination in the Best Foreign Language Film category, and it tells a storyof two people from different backgrounds that have their relationship changing,as the Bosnian War grabs the Balkan region into its claws.

Youhave an amazing opportunity to ask Angelina Jolie questions about In the Land of Blood and Honey righthere live on Thursday, January 12, at8pm EST/ 5 pm PST.

Morethan that, you can be a lucky winner of the giveaway Blood and Honeyposter*, which I, for one, consider one of 2011 best. What you have to do isleave your questions beforehand in the comments under this post. Only aresident of the USA or Canada can be a winner, so please let me know in yourcomments, if you reside in one of the two countries. However, if you liveoutside the US and Canada, you can still leave your questions for AngelinaJolie.

Please, spread the word and share this page with your friends. Seeyou on January 12!

* The giveaway Bloodand Honey poster is provided by PartnersHub.

Chevrolet in Popular Culture

2012-01-07T21:19:00.000+02:00

Chevrolethas recently celebrated its 100^th anniversary, and in its honor,Perfomics Worldwide created an infographic Chevroletin Popular Culture, films including. I think it's very cool, and here it isfor your consideration.

Yay! Eternity of Dream's 2nd Anniversary!

2012-01-06T20:29:00.000+02:00

Tobegin with, Happy New Year! I hope that everyone has had fantastic holidays andis ready to start off for another twelve months of film appreciation. I wouldlove to apologize for not being around; with the holidays and the fact that I'mstanding at the life crossroads right now, it has been problematic to keep upmy blogging at a sufficiently active level. But I'm longing to see more films, towrite more and to read more about cinema.

Thetitle makes obvious that my blog, Eternity of Dream, turns two years old today.When I think of it, it seems crazy, because I can't embrace the fact that Ihave been writing about cinema for a couple of years and haven't given up,although I used to have strong doubts about maintaining this site. I want to thankevery each of you who bother to give a look and a read in favor of my writings.I'm grateful to have this opportunity to express my love to films in a globallanguage and I thank you for forgiving me all my language mistakes. Side note:it all used to be my main doubt, my biggest uncertainty, but now I feel absolutely comfortable, writingin non-perfect English.

Alittle bit of trivia:

Ihave reviewed 140 films within these two years. Not too many but it makesme slightly proud.

Ihave published 10 guest posts. Contributors, you obviously rock.

Ihosted a little something, called Christmasin Genres. I never did something like this before, so evidently, I lovedit.

Forthe first time, I participated in a film-oriented podcast (Matineecast, to beprecise). It was a bit scary, I forgot how to speak English correctly, but itwas still awesome.

I was a #MTOS host.

______________________________________________________

I'mtruly glad that two years ago I started this mini adventure because I get toknow many great film lovers from all around the world thank to this blog andTwitter, where I haven't been active recently either, sorry for that! Onceagain, I thank everyone who reads the blog and who has been a fantasticconversationalist on Twitter.

Thankyou for support!

Happy International Day of Cinema! Oh, Those Beautiful Pieces of Silver Screen...

2011-12-28T23:47:00.001+02:00

Onthis day, 116 years ago, the Lumière brothers showed a collection of shortdocumentary films to a paying audience for the first time. Those tiny movieswere around one minute length each. They portrayed terrifyingly mundane moments, like a train arrival or workers, walking out of a plant atthe end of the day. But December 28, 1895 was more than that.

December28, 1895 was the day that got me here, writing this blog post.

December28, 1895 was the day that got you here, reading this site for some mysterious unknownreason.

December28, 1895 was the day that got Peter Jackson making The Hobbit and Chris Nolan, TheDark Knight Rises at this very moment.

Thelist can go on and on.

Let'snot forget that cinema is one of the most amazing marvels that were created byhumankind. Let's try to forgive its flaws. Let's embrace its beauty.

Tocelebrate the International Day of Cinema, I am sharing with you some — onlysome — pieces of beauty that silver screen has given us so far.

Cinema is passionate. Teaching us that, after all... tomorrow is another day.

There is no film to rule them all. Because many of them are so perfect in their own way.

Who said that anything about the film being enchanted? Ha ha ha. But don't belive them. Cinema is magic.

You can peer closely at it. But you never know, if you unraveled all its mysteries. For Cinema is like a box of chocolates. You never know what youre gonna get.

There must be a film that you met at a very strange time in your life.

There's two kinds of movies in this world, there's winners and there's losers. Maybe, a loser film that you hated inspired someone else.

Well, some films, they feel real while we're watching them, right?

Films have systems of their own.

I see you. I see you, one of the most stunningly beautiful films ever.

Some people, were born to sit by a river. Some get struck by lightning. Some have an ear for music. Some are artists. Some swim. Some know buttons. Some know Shakespeare. Some are mothers. And some people, dance. That's what cinema is about.

116 years. Well, it's definitely more than a quarter of a century. It's even more than three quarters of a century. Makes you think, doesn't it?

Actually, I don't have a quote for this one... But Cinema always aspires for more.

HappyInternational Day of Cinema, friends!

Guest Film Review: Casablanca (1942)

2011-12-25T18:00:00.000+02:00

The review is penned by our occasional writer,Margarita Soboleva.

It is also written in terms of Forever Classics Humphrey Bogart Blogathon.

If you like traditional old films about romanticstories then this one would be for you. Casablancais a 1942 American romantic drama film directed by Michael Curtiz, starringHumphrey Bogart, Ingrid Bergman. The movie is set in 1941 Casablanca at theheight of the World War II. The plot is focused on the internal conflict of themain character who has to choose between his duty and his feeling, between his virtueand his love. He should help a Czech Resistance leader to escape from theVichy-controlled Moroccan city of Casablanca to continue his fight against theNazis. But the main problem is that his wife is the woman the character ofBogart has loved for several years. So helping the leader to escape meanslosing her again without even a little possibility to meet her in the futurebecause those who leave the Europe occupied by Nazis for US will not probablyreturn. It's so sad but talking like the Frenchmen, c'est la vie (that's life).Except this problem there is a secondary one in the plot. I can even call itintrigue or love affair as the female protagonist having loved the main hero but,unfortunately, having broken his heart suddenly and unexpectedly meets him inthe Casablanca city years later and she has to ask him for his help but the wayher husband didn't know anything about her past and her love for another man. Whatshall she do? What shall the protagonist do in such a tricky situation? He hashated her for a long time when she broke his heart and didn't explain any goodreason of it. Why? Will he forgive her for her action? You can find out all theanswers to these questions during the watching the Casablanca film.

Talking about the performance itself I cannot sayanything bad because it is striking! No wonder actors play marvelously as it isan old movie without any visual effects. So the only thing that could make afilm interesting and pleasant for an eye is the actors' performance. Bogartembodied his character named Rick Blaine perfectly well. On the one hand, he isan inveterate cynic who does not believe in anything but money. On the otherhand, he appeared to be able to love. This side of his character is the mostinteresting as this was Bogart's first romantic role on the screen. The heroineof Ingrid Bergman, Ilsa Lund, is also well-performed. Till the very end of themovie we cannot realize who she loves more: her husband or Rick. Well, I guessher protagonist was very difficult to portray but she managed to cope with thistask very well. She showed realistically the feelings of woman in love.

In spite of the fact that it is a black-and-white filmI would strongly recommend you to watch this film describing the development ofprotagonists' relationships. This movie can also show us the problem of peopleunexpectedly having to face the war and having to overcome all the troubles ofthe war. Honestly, I can say this is what really strikes me while watching themovie. I suddenly realized that I do not want to face any war: neither WorldWar nor a local one. Because it is really apprehensive and fearful to liveduring the war. And no doubt that any viewer who has already watched or willwatch Casablanca understands myfeelings.

But let me finish the review in happy words. To draw aconclusion, I would say that this movie can teach us not to forget the past,the history, we remember the World War II and watching Casablanca we are able to relate to the protagonists, to theirproblems connected with the war so that we understand the feelings of thepeople of that epoch. To my mind, it is not bad. So the Casablanca film is worth watching and by the way this great movie notin vain has become one of the best movies in the Hollywood history not in vain.

I would estimate it 9/10

Written by Margarita Soboleva

Casablanca is one of the mostbeloved classics. What do you think of this motion picture?

To Have and Have Not (1944) Film Review

2011-12-24T19:30:00.000+02:00

Thisreview is written in terms of ForeverClassics' Humphrey Bogart Blogathon.

5 stars

"Was you ever bit by a dead bee?" (Eddie)

HowardHawks directed this film that was the first movie of Lauren Bacall and thetakeoff of her career, as well as beginning of a new Hollywood romance betweenthis leading actress and her future husband, Humphrey Bogart, whom she starredalongside in the motion picture under review, To Have and Have Not.

What is it about?

Inthe claws of WWII, the island of Martinique is grasped by gloomy atmosphere, aswell as the American captain Harry 'Steve' Morgan (Humphrey Bogart) who lendshis fishing boat to a tight traveler, while his only crew member Eddie (WalterBrennan) tries to break a record in bending his elbow. In need for money,Morgan decides to take part in a questionable affair, transporting a FrenchResistance leader and his wife to Martinique, but in this story, they are notthe most important people he meets for the man encounters wayward beautifulMarie Browning aka Slim (Lauren Bacall).

Was it made look good (by those who work in pre- andpost-production or behind the camera)?

Obviously,Hawks put his heart and soul into directing this film because it is madeflawlessly. It is one of the best war films (set outside the battlefield) thatI have ever seen. The pacing and dialogues are top-notch, while it's not only thanksto screenwriters because ad-lib was welcome during the shooting of this film.Since it's a black and white movie, you can imagine why it's especiallycharming, and on this side, I loved the use of lighting. The story itself isnothing special today but in an oldie like this, it couldn't have been better,and I was not sure how is it going to end till the last minute.

What about acting?

Thisis my first film watched, starring both Bogart and Bacall, and without a doubt,they are one of the most magnetic acting pairings ever. Humphrey Bogart plays abrooding and suspicious specimen with usual confidence and toughness. As anewcomer, Lauren Bacall is extraordinarily stunning not only because of herbeauty but because of her assured acting. It is unconfirmed whether it was hersinging in the film for there are two opposite versions but I wouldn't besurprised if it was her. Walter Brennan is funny enough, as he portrays acharacter that makes the film complete. Other actors, Hoagy Carmichael, SheldonLeonard, Dolores Moran, Walter Szurovy, are really good, forming a greatsupporting cast.

What did it make me feel?

WatchingTo Have and Have Not is a purerelaxation and rest. It is quite enjoyable and it is classic for real. You know,I came across many lauded classics and I thought they were given high ratingonly because they are old movies that have some beloved stars of yesteryear butthose movies were not that good. To Haveand Have Not is not one of those flicks; it justifies its high score onIMDb and other sites. This classic is very pleasant and I got a feeling that I waswatching something really worthy, something cinematically eternal. That's oneof the best things you can say about a movie, so I think I did what I had to.

Conclusion

HowardHawks' classic To Have and Have Notis a story, told against the background of war-time Martinique, and it featuresmesmeric performances from two big stars Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall.This motion picture is not a cheat for it opens its heart before you with sincerityand uniqueness in true classic silver screen spirit.

Rating:5 stars (see what that means)

Do you like this film? What do you think of Bogart andBacall starring together?

Christmas in Genres

2011-12-23T18:00:00.000+02:00

Afew weeks ago I suggested you taking part in this tiny Christmas in Genresinitiative by writing short film recommendations. Needless to say, I was notcompletely sure that people would like this idea, so I am very happy thateventually we made it. Moreover, contributors were collaborative, enthusiasticand helpful. Thank you very much for participating!

Inbrief, a contributor picked a genre and advised a Christmas film under this orthat genre. It is totally awesome that there is no genre missing. A few peoplehelped me out by tackling two recommendations, when the flow of contributorsfaded away. I appreciate that a lot.

Anotherpoint is that I tried to avoid overlap but it was not totally successful becausewe have one movie recommended under two genres. I apologize for that and I hopeyou will still love this post that celebrates the variety of Christmas films.

Beforeproceeding to the Christmas in Genres celebration, I would like to share withyou those motion pictures that were recommended but couldn't get into theultimate list because their genres were taken before people that suggested themknew about it. Thus, your Honorable Mentions are: The Family Stone (2005), MeetMe in St. Louis (1944, and it was suggested twice), The Proposition (2005), RockyIV (1985).

However,the biggest star of overall recommendations, which actually got into the list,is Die Hard (1988). I guess more thanten people wanted to recommend it and it was oh so difficult to say that"no, it had been taken at the very beginning". There is no wonderthis Xmas classic is so loved by film buffs.

Heregoes our Christmas in Genres list. The recommendations are written bycontributors.

Action

RuthMaramis aka @FlixChatter from Flix Chatter recommends Batman Returns(1992): Set during the Christmas season in Gotham, there's a scene of Batmanand Catwoman dancing together at a Christmas party... that's one of myfavorite parts of the movie. It's interesting that it's a masque ball but BruceWayne and Selina Kyle are the only ones who aren't in disguise and she saidsomething about tired of wearing a mask. I think both had a hunch by then whotheir real identities are. Here's the scene. This is my favorite Batman movie before the Nolan's versions came out.It's quite dark and the setting is very eerie and atmospheric. Michael Keatonis pretty good as the tormented hero, and he's got a nice chemistry with thesultry Michelle Pfeiffer with her breathy voice and slinky figure. The villainsare a bit too freaky for my taste but they somehow work under Tim Burton'sdirection. Great set pieces combined with an excellent score by Danny Elfman, Ihighly recommend this one for any fan of superhero movies.

Adventure

RuthRichards aka @RuthElizabeth_R from …let'sbe splendid about this… recommends Batman Returns (1992): Batman (MichaelKeaton) is back to protect Gotham once again in the holiday season, this timefrom the likes of Catwoman (Michelle Pfeiffer), Penguin (Danny DeVito) andbusinessman Max Shreck (Christopher Walken). The last time Burton directed thefranchise, it has all the marks of a Burton film. DeVito is a bit over the topas the Penguin, but Pfeiffer steals the show as Catwoman and the film is a funride!

Animation

MariaSofia Teixeira from FILMflare recommends Mickey's Christmas Carol (1983): It is the kind of film that shouldbe reborn with every new generation — I know I'll make sure my children watchit — and it is certainly something many of us associate with Christmas. Onlyrecently I learned that it is actually an adaptation of the Charles Dickensnovella, A Christmas Carol, from 1843. Being a Dickens fan myself,it only made this film the more special for me. Though certain parts of itscared the hell out of me (like the graveyard scene, or Goofy's ghost, and thatgiant!), I'll always associate Mickey'sChristmas Carol with something rather sad, but mostly warm and beautiful —just like Christmas. Whenever I think of scarcity, charity, compassion, suchrecurring themes for us this year, I recall Mickey's dinner, sharing even thetiniest pea between his children and wife. It's a bittersweet story with astrong moral tale behind it that reminds us of what Christmas is really about.Perfect for that magical evening, and fit for the whole family to watch. Sogather around the fireplace with comfy clothes and warm drinks, and spend awonderful 24 minutes with the best of Disney — I know that's what I'll be doingthis year.

Biography

Meredithfrom ForeverClassics recommends NativityStory (2006): It's usually overlooked since it doesn't have the qualitiesand elements most people expect from a Christmas film, however, it is a solidand accurate depiction of the birth of Christ that I think most people wouldenjoy viewing over the holidays.

Classic

ChipLary from Tipsfrom Chip recommends Miracleon 34^th Street (1947): This movie is reallyheartwarming. The American Film Institute put this film in their Top10 Most Inspiring Movies list. It was interesting for me to see that even in1947 people had a cynical attitude about Christmas and the “bother” of theholiday season. It’s funny because almost universally peopleremember the Christmas holidays of the past to be more innocent than thecurrent ones, regardless of what decade they are looking back on.If you havenever seen this Christmas movie, then you owe it to yourself to doso. If you have seen it before, then why not see it again? (You can read Chip's full review here.)

Comedy

Cherokeefrom FeminisingFilm recommends Jingle All the Way (1996): Longbefore the days of internet shopping existed, hapless father Howard(Arnold Schwarzenegger) comes to the daunting realisation that he hasfailed to get his son, Jamie (a pre-Attack of the Clones Anakin), the hottesttoy of the year - Turbo Man. Knowing that his son and wife, Liz (Rita Wilson),are going to be let down once again by his hopelessness, on the eve ofChristmas, Howard goes about the task of finding the sold-out toy. On hisdesperate quest to buy Turbo Man, Howard finds a nemesis in the local postman,Myron (Sinbad), comes across a crazed-group of dodgy Santas, and is practicallyaccused of paedophilia. Definitely one for the kids.

Crime

EmilEkelund aka @Esh_Kebab from A Swede Talks Movies recommends The Ice Harvest (2005): An intriguingblend of comedy and noir, The Ice Harvestfollows lawyer Charlie (John Cusack) during one Christmas Eve in small townWichita. Having just stolen 2 million dollars from his boss, he now has to dealwith a ruthless partner-in-crime, an enticing strip club owner and potentiallove interest, an alcoholic husband of his ex-wife, a persistent cop, and thethugs sent to get the money back, all until he can make his break and get awayfrom the whole place. This is not a happy white Christmas, but a cold and rainyone. Cynicism runs deep and the whole movie has a somber tone inbetween thelaughs. Funny and suspenseful, and well worth checking out.

Documentary

LeithAitken (@LeithAitken) from Ramble Film recommends Death in Santaland (2007): It's about afoiled school shooting in the town of North Pole, Alaska. It's not the happiestdocumentary but it shows all things aren't jolly in the hometown of the world'sjolliest character.

Drama

SteveeTaylor (@SteveeTaylor) from Cinematic Paradox recommends It's a Wonderful Life (1946): One moviethat definitely gets me into the Christmas spirit is It's a WonderfulLife. Made by one of my favourite directors, Frank Capra, and starringJames Stewart and Donna Reed, this movie is surprisingly quite a depressingone, but it is through that depression that we find that, well, it is awonderful life. Especially when we see George Bailey (Stewart) running down thestreet and yelling 'Merry Christmas!' to everyone and everything, beforemaking it home to be with his family. It is just so lovely!

Family

RaghavModi aka @raghavmodi from Ticker Talks Film recommends A Christmas Story (1983): We've allwanted that one present as a kid which our parents just wouldn't buy for us.The reason why I have always appreciated A Christmas Story is because it has auniversal appeal to it. Although it revolves around Christmas time, thehilarious quest of a kid to try and get that one present (a BB gun) holds truefor any season and/or any occasion. Funny and heartwarming, A Christmas Storyis the perfect film to cosy up with the family and watch on a cold wintery day.

Fantasy

Saifuraka @saifurv recommends Serendipity(2001): A great feel good movie about a couple who accidentally meet again,years after they first met. Fall in love and separate because they areconvinced that one day they would end up together.

Film-Noir

SarahCallow aka @sarahjcallow recommends Christmas Holiday(1944): It is a lovely, if not underrated example of the film noir genre, witha strong central performance from Deanna Durbin, playing the classic hookerwith a heart of gold. This film is also notable for the villainous performanceof Gene Kelly, a strange departure from his light entertainment persona. Christmas Holiday is a gem of a movie, adark tinged grimy affair that offers a twist on the traditional Christmas storyof salvation and new beginnings.

Foreign

ChipLary from Tipsfrom Chip recommends RareExports: A Christmas Tale (2010): What if the original Santa wasn’t thekind, jolly old man that stories make him out to be? What if thelegend got garbled over the thousands of years from when an ancient peoplefirst encountered him to when modern people now encounter him again? Howwould they respond? The Finnish movie Rare Exports: A Christmas Tale answers those questions andmore. As the tagline for the movie says, “This Christmas everyonewill believe in Santa Claus.” The film is a mixture of suspense anddark comedy that is highly entertaining. (Chip has also reviewed this film recently.)

History

DanK. aka @ElcrifyingMojo recommends White Christmas (1954): Released 9 yearsafter the end of WW2, White Christmas is a nostalgic tale about a couple ofarmy buddies that team up for a successful song and dance act who end upenlisting a sister duo to help out their former commanding officer in their civilianlives. The velvety voices of Bing Crosby and Rosemary Clooney singingsongs composed by the legendary Irving Berlin, along with dance numbersfeaturing the graceful Vera Ellen and the comedic talents of Danny Kaye havemade this an enduring Christmas classic that is still considered by many to betheir favorite holiday movie.

Horror

MichaelNazarewycz aka @ScribeHard (hisblogs) recommends BlackChristmas (1974): What’s the nice thing about genre mash-ups? Ifa film isn’t necessarily the best in one genre, it might be the best when twogenres are combined. Such is the case with Black Christmas (1974). Itisn’t the best Christmas movie, and it isn’t the best Horror movie, but it isthe best Christmas Horror movie. (That has to count for something,right?) Directed by Bob Clark (who is probably most famous for anotherChristmas classic, 1983’s A Christmas Story) – BlackChristmas tells the tale of a sorority house being terrorized, on theeve of Christmas break, by an obscene phone caller and killer whose is pluckinghis victims one by one. High tension and unsettling camera work(including shots from the killer’s POV) make this overlooked inspiration for1978’s Halloween a must-see alternative to the traditionalholiday fare.

Music

MaksimSustretov aka @waynesayonara recommends Joyeux Noël (2005): Based on realevents, Joyeux Noël tells a surprisingly inspiring story of Scottish, Frenchand German soldiers who happen to face Christmas in the trenches of WWI.Although you won't see many familiar faces here, it's well-acted and enjoyableto watch (the scene with Diane Kruger singing in front of the soldiers issimply brilliant). Joyeux Noël shows fatuousness and absurdity of war like noother film can. It leaves you invigorated and with a feel-good pacifist mood,which makes it a perfect Christmas film.

Musical

@MovieTruth from Movie Truth recommends Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory(1971): What better way to get into the Christmas spirit than to visit themagic of Wonka's wonderful Chocolate Factory. Grab your Golden Ticket and joinWonka and the Oompa-Loompas as they take you on a guided tour of the stuff thatdreams are made of! "Invention, my dear friends, is 93% perspiration, 6%electricity, 4% evaporation, and 2% butterscotch ripple."

Mystery

Auroraaka @CitizenScreenfrom Citizen Screen recommends Back for Christmas from Alfred Hitchcock Presents series(1955-1962): There once was a man who made an occasional film that became anoccasional classic. He was a suspicious sort. His name was AlfredHitchcock. He loved Christmas and a warm and fuzzy, family story. Especially if the story had tinges of deceit, doom and murder. Back for Christmas, first broadcast onMarch 4, 1956 and directed by Sir Alfred himself, is an installment of thepopular Alfred Hitchcock Presents series. The premise issimple: a man kills his wife right before leaving for a holiday. Heburies her in his basement. She'd promised, before her demise, to be"back for Christmas" to all those who are a part of her life — themaid, the neighbors, the friends. While enjoying his holiday sans wife,he gets word, she left him a special present. Ho-Ho-Ho.

Romance

ChrisMason aka @GrumpyDuckUK recommends Love Actually (2003): Love Actually... is… all around. From theopening lines about messages of love from the high-jacked 9/11 planes to theending montage of hugs and kisses accompanied by The Beach Boys "God OnlyKnows" this film fills one with a warm glow and sense of well being. Thetwisting and entwined relationships of the characters keep you guessing andsurprises you throughout. Love is the central theme and how it affects us indifferent ways is explored here, there is falling in, falling out and fallingback in love, there is unrequited love, forbidden love, young love, platoniclove and every type in-between. In fact I LOVE it and you will too.

Sci-Fi

RyanStuckey from The Tao of Stuckey recommends Santa Clause Conquers the Martians (1964):A ridiculous holiday movie where Martians abduct Santa (plus two kids) fromEarth so the children of Mars can experience some actual joy. It's bothterrible and terribly entertaining, especially when viewed via the MysteryScience Theater 3000 episode.

Short

BrittaniBurnham aka @RamblingFilm from Rambling Film recommends The Spirit ofChristmas (1992 & 1995): While technically it's two animated shorts,what's important about this film is what it started. This animated film, puttogether with construction paper, glue, and shot on an 8mm camera no less wasmade by Trey Parker and Matt Stone while they were students at the Universityof Colorado. This crude set eventually became the delightfully offensivetelevision phenom known as South Park.I recommended it to anyone who wants to see how South Park began.

Sport

RaghavModi aka @raghavmodi from Ticker Talks Film recommends Deck the Halls (2006): Christmas! Theone time of the year when the whole family gets together and spreads theholiday cheer. It's also the one time for the most competitive sport everplayed between neighbors. This "sport" has no rules, no boundaries,no expense. It is simply a game of one-upmanship. Ladies and Gents just likeMatthew Broaderick and Danny DeVito in Deck the Halls, I expect you to face upand admit that you too are making sure that your house is better decorated andlighted up than your neighbors. So if you want to experience a true Christmassport. One that takes no prisoners and gives the winner a year of braggingrights, make sure you watch Deck theHalls for some much needed inspiration.

Thriller

Michael Fulmer aka @Fulmer from The Bad and the Beautiful recommends Die Hard (1988): What says Christmas more than a Joel Silver production with BruceWillis, a gang of well organized thieves masquerading as terrorists and a scorefilled with variations on the Ode to Joy? Okay, so Die Hard is not your typical Christmas film per se and the holidaysetting is well utilized by screenwriters, Jeb Stuart and Steven E. de Souzawho keep the Christmas traditions firmly in the background; thankfully (mostly)avoiding the treacle of the season. This is an action/heist film and directorJohn McTiernan never strays far from the genre canon.(For full review, click here.)

War

CarlosSalinas aka @FilmSamurai recommends A Midnight Clear (1992): An AmericanIntelligence squad in World War II encounters a squad of German soldiers.Realizing they are isolated from the war, the tension breaks and both sidesagree to celebrate Christmas together. It's a deliberate, thoughtful film witha great cast of newcomers at the time such as Gary Sinise and Ethan Hawke.

Western

MichaelNazarewycz aka @ScribeHard (hisblogs) recommends Bush Christmas (1947): In thecontext of movies, whenever I hear “Christmas,” my mind automatically thinks ofmany things, including a setting that involves cold, snowy weather. Andwhenever I hear “Western,” my mind automatically thinks of many things, all ofwhich are quite American. What a refreshing surprise, then, to find amovie that not only combines the Christmas and Western genres, but does so witha summertime setting … in Australia. Like the Grinch stole Christmas from theWhos down in Whoville, the thieves in Bush Christmas (1947) steal afamily’s horses, casting a pall over the holiday season. But the childrenof the family won’t be denied their joy, so they take matters into their ownhands by trekking out into the Australian bush to recover those horses and saveChristmas! This is an adorable family alternative to traditional AmericanChristmas Movie choices. It was also remade in 1983 (featuring the filmdebut of future Oscar-winner Nicole Kidman).

That's our list! What are your favorite Christmas films?What is your favorite genre, when it comes to Xmas movies? How many films out of this list have you already seen? Are there any recommendations that you would like to watch?

Merry Christmas!

Guest Post: "Now I have a machine gun. Ho Ho Ho"

2011-12-22T17:31:00.000+02:00

For a couple of weeks now, film sites andblogs have been reviewing Christmas movies, presenting holiday lists andsharing their passion to the silver screen, decorated with tinsel and seasonedwith warm Xmas humor. However, today you won't read the review of a family funfilm but of a classic motion picture that has action and thrills at its core toentertain every viewer, and I have never met a person who doesn't love Die Hard (1988). Our contributor todayis a great cineaste Michael Fulmer from The Bad and the Beautiful and whomyou may know on Twitter as @Fulmer.

Michael, thank you for writing this amazingpiece about a beloved Christmas classic!

Now I have a machine gun. Ho Ho Ho

What says Christmas more than a JoelSilver production with Bruce Willis, a gang of well organized thievesmasquerading as terrorists and a score filled with variations on the Ode toJoy? Okay, so Die Hard is not your typicalChristmas film per se and the holiday setting is well utilized byscreenwriters, Jeb Stuart and Steven E. de Souza who keep the Christmastraditions firmly in the background; thankfully (mostly) avoiding the treacleof the season. This is an action/heist film and director John McTiernan neverstrays far from the genre canon.

McTiernan’s pacing never lags as officerJohn McClane (Bruce Willis) arrives at the Nakatomi Christmas party in LosAngeles just before the holiday revelry is interrupted by the well dressedEuropean cadre of criminals led by Hans Gruber played with a self-assuredpanache by Alan Rickman. There is a useful subplot of McClane attempting toreconcile with his wife (Bonnie Bedilia), but as the entire party has beentaken hostage he must save the group, foil the high stakes robbery and preventthe seemingly idiotic L.A. police force from the many ill conceived attempts atrescuing them. In short its one man versus the heavily armed professional gangand one by one McClane picks them off by utilizing his police training and theelement of surprise with great effect.

Christmas is revealed with not the usualwarm and fuzzy tone, but usually with a humorous, though not quite comedicbent. When the L.A. SWAT team begins one of their hapless assaults on thebuilding, Theo (the surveillance tech bad guy) narrates to his nefariousbrethren, “All right, listen up guys.’Twas the night before Christmas, and allthrough the house, not a creature was stirring, except... the four assholescoming in the rear in standard two-by-two cover formation.” If the spirit ofChristmas is treated with a little more respect it is in Michael Kamen’s score.Eschewing any typical holiday music, Kamen employs Beethoven’s 9^thSymphony Ode to Joy as a musical leitmotif throughout the film which worksquite well in constantly reminding us that it is indeed Christmas time withoutfeeling clichéd or overly didactic.

Jan de Bont’s cinematography is confidentand frames the action with a stable perspective while lighting the characterswith enough fill to properly reveal their facial expressions. If Die Hard has a glaring fault it is thepolice and FBI portrayals. Deputy Police Chief Dwayne T. Robinson (PaulGleason) only serves to give McClane material for witty replies to his foolishremarks and behavior and further cement McClane’s isolated (and thus moreheroic) position against Gruber & co.

Need a break from the constant barrage offamily centered Christmas fare, then sit back and enjoy the ride that is DieHard. Merry Christmas.

Written by Michael Fulmer

What do youthink of Die Hard? Well, definitely,you love it, don't you?

The Hobbit Trailer

2011-12-21T15:27:00.001+02:00

PeterJackson, why are you so cruel? I mean releasing the first trailer of this epicadventure called The Hobbit a yearbeforehand? I can't wait.

Iloved the trailer.

Thevery beginning is accompanied with the great already known score; there arecharacters whom we know from The Lords ofthe Rings trilogy; and there are Shire and other places that we have seenin the films.

Iread the books when I was just a kid, and book-wise, I remember that I loved The Hobbit better than The Lords of the Rings. However,film-wise, I have no prediction what is going to happen. The trilogy is on the topof my all-time favorites. I can't even describe how much I love the films, andI saw them many, many times when I was younger.

Myverdict: the trailer is beautiful, I am awestruck, and I am anticipating The Hobbit very eagerly.

Whatdo you think of the trailer? Are you excited about the film?

Silent Life Teaser Trailer

2011-12-20T18:00:00.000+02:00

Iwould like to bring to your attention a teaser trailer of the upcoming 2012 independentfilm Silent Life that pays tribute to100^th Anniversary of Hollywood. Directed by Hollywood-basedfilmmaker Vlad Kozlov, the film explores the lives and death of the majorsilent era star Rudolph Valentino. The director is starring opposite IsabellaRossellini, Galina Jovovich and Monte Markham.

Thetrailer itself is abundant in beautiful images that promise an excellentexample of a motion picture that admirably mixes various styles and formats inbringing the unique artistic vision to the screen.

Please,watch the trailer and share your thoughts.

SILENT LIFE movie preview - teaser trailer from Rudolph Valentino Productions on Vimeo.

Christmas in Genres Reminder

2011-12-18T18:00:00.000+02:00

Youmight have heard of my little Christmasin Genres campaign.

Thoseof you who signed up for writing a recommendation and sent it to me beforehand,thank you! Many of you have been very enthusiastic, what I totally love andappreciate.

Thoseof you who picked a genre but didn't email me your writing, please, try to makeit within a couple of days. In the original post, I didn't set a cleardeadline, that's my bad. I also said that I would post the collection of your filmadvice on Christmas Day but I figured that it would be better to publish it alittle bit earlier. Anyways, there is still plenty of time.

Finally,those who want to join in, you have a chance because a few genres have not beentaken yet; they are Classic, Sport and Western. Some pretty tough genres left, except for the former (Iactually want one special and famous film be the Classic recommendation butyour ideas are welcome). Just claim the desired genre yours by emailing me andwe will figure out a film you'd like to recommend.

Off-topic:Happy Birthday to Steven Spielberg and Brad Pitt!

Moneyball (2011) Film Review

2011-12-17T18:00:00.000+02:00

4 ½ stars

"How can you not get romantic about baseball?" (Billy Beane)

ForBennett Miller, it is the second attempt to direct a feature film; his previousdirectorial credits include the documentary TheCruise (1998) and highly acclaimed Capote(2005). The latter was honored with a few Oscar nominations, and I guess it iseligible to presume that history will repeat itself with Moneyball that is a good sport movie equally as it is a goodbusiness movie.

What is it about?

Onthe verge of complete collapse, Oakland A's general manager Billy Beane (BradPitt) and Yale graduate Peter Brand (Jonah Hill) oppose to traditionality,using statistical data to evaluate and hire team players. While no one believesin their success, the two stubbornly work, following their own system.

Was it made look good (by those who work in pre- andpost-production or behind the camera)?

BothAaron Sorkin and Steven Zaillian are renowned writers who bring wit and easeinto the dialogues and pacing of the story, while Bennett Miller and his crewskillfully transform their writing into an enjoyably watchable motion picture.There are some really good moments in the cinematography, which is notsurprising when the director of photography is Wally Pfister (a long-timecollaborator in many Chris Nolan's films). The dynamic looks of the movie isalso enhanced by the inclusion of real game footage. Mychael Danna's originalscore is nostalgic at times, while some tracks reveal the sound of brisk hopeand are definitely among the best music pieces I have heard this year in films.

What about acting?

Theleading actor Brad Pitt is truly great. Now I can see where critics' praisecomes from. Pitt manages to convey a bunch of various emotions that the protagonistgoes through and to say that the GM he portrays is a complex character would bean understatement. Billy Beane not only suffers from utter disbelief of hiscolleagues and total frustration about their lost games but he also struggleswith the fact that he might be a not very good parent and simply an eternalalso-ran. The bottom line, Brad Pitt is superb in decoding the emotionalpressure with the help of his eyes, facial expression and body language. Manypeople say that this is the role of his lifetime but my opinion discords with thisassumption. Pitt has got one of the best résumés ever and he has been givingtop-notch performances in every each of the films he was attached to. I can'tagree that the Moneyball part is histop best performance, although it is overwhelmingly outstanding.

JonahHill's metamorphosis is a surprise. If a year or two ago someone told me thatthis actor would be successful in a serious film, I wouldn't believe it. However,he is one of the best supporting actors this year. Philip Seymour Hoffman acquiresa tiny part in the film but I wouldn't underestimate his presence on screen:his manifests skepticism and joy during different staged of the story that yousimply cannot write him off, recalling Moneyball.I also was impressed by a Ken Madlock, who served as a great opposition to BradPitt's character, and I was surprised to find out that he is really unknown actor.Robin Wright is there for a few short moments. You'd better call it a cameo orguest appearance.

What did it make me feel?

Ican't say that the baseball story itself connected with me on an emotionallevel but I always respond to excellence in films. It is so well made that Ididn't mind not knowing baseball terms. It was so well made that I even foundmy eyes misty at several points. Of course, there are emotional factors like relationshipbetween father and daughter, being misunderstood by your business partners,peers and everyone else, losing and winning, believing in those who areconsidered failures. Profound film.

Favorite moment (there may be spoilers)

Theone when Beane's daughter Casey, portrayed by Kerris Dorsey, plays the guitarand sings a song. Beautiful acting from Brad Pitt, as his character is so movedby the child singing. Also the ending is so perfect and features the slightlychanged song and it works so good for the film.

Conclusion

BennettMiller's Moneyball is a sport/businessfilm with a big heart and a great cast, where Brad Pitt is still a standout. Thisfilm is strongly recommended whether you are a baseball fan or not.

Rating:4 ½ stars (see whatthat means)

What did you think of Moneyball? Is it the best partof Brad Pitt? Does this film have a chance to get into your top 10 of 2011favorites?

Can J. Edgar Make It to the Oscars?

2011-12-14T20:00:00.000+02:00

Ihaven't seen the film but what I know is people tend to hate it. Dislike it. Sodo the critics. I was expecting this film to be another fantastic picture fromthe grandmaster Clint Eastwood, especially with him teaming up with one of themost impressive leading men of the present day, Leonardo DiCaprio. Imagine myastonishment when after the limited release opening I wandered on the RottenTomatoes site and discovered that the film had only around 40% fresh reviews,and later this number refused to considerably alter.

Atthe moment, J. Edgar has got 69 freshreviews and 97 rotten ones at Rotten Tomatoes, which makes the tomatometer goas high as 42% of positive critiques, which is, hands down, a yearn-for-moreresult. The question is: can this movie still get some love from the awardsseason and the formidable Academy, in particular?

Thinkingit over, I guess the only category that still has all chances to honor the filmis the Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role one. Leo DiCaprio,previously nominated for three films, What'sEating Gilbert Grape (1993), TheAviator (2004), and Blood Diamond(2006), is the one who can get some recognition for the infamously panned biopic.The chances of him not being snubbedby the Academy members are rising even higher with today's announcement of SAGAwards, as the Guild agreed that the part of Hoover is good enough to give itsome acclaim. Thus, I ~~almost~~ have no doubts that Leonardo will get anod.

Itgave me another thought and the actual idea for this post. Below are the actorsand actresses, who were nominated for films that are considered"rotten" by the majority of critics. The tomatometer results aretaken from the Rotten Tomatoes site. It was an interesting tiny research. Note:I explored the nominated films that were made since 1970. Don't forget thatolder films receive less reviews than modern ones, that's why they could haveeither better or worse scores.

Best Actor in a Leading Role:

JamesEarl Jones for The Great White Hope(1970) — 33%

RyanO'Neal for Love Story (1970) — 59%

RichardHarris for The Field (1990) — 43%

SeanPenn for I Am Sam (2001) — 34%

Best Actor in a Supporting Role:

DavidPaymer for Mr. Saturday Night (1992)— 56%

JamesWoods for Ghosts in Mississippi(1996) — 46%

StanleyTucci for The Lovely Bones (2009) —33%

Best Actress in a Leading Role:

JaneAlexander for The Great White Hope(1970) — 33%

AliMcGraw for Love Story (1970) — 59%

SarahMiles for Ryan's Daughter (1970) —50%

MaggieSmith for Travels with My Aunt (1972)— 40%

ShirleyMacLaine for The Turning Point (1977)— 45%

EllenBurstyn for Same Time, Next Year(1978) — 40%

MarshaMason for Chapter Two (1978) — 40%

MarshaMason for Only When I Laugh (1981) —50%

AnneBancroft for Agnes of God (1985) —53%

MichellePfeiffer for Love Field (1992) — 36%

JodieFoster for Nell (1994) — 53%

MirandaRichardson for Tom & Viv (1994) —42%

DianeLane for Unfaithful (2002) — 49%

CateBlanchett for Elizabeth: The Golden Age(2007) — 35%

Best Actress in a Supporting Role:

LeeGrant for Shampoo (1975) — 59%

LeslieBrown for The Turning Point (1977) —45%

MaggieSmith for California Suite (1978) —58% Winner!

JoanHackett for Only When I Laugh (1981)— 50%

RosemaryHarris for Tom & Viv (1994) — 42%

LaurenBacall for The Mirror Has Two Faces(1996) — 52%

BarbaraHershey for The Portrait of a Lady(1996) — 43%

PenelopéCruz for Nine (2009) — 37%

Asyou may see, for some reason, female actors from "not good" films gotmore nominations that the male actors from equally "not good" ones.Maggie Smith even took home the AA for a rotten film.

What are your thoughts on J. Edgar chances? What do you think of "rotten" filmsthat get recognition from the Academy?

Guest Post — The Twilight Saga So Far: A Male’s Perspective

2011-12-13T20:00:00.000+02:00

Today I would like to bringto your consideration the set of reviews, contributed by Dan Spicer, whomaintains his own film blogthat you are more than welcome to visit. Dan decided to watch all Twilightfilms that are released nowadays and give his objective opinions on the saga.

TheTwilight Saga So Far: A Male’s Perspective

The First ‘Twilight’ movie – DVD Review

Bella Swan has moved back in with her fatherCharlie while her mother is away with her new boyfriend. Bella starts school inher senior year and makes friends quickly. But the mysterious Edward Cullentakes her fancy and she strives to figure him out. When she realises he’s avampire, he’s tempted to consume her blood but refuses. He introduces her tohis family and she becomes one of them. Then evil vampires show up and theyhave decided to make a game of Bella for some reason. Bella becomes the prizeand it’s up to Edward to defend her. This vampire romance is tolerable. It’snot the greatest thing ever, but I do understand the slow burn chemistry. Themovie does drag it out a bit. Still, there’s a lot to like about the romance,despite how dull it might seem from an outsider’s perspective. I didn’t thinkit was boring, not exactly.

The first half is really good and it would havebeen better if that sexual tension was maintained. You just have to like Bellawho’s the main character. Everything else should fall into place. If you thinkBella is a snot, then you’ll hate this. She rarely smiles, her love for Edwardonly touches the surface, but that’s what teenagers are about and you can telljust how angst-ridden Bella is. It’s a good performance from Kristen Stewartwho I think is really attractive anyway in order to be likeable. Her characterBella is not nasty, but she’s shy and you sometimes wonder what’s wrong withher, why is she so angsty. She doesn’t have her head on straight. In terms ofthe whole vampire story, it’s very basic. Nothing to write home about. But Ithink now I understand the appeal of the romance side of things.

6/10

New Moon – DVD Review

It must be tough not being a Twilight fan andtrying to like these movies. For one, their pace is slow and in this moviethere’s hardly anything going on apart from Bella moaning about the loss ofEdward who has decided to leave the town of Forks with the rest of the CullenFamily. Jacob Black steps in to give Bella comfort as they work on motorcyclesand generally just hang out. It’s a good relationship, but Jacob wantssomething more. Victoria, the enemy vampire from the first film, is after Bellaand the werewolves are out to hunt Victoria down. Bella hears that Edward isgoing to kill himself because he thinks she’s dead, so Bella travels to Italyto save him. They meet the Vulturi who are vampire royalty and Edward makes apromise to convert Bella into a vampire.

I’m starting to like these movies, not that I’dwatch them obsessively. They’re grim, but they’re also interesting and a littlefun at times. If it wasn’t for the beautiful Bella, I probably wouldn’t caretoo much about them. The performance by Kristen Stewart in the three movies isso nuanced and sharp, you can’t believe she’s acting. It’s understated howcomplex she is in the role. Losers who diss the franchise for being romanticcompletely sicken me. And the people who judge without watching them are worse.Seeing this movie, it’s hard to be critical when I had the appropriate expectations.It’s a love triangle and it’s fun to watch. It’s not the gooiest of films –Eclipse is probably worse – but New Moon is basically about setting up Jacob asthe second love interest. I hope Bella doesn’t choose to become a vampire. Thatwould be selfish. I hope instead Edward turns back to normal, and she marriesthem both.

6/10

Eclipse – Cinema Review

Two screenings:

Thursday 1st July 2010 - 3:10pm-5:34pm HoytsErina Cinema 4

Wednesday 7th July 2010 - 3:10pm-534pm HoytsErina Cinema 3

Bella and Edward the vampire are a couple, butBella is in trouble because there’s vampires after her. Someone is creating anarmy in Seattle, turning innocent people into bloodsuckers (and I didn’t reallyunderstand why Bella is so important, but now I do. Victoria, who in the firstmovie lost her friend James, is seeking revenge on Edward by tormenting Bella.A guy called Riley, a newborn vampire is her pawn). Bella is having even moretrouble with Jacob. Jacob is a werewolf who fancies Bella, but Bella won’t admitshe loves him. Edward and Jacob have this rivalry, with Jacob saying Edward iscold, lifeless and without a soul. Edward proposes to Bella and they agree toget married. Jacob tries to convince Bella that becoming a vampire is a bigmistake and she wouldn’t have to change if she chooses him. Then there’s a lotof fighting between the two vampire groups having been led to a field byBella’s scent.

I think the tent scene is the stand out, whereEdward and Jacob verbally tussle with each other. I enjoyed Bella’s dad Charliewho I thought was pretty funny. Some might call this movie dreary, but it’s notlike that. It’s a simple tale about a love triangle between a girl and twofantastic creatures, a vampire and a werewolf. In that simplicity, there’s allsorts of emotions and expressions. I don’t mind soap opera, and this is soapy,though it’s for young people, not cynics. Oh yes, it’s very beautiful and veryromantic, these are good looking people here. I heard things before hand, thatthis movie would be boring as all hell, but it’s not. It actually goes prettyquickly, it’s likeable and funny at times. I think it’s the best in the series,balancing drama with action quite well.

7/10

Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part 1 - Cinema Review

Saturday 19th November 2011 - 1:20pm-3:32pmHoyts Erina Cinema 1

In this episode, starting pretty early is BellaSwan and Edward Cullen’s wedding. It’s a standard affair and unfortunately so.I was expecting something more, I guess. Maybe an interruption from Bella’sother boyfriend Jacob Black since he threw a tantrum when he received hiswedding invitation. At the wedding, there’s speeches, toasts, a cake anddancing. Then Jacob does turn up to wish Bella well, dancing with her, spinningher around and lifting her off her feet. Then when Edward admits he’s not goingto turn Bella into a vampire before the honeymoon sex, Jacob is terrifiedEdward’s seed will kill Bella. Bella seems dumb this episode, not listening toJacob and journeying down to Brazil to a beach house where the married couplediscover sex for the first time. They’re not very good at it either - Edwardbreaks the bed with his bare hands, forcing the maid to clean up afterwards.Heaps of sex later, Bella discovers she’s pregnant and it’s all downhill fromthere.

There’s no real magic in the franchise thistime. There’s nothing inspiring at the wedding (except Bella’s dad Charlie’sspeech), but nothing else stands out. The honeymoon is surprisingly unromantic,and when it tries to be romantic, it’s dull and uncomfortable. The main sexscene is decidedly unsexy, no smoke, no glossiness. None of the film thrilledme, it was occasionally boring and pretty uneventful like the filmmakers weredragging it out. The love triangle seems officially over, and the movietherefore has lost its greatest asset. I knew the movie would be disappointingdue to the love triangle collapsing, but they could have substituted it withsomething else, like action (there’s this poorly directed action scene at theend, the only one). Since there’s no sexual tension, I was thinking more twistscould how been implemented, using the whole book rather than dividing the storyin two. Because in the end, the characters do hardly anything. Thankfully, thecheese factor is still there, and I am looking forward to the next part, but Ididn’t like this movie that much. It needed a proper story, more melodrama.Everything was bland.

4/10

Written by Dan Spicer

What do you think of theTwilight saga?

Help 'The Man of the Orchestra'

2011-12-09T18:00:00.000+02:00

"ColorballFilms is creating its first feature film to be submitted into The Cannes FilmFestival. The Man of the Orchestra isa dark romantic drama, suspense thriller based aroundblackmail. Tastefully done, this story is very romantic, and witty, with thesilence of a deceased victim unraveling the suspense."

Plot summary: "Setback in the 1940's, a rebellious, motherless Olesya Shikov is blackmailed byher manipulating stepfather Harold Stolin after multiple attempts to steal herdeceased aunt's sapphire earrings. All of this takes place prior to a charityauction that will feature the precious stones at the family estate. Olesya isto frame Rick, an Australian millionaire said to owe Harold a large sum ofmoney, by placing the missing earrings on him, and leading him to Harold to beheld captive in exchange for a clean slate and the earrings of her desire.During a night of cat and mouse, a romance develops and the selfish Olesya mustmake a decision to either continue to frame Rick, or to save him before it'stoo late."

Youcan help to make a real looker out of TheMan of the Orchestra with recognizable cast and splendid art direction. Tosee how, visit its Kickstarter page. Personally, I was much intrigued by thestory and was impressed by film locations (you can see photos, following theabove-mentioned link). Eternity of Dream wishes the best to the writer/directorEnjoli Correa in making her first feature film!

Guest Post: An Interpretation of Sucker Punch

2011-12-07T18:00:00.000+02:00

Today I would like topresent you with an amazing analysis of film Sucker Punch that gathered mixedreviews this year. The minute interpretation was penned by a passionate filmlover Carlos Salinas who is also a contributing writer for TheDangerBlog.com and can be reachedon Twitter. Carlos, thank youfor this awesome write-up!

Dear readers, please,share your thoughts on Zack Snyder's creation and the interpretation itself.

Attention: the articleincludes spoilers.

AN INTERPRETATIONOF SUCKER PUNCH

By Carlos Salinas

In 2011, Zack Snyder,the visionary director of such films as Dawn of the Dead, 300, Watchmen andthe upcoming Superman film, Man of Steel released the filmSucker Punch to divided opinions. Some viewers enjoyed the spectacle andSnyder’s video game-like scenarios coupled with the soundtrack and attractiveyoung cast. Others were baffled at the “plot” or lack thereof. They didn’tunderstand it and wrote it off as the director’s over-the-top exercise insci-fi and fantasy tropes. Others called it a fan boy’s wet dream. The femalecharacters were too sexualized. They just didn’t “get it.”

The following is anattempt to explain the “plot” of Sucker Punch. It is merely an interpretationand not intended to read the mind of Zack Snyder who is the only person whoactually knows what it means. It is important here to note a word used in thetreatment of mental illness:

Projection- A defense mechanism, operating unconsciously, in whichwhat is emotionally unacceptable in the self is unconsciously rejected andattributed (projected) to others.

The following is themain cast of characters in Sucker Punch:

“Baby Doll” (EmilyBrowning) is a 20 year-old girl who is admitted into the Lennox Insane Asylumby her stepfather after accidentally killing her younger sister. She is alsosuffering the trauma of losing her mother and the cruelty and likely abuse ofher stepfather. She first appears lonely and afraid.

“Sweet Pea” (AbbieCornish) A is a patient at Lennox. She is tall and strong willed with quietstrength. She does not trust strangers.

“Rocket” (Jena Malone)is Sweet Pea’s younger sister. She is more outgoing and friendly.

“Amber” (Jamie Chung) isa patient. She comes across as timid and insecure.

“Blondie” (VanessaHudgens) is a patient. She is unsympathetic and cynical.

Dr. Vera Gorsky (CarlaGugino) is a Polish psychiatrist at Lennox. In the “bordello reality” she is“Madam Gorsky”

“Blue Jones” (OscarIsaacs) runs of the bordello reality. At Lennox he is a sadistic orderly.

“Wise Man” (Scott Glenn)appears as many male archetypes.

Before we get to theclues to the meaning of Sucker Punch we should go ahead and state up front whatthe basic scenario is: This is the story of Sweet Pea. Not Baby Doll.If there is a reality at all in this film it is that the girl, “Sweet Pea”, isinsane and she is in a mental hospital. Baby Doll is simply afigment of her imagination. Baby Doll is Sweet Pea’s defense mechanism thatshe will use to help her escape the horror of abuse from the orderlies andeventually set her free from an eventual lobotomy.

The entire film is aperformance, a play. The film opens with theater curtains opening and revealinga stage set. The bedroom is not real at first. The stage works can be seen justat the edges of the bedroom walls. As the camera moves in the set becomes adream or illusion. We see the figure of “Baby Doll” but it is only a memory ofwhat actually occurred to “Sweet Pea.” It is a traumatic memory, a nightmare.It is the event which drove her insane and was the cause of her being in theLennox mental hospital.

During the openingvoiceover, we hear Gorsky’s voice tell us that an “angel takes on many forms”.She tells us “angels can show up anywhere at any time”. Angels can “shoutthrough demons, daring us to fight.” Baby Doll is one of those angels.

When we first see the“theater” at Lennox there is a stage in the back with a bedroom set. Sweet Peais sitting on a bed, nearly recreating the same “scene” as “Baby Doll” in theopening montage. While Dr. Gorsky is working with Sweet Pea through “play acting”therapy on the stage, Blue is discussing Baby Doll’s fate with her father inlaw. In five days the girl will be lobotomized. Blue tells him that soon BabyDoll will be in “Paradise. And all your troubles will be over.” Baby Doll willnot be able to reveal the abuse once the lobotomy is performed on her. Blueuses that phrase as a sick way of describing “Baby Doll’s” post-lobotomycondition. The word “Paradise” is deliberate here. We’ll see whylater.

Onstage Dr. Gorsky tellsSweet Pea: “You control this world. What you are imagining right now? It can beas real as you imagine.”

We transition to BabyDoll’s first night at Lennox. She is crying alone in the bathroom. A song isplaying. “Where Is my Mind?” The first of many Projections comes tocomfort her in the form of Rocket. Rocket is a projection of Sweet Peas littlesister, the one who she killed accidentally. In other words, Rocket is aseparate personality that she uses to help her cope. She is the sister who isalways eager to be a friend.

The scene moves to theactual lobotomy of Baby Doll. But Baby Doll is actually Sweet Pea. And from themoment the hammer is brought back and about to be struck, we are thrown intoSweet Pea’s alternate reality, the bordello. And what is the first thing we see?Sweet Pea strapped in the chair about to receive the lobotomy in a staged“performance”.

She stops the “scene”cold, almost panicking. Her complaints about the set-up, the nurses, the mentalpatient being sexy, and the commerciality of it are almost a direct statementof the film itself. Even the characters see the absurdity of it and from thatpoint on we are in a staged show. Everyone is playing a character. The actingstyle is like actors in a play not a realistic film. Madam Gorsky is a caricature.Blue will become the mustache-twirling villain of theshow.

Then Sweet Pea sayssomething here that is very revealing. “I’m the star of the show.”

Every character in this“play” has an opposite in the mental hospital. But it is now all in Sweet Pea’smind. Baby Doll’s role in this play is the angel, the savior who has come tohelp her escape in many different scenarios which play out in the drama. Forinstance, when we see Rocket’s assault attempt by the fat cook, Baby Dollrepresents the first appearance of an angel who rescued her.

When we move into thefirst “dance scene” Madam Gorsky tells Baby Doll, “Your fight for survivalstarts now. You have all the weapons you need. Now fight.” These are wordsSweet Pea has likely heard in Dr. Gorsky’s therapy and she uses them in thebordello reality.

Then we transition tothe “hyper reality”. This is like the dream within the dream. The dance is notthe important thing. It’s merely a device in the bordello world to get to thehyper reality. We are never meant to see it. It’s left to our imagination if weimagine it at all. It’s yet another coping mechanism to help Sweet Pea escape.And in the “Samurai” reality Baby Doll meets the wise man. Here he is the firstof many strong male archetypes: The wise sensei. After getting her to tell himwhat she wants, “freedom” he gives her instructions and weapons and tells herto “defend yourself”.

In stunning fashion BabyDoll defeats a trio of giant demon samurai warriors. She realizes her truepower. When she returns to the “bordello reality” she is immediately lookedupon as special. That night she tells the others of her plan to escape. SweetPea is resistant. This is her strong personality fighting with herself, alwaysdoubting. When Baby Dolls says she will escape from this place, Sweet Pea tellsher sarcastically, “Send me a postcard from paradise.”

There is word “paradise”again. We will see it used once more later in the film.

The next scene is anincredible magic trick. Sweet Pea, Rocket and Blondie are sitting at a trio ofvanity mirrors. At first watch we don’t even realize what we see. The camerapans from one side of the mirrors, through the mirror, and then the other sidewithout a cut. Rocket is telling Sweet Pea how Baby Doll “saved me” from the cook.Like an angel.

Sweet Pea finally comesto terms with the plan to escape. The first thing they need is a map. A plan isset in motion. Then we enter the second “hyper reality” where modern weaponryis mixed with World War I planes and airships. Blondie lifts the helmet of ayoung British soldier who is shell-shocked. The wise man appears as an Armyofficer and tells the girls their mission is to retrieve a map. He gives them ageneric motto: “If you don’t stand for something you’ll fall for anything.” Andthen he adds “one more thing, try and work together”.

German steam punksoldiers and a demonic German army officer are killed by the dozens until a mapis retrieved. Once again she comes out of the “dance.” Blue is impressed.

In the bordello realitythe next item to get is a gold lighter. The third hyper reality is a castlesiege of Orc-like creatures. There they are to get fire from the neck of a babydragon. This time the wise man is a World War II bomber pilot crewman. Thesemale archetypes are most likely Sweet Pea’s idealization of her real fatherwith the sage advice and homespun sayings.

The fourth “hyperreality” is a futuristic train with a bomb on board, which represents the nextitem on the list: a knife. Here the plan goes horribly wrong. In thebordello world, Rocket, the little sister is stabbed. In the future reality shesacrifices herself and sends Sweet Pea to safety. The first of herpersonalities is now dead. This goes back to Baby Doll losing her little sisterin the opening montage. In Sweet Pea’s real life, it was the loss of her realsister.

Things have come to ahead now in the bordello reality as Blue tries to regain control. He puts SweetPea away while he kills two more of her personalities, Amber and Blonde. MadamGorsky is distraught and tells Blue, “I teach them to survive you...“ Inother words Madam Gorsky teaches Sweet Pea and the others to cope with Blue’streatment. (Simultaneously in the mental hospital Dr. Gorsky is teaching her tosurvive the effects of her abuse)

All that’s left is herangel, Baby Doll, who helps her fight back by stabbing Blue and getting SweetPea out of the closet. They use fire and the key to escape and when it seemsthey are trapped outside the bordello, it is then that Baby Doll realizes thatshe is the fifth thing. This is not her story. It was never her story. It wasSweet Pea’s story.

Baby Doll tells SweetPea (herself) “You go home… Love… Be free… Live for all of us. You’re thestrongest.” Here Baby Doll is telling Sweet Pea she is the strongest of all thepersonalities and she will escape.

Then the angel Baby Dollmakes one last sacrifice to help Sweet Pea’s escape. Baby Doll then closes hereyes to take the final blow. The lobotomy is done and for the longest time wedo not see the face of the girl in the chair. It is finally revealed to be theface of who we perceived as Baby Doll. But it is the face of the angel SweetPea has left behind.

When we see Sweet Peaget on the bus we see the wise man one last time in the guise of a bus driver.Police attempt to detain Sweet Pea just as she is about to board the bus. (Notethe boy in front of her who turns around is the shell-shocked boy on the WorldWar I battle field in the first hyper reality)

The bus driverintervenes on Sweet pea’s behalf and the police allow her to go on her way.Once on the bus she admits she doesn’t have a ticket but the bus driver assuresher he knows and that it’s okay. He tells her to go sit in the back and getsome rest. He tells Sweet Pea, “We have a long way to go.”

As the bus drives offdown the road to the right is a billboard which reads, “Paradise Diner”.

Last Week I Saw… Moonstruck, Black Christmas, The War Game etc.

2011-12-06T17:48:00.001+02:00

Iconfess. I watched a lot of filmslast week. Among them, there were (also) a lotof shorts; at first, I wanted to include them into this list but it wouldbecome too long, so here are the opinions only on features.

Moonstruck (1987)

Director: Norman Jewison

Iam a bit baffled by this film. To my mind, the story is not outstanding, nothinghappens in the movie. Sadly, I find nothing charming in it and I don't get itsstatus of a loved romantic comedy. It was not awful though. I enjoyed Cher'sacting but I still have my doubts about her Oscar win for exactly this part.(3/5)

Black Christmas (1974)

Director: Bob Clark

Thisone is a pretty solid holiday horror hyphen thriller but it drags a bit.However, the use of the camerawork is very good, while the young and unknowncast make it all believable. The mysterious maniac figure is rather scary, andthe ending it top-notch. (3.5/5)

Scream 4 (2011)

Director: Wes Craven

Thelast of the famous series, the fourth installment is quite laughable at timesbut I guess it strives for being that way. I found Neve Campbell's acting mostmature in this film, which brings her character more layers. At first, Ithought the film was terriblyridiculous but now I understand that I still enjoyed it. (3.5/5)

Mary Poppins (1964)

Director: Robert Stevenson

Iwanted to see this classic for a while and finally I did. It's a must-see forevery film fan because it's Walt Disney Productions and because it's thesweet-voiced Julie Andrews. I was not aware that they used animation for thisone, too, so it was a surprise. MaryPoppins is a full-fledged musical, not like they sing one or two songs;they actually spend quite much time, singing and dancing, so be prepared, ifyou are not a musical fanatic. Bottom line, Julie Andrews was awesome. Withouta doubt. Her co-stars Dick Van Dyke, David Tomlison and Glynis Johns did agreat job as well, while kid actors were nicely funny. (3.5/5)

Scream 3 (2000)

Director: Wes Craven

Ithink that you can read my commentary to Scream 4 to know what I think of thisone. However, I think I liked this one a sliver more than its follower. (3.5/5)

The Palm Beach Story (1942)

Director: Preston Sturges

PrestonSturges is one of those filmmakers who make movies in their own style. That's probablywhy he is considered to be one of the greatest directors of classic comedy. The Palm Beach Story is a cute motionpicture, starring the simply amazing Claudette Colbert and Joel McCrea.However, it makes me a bit upset that I couldn't fall in love with this film.Yes, it's funny, it's classic but it isn't even close to approach my top 100list of all-time favorites. Recommended though. (3.5/5)

The War Game (1965)

Director: Peter Watkins

Itmay be considered a short film (48 min.) but I choose to regard it as a featuredocumentary, which by the by won the Oscar as the Best Documentary. However,the events depicted in this film never happened. On the contrary, The War Game reflects on the effects ofthe nuclear war in Great Britain. The film is quite heartbreaking. Of course,the visual effects and makeup were not as advanced as nowadays but thispseudo-documentary still affected me a lot. Must-see. Seriously, watch it.(4/5)

Sullivan's Travels (1941)

Director: Preston Sturges

Thisis my favorite film by the director so far. It is a delightful comedy but whatI liked the most about it is its direct connection to the movie industry. Infact, the story is centered on a Hollywood director and his beliefs thatpeople, living during the Depression, don't need comedy. It's easy to figurethat it's worth of your attention. I won't fully reveal my favorite scene from Sullivan's Travels but I will vaguely sharethat it is connected with the show of Walt Disney's cartoon Playful Pluto (1934). In addition, it ismy first film, starring Veronica Lake, and she is so beautiful! If you have achance, don't miss this delightful and meaningful comedy. (4/5)

Scream 2 (1997)

Director: Wes Craven

Iliked it. (4/5)

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

Director: Wes Craven

Afternot watching horror for almost entire life, I can't help but love those kind ofscary movies. A Nightmare on Elm Streetis not excessively scary but it has its jumpy moments and Freddy Krueger himselfembodies one of the creepiest villains ever. I also can't even express how gladI was to see Johnny Depp's first film; you all know that he is my favoriteactor. It was sort of strange to see him in such a normal part. Overall, thefilm is a horror classic and I loved it. (4/5)

Andthe best film that I saw last week was…

The Purple Rose of Cairo (1985)

Director: Woody Allen

Secondweek in a row, the best film I watch is Woody's. However, there is no oddity insuch constancy. Woody's greatest skill is combining reality and fantasy inextremely cozy way that it doesn't even seem to be unnatural. I loved about thisvery film that in some way it was about another film. Mia Farrow is brilliantand a delight to watch, while both Jeff Daniels and Danny Aiello give excellentsupporting performances. Woody is a true artist, and I came to understandingthat I was totally wrong, not liking AnnieHall (1977), which was my first film by this director. Thus, I recommendeveryone to watch The Purple Rose ofCairo. (4.5/5)

Which films have you seen out of this list? Are thereany that you would like to watch? What are your thoughts?

Discussing Melancholia at Matineecast

2011-12-05T17:50:00.001+02:00

Ryan McNeil from The Matinee was kind enough to invite me to be a guest at an episode of hisMatineecast, and I had a great opportunity to discuss with him one of the mostoutstanding films this year, Melancholia by the infamous Lars Von Trier. Apartfrom the movie talk, we shared some films that we think are both beautiful anddepressing. To listen to the episode, click here.

My English was not verygood for I haven't spoken this language on a regular basis for quite a while,so sorry for that! I hope you enjoy listening to the show though.

Tomorrow I will share withyou what films I had pleasure to watch last week. And as a reminder, check outmy Call for Christmas Film Recommendations. There are still some easy genres,and I would be happy if you participate, if you still haven't joined in.

Call for Christmas Film Recommendations

2011-12-04T16:26:00.001+02:00

Iwill try to make it concise and clear.

OnDecember 25, I would like to make a holiday post, consisting of your filmrecommendations. This list will have a title Christmas in Genres. That's how it works. Every contributor picks agenre and chooses a film, somehow connected to the holiday and belonging to thegenre he or she has chosen. They email me the title and one or two sentencesabout it beforehand, so that I could assemble all contributions into one poston Christmas Day.

Theymake so many films of different genres about Xmas that I think it won't be aproblem.

Hereis the list of genres:

~~Action~~

~~Adventure~~

~~Animation~~

~~Biography~~
~~Classic~~

~~Comedy~~

~~Crime~~

~~Documentary~~

~~Drama~~

~~Family~~

~~Fantasy~~

~~Film-Noir~~
~~Foreign~~

~~History~~

~~Horror~~

~~Music~~

~~Musical~~

~~Mystery~~

~~Romance~~

~~Sci-Fi~~
~~Short~~

~~Sport~~

~~Thriller~~

~~War~~

~~Western~~

Onceyou pick a genre you would like to recommend a film of, drop me a line to eternityofdream@gmail.com As soonas I get your email, I will edit this post and will strikethrough the genre youhave chosen. I would also appreciate it, if you share with me in the email thefilm that you are going to write a tiny recommendation about because manymovies belong to several genres, and I would love it, if we don't haverepetitions. Don't worry if your film pick is too famous or too unknown. It doesn't matter.

Don'thesitate to take part! All I ask from you is a recommendation and a couple ofsentences.

Pleaselet others know about my call for Christmas recommendations. It is the firsttime I do such a thing and I would love to make it happen! Thank you.

IMPORTANT: please don't write your recommendations under this post. I guess it would be more fun, if we see what we get in the ultimate list only when it is out. Besides, then everyone can comment on what Xmas films they love.

Last Week I Saw… Burlesque, The Lady Eve, Scream etc.

2011-11-28T21:07:00.001+02:00

HappyMonday everyone! Have you seen any great films last week? As for me, I didn'tvisit theaters and was enjoying some older movies instead. There were some Ididn't like that much but the situation was balanced by really good pictures.Let's see.

You Again (2010)

Director: Andy Fickman

Withouta doubt, it was cool to see Sigourney Weaver and Jamie Lee Curtis co-starringin this film but it's a pretty pointless and unfunny flick. Although some averagemoviegoers would enjoy it, I wouldn't recommend the film to the majority ofpeople. (2.5/5)

Burlesque (2010)

Director: Steve Antin

WhatI liked about this movie is that it is set at present day, which is quiteinteresting for almost every single musical that I have seen relates to this orthat time era. Music numbers, art direction and costume design are excellentbut they alone can't keep Burlesqueafloat. As a leading actress, Christina Aguilera is not convincing, while therest of the cast is not that good with probably the only exception, StanleyTucci, who seems to retrieve the part from TheDevil Wears Prada (2006) though. Although the film looks overall sparkling andattractive, its main drawback is the fairytale-ishly ridiculous story. Evenclassic Walt Disney cartoons are more believable, plot-wise! Generally, Ienjoyed the movie but it could have been much better. (3/5)

A Prairie Home Companion (2006)

Director: Robert Altman

Inhis last film, Robert Altman once again proves that he can manage extremely hugestarry casts to the benefit of the film. Being a story of one last broadcast ofradio show, the movie is well-acted and flows smoothly, focusing on the interactionsbetween characters. The credits include such great acting talents as MerylStreep, Lily Tomlin, Tommy Lee Jones, Kevin Kline, Virginia Madsen, John C.Reilly, Woody Harrelson, and Lindsay Lohan. (3.5/5)

The Lady Eve (1941)

Director: Preston Sturges

Ifyou go to its IMDb page, you'll see this beautiful colorful poster that rendersthe atmosphere of the picture perfectly. I am a big fan of old posters likethis one, and it is surely a work of art. As for the film itself, I was reallylooking forward to watching it because I really want to familiarize myself withSturges' filmography, as he has some quite interesting titles in the body of work.However, I was a little bit let down by TheLady Eve, which is sweet and positively silly but still not that hilariousas I imagined. Disregarding this fact, Barbara Stanwyck and Henry Fonda areamazing together onscreen. I think one of my favorite scenes is the one, whenwe see in the shot what Barbara's character sees in her mirror, as she keepsher eyes on Henry's character and she voices what he might think at thosemoments. It is implemented very interestingly. Although I was a bitdisappointed with the film, I still recommend it to any classic fan or simply filmlover. (3.5/5)

Deja Vu (2006)

Director: Tony Scott

Deja Vu is a quiteabsorbing action sci-fi film, intelligent and dynamic at the same time, and itfeatures a strong performance from the leading actor Denzel Washington and avery cute one from Paula Patton. Nevertheless, the film is flawed with a lovestoryline that should have been eliminated. As a cinematic jigsaw puzzle, it'squite good though. (3.5/5)

Scream (1996)

Director: Wes Craven

Ihave been missing out on many good horror films but I'm glad that I overcame myfear and started educating myself on this genre. This one is cool, thrillingenough, making me long for watching more horror. I can't say that I was totallysatisfied with Neve Campbell's performance but let it be. It was also nice tosee Courteney Cox. (4/5)

Andthe best film that I saw last week was…

Scoop (2006)

Director: Woody Allen

Ihave no clue why people tend to dislike this one but I had great time, watchingit. The casting is great, including Woody himself, Scarlett Johansson, HughJackman, and Ian McShane. The film comprises some fantasy elements, and it ispleasant both for ears with the used classic music and for eyes with greatplaces where the movie was shot. You may say it is clichéd but once again Ihate this word and in my opinion it means nothing in films. I was amused and I loved Scoop. (4/5)

Whathave you seen last week? What do you think of the above-mentioned films?

Last Week I Saw… Breaking Dawn, The Help, The Tree of Life etc.

2011-11-21T21:56:00.000+02:00

Ifyou missed the previous post, I will sum it up: I will not write as manyfull-fledged reviews as I used to; instead, I will be publishing weekly postsabout films that I have seen during the week, preceding the post itself. Tofinish it on a positive note, I will always end the writing with the best filmthat I saw this or that week.

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1 (2011)

Director: Bill Condon

Ihonestly planned not to go to see this movie but sometimes some unaccountableforces and circumstances can make all your plans go wrong. Speaking of the flickitself, it was seriously the worst film in the series. I don't know why BillCondon did this to his career after Godsand Monsters (1998), Kinsey (2004)and Dreamgirls (2006) but hisdirection doesn't revive the dull and uninteresting saga, adored by teens. Tobegin with, the book split into two parts is totally unnecessary because thispart one of Breaking Dawn seems like acompilation of long-drawn-out shots of two sweethearts staring at each otherand flashbacks and that's it. You cut out all those meaningless scenes andyou're good, you made a short. All in all, BreakingDawn - Part 1 is the same old story Twilight has been teaching us and themost tedious one in the franchise. Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson aresurely better actors in other projects. (1.5/5)

Field of Dreams (1989)

Director: Phil Alden Robinson

Iheard a lot about this film but to me it was a bit of a letdown. I enjoyed itbut expected a lot more from the flick. It does remind me of Steven Spielberg'sAlways, a fantasy movie of the sameyear, with its atmosphere and attitude to showing miracles. Acting wise, KevinCostner, James Earl Jones, and Ray Liotta give decent performances that arealso supported by Burt Lancaster who has a pretty small part that neverthelessdoesn't underestimate the significance of the great player. There are wonderfulmessages that are conveyed by the film: fighting for your dream, even if no onebelieves you can handle it, and supporting the ones you loved, even if you don'tget what they are doing. However, the love the film has been drawing probablydepends on the fact that the setting of the movie is the baseball field,America's favorite sport. (3/5)

Love Me Tonight (1932)

Director: Rouben Mamoulian

Thisfilm is one of those classic musicals that in its own times tried to makepeople re-gain their faith and hopes for the better, while the Great Depressionreigned all over the entire world. The movie is light-hearted and fun and Idon't think you'll get something more from it. Its main theme is love betweentwo people from different society layers; done to death now, but in the early 30's,it wasn't that trivial in the silver screen. Watching this movie made me feelgrateful that I live in this era, when I can enjoy such old forgotten gems aswell as modern visual marvels. The leading actors Maurice Chevalier andJeanette MacDonald are rather good but I was especially happy to see Myrna Loyin one of supporting parts. If you are into the classic musical, watchthis delightful movie. (3.5/5)

Cars 2 (2011)

Director: John Lasseter, Brad Lewis

Theycall it the only failure of Pixar but I found it decent and quite enjoyable. Icannot judge the original humor of the film because I watched the dubbedversion and our translators make them great for comedies and animation; thus, Cars 2 was not an exception. I loved theway the cars rushed around the globe because the animators did justice todifferent cities featuring in the story. As usually, the Pixar film conveyed apowerful message about being a friend and being yourself but the lack oforiginality on this level doesn't make the animated feature less worth of yourattention. (3.5/5)

The Tree of Life (2011)

Director: Terrence Malick

Youcan read my cinema review of this film here. However, I still have a few thingsto say about it upon my second viewing. Seeing it for another time, I felt thatthose moments, which I couldn't fully understand in the theater, make much moresense now. The scenes that are considered just a visual treat by many people doactually have a profound meaning and they are irreplaceable because they arethose ingredients of the story that make it that influential. Although I lovedthe film, the rating dropped a bit. However, I still recommend it to those whocan deal with its pretentiousness. The best way to grasp the ideas of thepicture is to forget about commonplace criticizing and try to admire the beautyof filmmaking. (4/5)

Andthe best film that I saw last week was…

The Help (2011)

Director: Tate Taylor

Ihave been waiting to see it for a while, and my little dream has come true.Firstly, it is an inspiring story, which I always welcome. Secondly, theperformances of almost all-female cast are stupendous. Viola Davis is the mainpart of the movie mechanism and she is the one to make it work. I can'tthink of any other young actress that could replace Emma Stone and be better.Octavia Spencer gives a breakthrough performance and there is already Oscarbuzz for her role (as well as for Davis), which I would totally support. Bryce Dallas Howard made melook at her in a new light because she is the best villain ever for this motionpicture. Jessica Chastain plays a dumb blonde but man she is fantastic in thisrole; it is a big year for the actress. Allison Janney, Sissy Spacek, and MarySteenburgen with their smaller parts don't let us forget about their presenceon screen. Thirdly, the art direction and vividness of colors are just to mytaste. I do love the style of 60's for these reasons. To sum it up, "Youis kind. You is smart. You is important." (4.5/5)

Haveyou seen these movies? Would you like to watch any of them? What good films didyou acquaint yourselves with last week?

Promised Reviews and Trailer Talk

2011-11-19T20:00:00.000+02:00

Hieverybody! I finally figured and had enough courage to acknowledge that I can'twrite my usual reviews often, that's why once a week, I will publish a post,featuring my opinions on films that I have seen during those seven days andmaybe share some thoughts on film news and trailers. Thus, starting Monday, Iwill be writing those weekly posts. Today I will partially keep my promise andgive you my point of view on movies, which I had promised to review, but let'sstart with a trailer talk.

SnowWhite and the Huntsman (2012)

Ididn't care about this movie or another one about Snow White. However, when Isaw the trailer, it made me sad. With all honesty, and it's not because ofKristen Stewart's involvement into an infamously dull vampire saga, thisfairy-tale movie doesn't look good at all. I have no doubts that they shot itbeautifully and its colorfulness reminds me of this year's flop 'Red RidingHood' with Amanda Seyfried in the lead. On the positive side, Charlize Theronis great enough to play the fairest evil queen.

YouTube link

Mirror,Mirror (2012)

Isaw this trailer after the one of 'Snow White and the Huntsman', and to tellthe truth, it made me even sadder. Lily Collins is definitely a better SnowWhite but all in all it's one of the most disgustingly ridiculous things I haveever seen. I'm also sorry for Armie Hammer.

YouTube link

TheIron Lady (2011) second trailer

Thisone seems to be another conventional story about a strong woman, who stillsuffers at heart. That's what I want to see. Let it be conventional, it is nota problem to me, and I did like the poster, while everyone hated it. MerylStreep is the best actress alive. As you may see, I am still anticipating thisfilm.

YouTube link

TheHunger Games (2012)

Well,well. I actually thought that action takes place in the woods all the time andI imagined that the arena is more ancient like. Whatever. The trailer was kindof messy but judge a movie, not a trailer. I love smart sci-fi films that buildup a new order of things in the world that's why I expect it to be a treat. JenniferLawrence is so cool, and the cast is pretty famous overall. I probably don'tanticipate it as much as original book fans but oh I so root for it to be ahit!

YouTube link

Nowthose promised reviews, squeezed to tiny length. These are just opinions though.I saw the films quite a while ago and just couldn't find time to write up aboutthem.

TheThing (2011)

Iwas not a big fan of the original but decided to see the prequel on the bigscreen. Surprisingly enough, I enjoyed it. My friend and I went to see it at thematinee and it was a bit scary for there were only two of us. Back to the film,I had the same problem as with John Carpenter's version: too many characters;their number is necessary but still it was quite a challenge to remember who was whom. However, I loved that they had a woman as a lead. Because at least, I knewwho she was, and Mary Elizabeth Winstead didn’t disappoint me. The bottom line,the movie was rather thrilling and I enjoyed it. (3.5/5)

Pussin Boots (2011)

Ilove animation. That's what I thought after seeing it. It was a littleembarrassing to be among a few adults who were without kids in the cinema butwhat could I do? The plot was silly, and I didn't like the looks of that HumptyDumpty, but I admire the idea of finally giving a feline the starring part.Anyway, the film is awesome because it is vivid, dynamic, and fun. I amuncertain if adult audience is satisfied with the plot but you can just enjoythe marvels of animation. (4/5)

Midnightin Paris (2011)

Thisone definitely deserves a more insightful review but let me just share how muchI loved it. Woody Allen made me want to explore his filmography, even though Iknow that his older works differ from what he creates nowadays. 'Midnight inParis' is a magical experience and now I can understand why every second personsays it is their top favorite this year. The cast is stellar but it is not itsonly merit. Allen manages to direct them in the way it seems they forget theyare in front of camera and act as if they are in the real life. Besides, seeinghow they manage to revive so many great artists of the past on screen isfantastic. Ah, you know what? I can't do justice to this beaut in just a fewsentences. I'm gonna review it next week. (5/5)

Whatdo you think of these trailers and movies?

Three Things to Say

2011-11-11T19:00:00.000+02:00

1)I have been kind of, well, not busy but not involved into blogging life. Ineither read much nor wrote much. But I really want to get back to normal. Istill have to write reviews of 'The Thing' (the prequel), 'Puss in Boots', and'Midnight in Paris', and start a new reviewathon. I want to see 'The Rum Diary', 'Tintin' and 'Higher Ground' soon, so I will have work to do. I also hope to read some stuffthat you have written while I was not here.

Othertwo things concern this day in film history.

2) Happy birthday Leo! Undoubtedly, he isone of the best actors working today and one of my favorites. I don't careabout 'J. Edgar' getting rotten reviews. I've never seen a terribly bad filmfrom DiCaprio or Eastwood.

3)Happy birthday to Stanley Tucci! This actor is very much underrated but Ialways thought he was amazing even in the smallest parts. Just recall 'Julie& Julia', 'Easy A', 'Captain America', 'The Lovely Bones' and a lot of others.

Iguess that's it. Have a nice day!

Guest Film Review: Carnage (2011)

2011-11-10T19:00:00.000+02:00

Hello everyone! Today I present you with a guest review of 'Carnage',which I haven't seen yet but certainly look forward to. Our guest writer isMargarita Soboleva. She is a second-year student at a University, where shestudies foreign languages (English, French, a bit Italian). In order to havemore practice in writing, she decided to try her hand in reviewing movies inEnglish. Thanks Margarita for this awesome contribution!

Let's watch a new movie byRoman Polansky under the title Carnage.It is a very thoughtful and profound film which deals with the conflict of twofamilies, two pairs of young parents who have clashed over the question of theirsons' fight. One of the problems they touch upon during the whole film is theirargument over the bringing-up of their children and who does it in the rightway.

While watching this movie many viewers may criticize severely or even attack itbecause a modern viewer has not got accustomed to films like this one. There isno intrigue, suspense or exciting plot in the film concerned and the outcomeleaves mixed uncertain feelings. We might also think that the name of the movieis not reasonable because of the absence of bloodshed that was supposed to bein the movie with such a title. But those who dislike Carnage for all these things would be wrong as Carnage was not made for all those aspects above. Right on thecontrary, it is very complicated, its main purpose is to show the relationshipsbetween the protagonists which are based on misunderstanding and on the lack ofdesire to try to hear opponent's point of view. So Carnage makes us think a lot about the way we argue sometimes.

Talking about genres, I would certainly say it is a psychological movie withthe components of comedy because there are several moments in it which couldmake the viewer laugh at the actions of main characters.

The movie is very realistic. It is based on the performance of actors andactresses whose famous names explode viewer's doubts. Such great people asJodie Foster (The Silence of the Lambs),Kate Winslet (Titanic), ChristophWaltz (Inglourious Basterds), John C.Reilly (What's Eating Gilbert Grape)have done their best in the film. It goes without saying that their performanceis really amazing and these people cannot act badly at all! Every character standsout in their own way what makes Carnagean unusual film.

To my mind, the most thoughtful and serious films are those which are based onthe ordinary and everyday plot with ordinary people whose urgent problems aresimilar to ours.

To draw a conclusion, Iwould strongly recommend you to watch Carnagebecause it is worth it.

Written by MargaritaSoboleva

Haveyou already seen the film? If yes, what do you think of it? If no, are youanticipating it just like me?

In Time (2011) Film Review

2011-10-29T20:00:00.000+03:00

3 ½ stars

"Hasn't evolution always been unfair?" (Philippe Weis)

Havingless impressive works in his resume, Andrew Niccol still can boast about thefact that it was him who penned 'The Truman Show' (1998) and wrote/directed'Gattaca' (1997). In fact, my expectations about 'In Time' were rather high,and in my opinion, the film didn't bomb. Therefore, I strongly object to itsrotten reviews that seem to domineer at Rotten Tomatoes. Let's find out why.

What is it about?

Thepremise is amazingly interesting. In not so distant future, people stop agingwhen they turn 25 but are left to live only one year more. Afterwards, theyjust can earn more time. Naturally, with time as currency and the only money,people are divided into the poor and rich. The former can hardly make it toanother day, dying young, while the latter can live for centuries. In hisghetto time zone, Will (Justin Timberlake) meets a stranger with more than a hundredyears on hand (both figuratively and literally), who reveals him the truth aboutthe system they are a part of, and soon after, Will decides to struggle forjustice.

Was it made look good (by those who work in pre- andpost-production or behind the camera)?

Onceagain, the concept of such a future model is wildly interesting: you want tobuy a cup of coffee? Make a phone call? Spend the time that you have earned,but don't forget that when time is gone, you are gone. It is certainlyinteresting to see what details Niccol decided to add: e.g. upon Will's arrivalto the richest time zone, New Greenwich, he hurries as he got used to but verysoon notices that he is the only one to move so fast. It shows how much peoplefrom the film value time. The plot itself is the known ole story set against asci-fi background. Unfortunately, it does have some loopholes but I can easilyclose my eyes on film flaws because no matter what, 'In Time' is entertainingand occasionally smart.

Whatreally can deserve some laughs is the style, no, not of the movie itself but ofAmanda Seyfried's heroine. I cannot say that I'm totally against the image theycreated but at times it is rather ridiculous. Amanda's Sylvia is on the runwith Will, they have been robbed of time, then they steal some to remedy thissituation… but she always looks excellent: not simply because she is naturallybeautiful but because of her perfect hair setting, makeup (yeah, they have torun, time is gold, but she always manages to spruce up) and devilishly high heels(ahem). However, I really can persuade myself to look at this like at the partof film's futuristic style.

What about acting?

Haveyou ever had this moment when you realize that an actor you dislike may be notthat bad? I experience that moment yesterday watching the film. JustinTimberlake may be not an outstanding actor who can be compared to the greatest playersbut he surely does a good job and manages to lead 'In Time' all the way fromthe beginning to credits. As much as I love Amanda Seyfried, her work doesn'tsatisfy me in this film for I just couldn't see her acting, which was sadly flatand unimpressive. Minor part of Olivia Wilde is nevertheless very important forthe story, and the actress is convincing, succeeding to render what she has toin such a small period of screen time. I haven't seen her in any other moviesbut what I saw in 'In Time' definitely speaks in her favor. CillianMurphy is a great villain. He always is. And in this film, he plays an eviltime keeper. I wouldn't say that he is totally evil but is a great oppositionto the protagonist. Matt Bomer and Vincent Kartheiser seem like good actorstoo.

What did it make me feel?

Despiteall its indiscretions, the film made me think over a few points. Firstly, ourworld is considered hectic and fast and it is absolutely true; but incomparison with their world, we crawl around at a snail pace. It got methinking that no matter how much we rush and hurry, we sometimes can indulge inprocrastination and linger about, doing nothing, tweeting, napping, chatting over the phone. They don't have such luxury. Unless they're rich. Personally,I usually don't value my time as people in the film, that's probably the main reasonwhy I liked 'In Time'. It managed to articulate the idea of wasting vs. respectingit so well that I can forgive its mistakes. Secondly, the presented order ofthings is quite sad. It's not about how much time you are given; it's about thefact that those people would finally know when their lives are going to end. Ican't imagine life like this. The film also has a very well done emotionalaspect connected with Olivia Wilde's character. If you watched a certaintrailer, you know; if you didn't, I won't spoil it for you. Anyway, it was justbeautifully filmed.

Conclusion

AndrewNiccol's 'In Time' is an exciting leap into a future, seasoned with some actionand fun. Moreover, being an entertaining flick, it doesn't fail to make one thinkabout life.

Rating:3 ½ stars (see what that means)

Whatdid you think of the film? Are you going to watch it? If no, what is the reasonfor your disinterest?

The Symphony (2011) Film Review

2011-10-28T20:00:00.000+03:00

4 stars

"I cut. I burn. I hallucinate. And then I create."

Artistsare not always understood; their works are not always accepted. Some artistsbalance on the ledge of the ordinary, while their more obsessed counterpartsindulge in some kind of insanity just to be remembered and leave a legacy. Anartist's mind is a mystery, and although many film works set ajar the door tounderstanding it, 'The Symphony', written and directed by Michael LaPointe,gives its original interpretation of this phenomenon.

What is it about?

Aself-mutilating composer, Ray (Robin Zamora), cuts and burns himself, recordingthe sounds of his pain in hopes that a long-awaited muse will come. Histhoughts are focused on one thing only: his album that he has been working on,his remarkable contribution to the world music. It appears that he doesn't havelife but this slow self-murdering as he begets the work of art. Although hisgirlfriend Sam (Marissa Merrill) can't understand his destructive mania, she isvery supportive and patient, but the artist doesn't seem to appreciate it tothe full; maybe, he doesn't even notice her care. He meets a homeless man,Chancelor (Bill Oberst Jr.), who becomes Ray's spiritual leader of some sortand who may direct him onto the answers he is seeking for.

Was it made look good (by those who work in pre- andpost-production or behind the camera)?

'TheSymphony' is a special film. I haven't seen anything like this before, althoughit does remind me of Darren Aronofsky's 'Pi' (1998). As suggested in the intro,the film half-opens the window into the mind and soul of an artist, sinking in madnessand desire to leave an outstanding legacy. Since the movie is limited location-wise,we spend quite a lot of time getting acquainted with the main character. Hetries to find perfection and beauty in what he creates, dragging us into thesame venture.

Beinga story about a composer and his nascent oeuvre, 'The Symphony' is a picture ofmany sounds. They are carefully edited, mixed and interwoven into thekaleidoscope of the surrealistic tale. The cinematography and editing are alsodone to perfection, giving the film a pulsating and nervous gait. As the writer,Michael LaPoite manages to implement some really interesting ideas; as the director, he fastens all threads together to tell an unusual story.

What about acting?

RobinZamora is a center of 'The Symphony' and he is truly a star of this film.Portraying a self-involved and self-destroying composer, he succeeds inconveying those emotions and pain of his character that we feel that he mightbe real. It seems that sometimes camera is not interested in Marissa Merrillfor at the very beginning she shows up in a scene, she is off-screen and weonly hear her voice at first. However, it doesn’t make her less important; itadds to the story that Ray is the core of it, but Sam is always there for him,even at the moments we can't see her. Merrill gives a very natural performanceof a loyal partner, and it seems that we behold not Merrill theactress but Merrill the real person, vulnerable and devoted. Last but not least, Bill Oberst Jr.impressively co-stars alongside the two, as his highly professional acting resemblesthe work of an illustrious thespian.

What did it make me feel?

Undoubtedly,this film made me think of artistic brilliance and sacrifices one must do toachieve greatness. I enjoyed it because of its originality and I think it doesdeserve attention.

Conclusion

MichaelLaPointe's 'The Symphony' is a fantastically crafted independent drama that exploresthe horizons of genius and obsession, introducing an original look at the sctory and a selectcast.

Rating:4 stars (see what that means)

Mother's Red Dress (2011) Film Review

2011-10-27T20:00:00.000+03:00

4 ½ stars

"All we can do is face what is real." (Ashley)

Lookingback at the past, at the Golden Age, when major studios owned every inch ofsilver screen, makes one appreciate the battle that has been going on betweenmainstream and independent filmmaking. What we are offered to see in cinemasevery day is not necessarily shallow and lacks in depth but sadly not everyoneis lucky enough to find out about a truly honest indie gem that raisesimportant social issues. However, we have been witnessing the process of thewall between mainstream and independent coming down; and there is a hope thatsomeday more people will be able to enjoy indie films.

What is it about?

Notable to accept what his mother, Laura (Alisha Seaton) has done, young Paul(Timothy Driscoll) starts off to seek for a better life, and the road leads himto a small town and a tiny coffee house, where he meets Brenda (Amanda Reed)and Ashley (Alexandra Swarens), who also cope with their everyday disasters.While Brenda appears to develop distant affection to the guy right away, heevidently falls for Ashley. Although a new life flickers ahead, the past can't letPaul go; or maybe it's the other way about.

Was it made look good (by those who work in pre- andpost-production or behind the camera)?

Asin their earlier work 'One Hour Fantasy Girl' (2009), writer/director Edgar MichaelBravo and producer John Paul Rice resort to the idea of starting over and socially-crucialthemes but they present us a totally different story, which nevertheless,doesn't fail to be as much thought-provoking and engrossing. As the story goeson, intensity confidently builds up, leading to an emotionally strongcatharsis, and the whole film benefits from a very impressive use of lightningand color that are an integral part of its intensity. In fact, non-linearstructure, expressed in flashbacks, is enriched by black and white intrusions thatmake our minds long to explore the troubled past of the main character andexpose the truth.

'Mother'sRed Dress' prominently succeeds in a fantastic characterization. Edgar Bravoand his cast create close to real life personalities with their weaknesses, fears,and virtues; their demeanor and atmosphere that each of them brings to a scene arethose levers that move the story forward but most importantly make viewersempathize with onscreen inhabitants of the film. They are flawed but, sonatural and credible, they manage to be likeable. The most impressive thing isthe respect granted not only to the leads but to supporting characters like Brenda.Although she is definitely not a core of the story, filmmakers don't forget toimpart another dimension to her.

Theoriginal score by Kevin J. Doucette and The LA Strings is worth mentioning forit makes 'Mother's Red Dress' alive with the haunting "Heist" andbeatific "Mother and Son Heaven" soundtracks.

What about acting?

TimothyDriscoll is a very fortunate newcomer to start his career with a film like thisone. He manages to portray Paul with believability and devotion, while the restof the cast is there for him to support the leading man. Alexandra Swarens isan ideal casting as the protagonist's love interest: her tenderness and outwardfragility are able to influence and change Paul for the better. Amanda Reedtackles a very interesting part and she is great, playing an elbow-bender witha low self-esteem and giving this part even more depth. Whenever Alisha Seaton appearsin the frame, the film becomes eerie at its best; she doesn't let her characterto fade against others who have more screen time. Jeff Davis as Paul's fatherand Tom Wade as Laura's abusive boyfriend perfectly show the darker side of humannature. To top it off, the cast is strong and impressive.

What did it make me feel?

Thestory itself made me question what had happened to the main character but apartfrom being just an interesting film, it is very touching and makes audiencethink about social problems that many people face every day.

Conclusion

EdgarBravo's 'Mother's Red Dress' is an eloquent psychological thriller that movesyou with a tragic love story, brings up important social issues and isbolstered by an impressive cast.

Rating:4 ½ stars (see what that means)

Youcan rent and enjoy 'Mother's Red Dress' right now!

Contagion (2011) Film Review

2011-10-26T20:00:00.000+03:00

4 ½ stars

"It's figuring us out faster than we're figuring it out." (Dr.Ally Hextall)

Withthe release of the 'Contagion' trailer, my thoughts focused on the possibilitythat it was just another flick about bio-disaster that would be just like anyother film. The director Steven Soderbergh yet again managed to gather astellar cast, which could be a weighty reason itself to see 'Contagion'.However, as it turned out, the great onscreen team is not the only great thingabout the film.

What is it about?

Adeadly virus starts its march around the world, while a set of brilliant doctorstry to conquer it and ordinary people endeavor not to get clasped by thedisease. Naturally, the film comprises many sub-plots that nevertheless createa full-blown picture of our world, being captured by this kind of calamity.

Was it made look good (by those who work in pre- andpost-production or behind the camera)?

Tostart with, 'Contagion' is definitely not "another bio-disaster flick".It is one of the outstanding mainstream movies this year that doesn't only showoff its stupendous cast. I think its main merit is the issue that made it sodifferent from other movies of this genre: it didn't rest on panic and unnaturalrush to defeat the problem, that's why it looked so realistic. Of course, thereare moments of turmoil but Soderbergh and the writer Scott Z. Burns don't placean odd emphasis on it.

Thenumber of subplots doesn't make it confusing and they all serve for a bettereffect the movie aims at. What a smart decision it was to open 'Contagion' with anairport scene; it's a place that renders that atmosphere of danger for manypeople from every corner of the globe, and that hazard can reach even the backof beyond denizens.

Anotherthing that was impressively implemented is the shots of objects that peopletouch every day outside their homes: tables, cups, door knobs etc. At the verybeginning of the film, cinematographers stress upon it like accidentally but itlater transforms into a sequence of close-ups, and it works bloody well.

Asyou may know, I'm a great fan of original score in films. Cliff Martinez composeda virally gripping music, which I totally loved. So far, it's in my list of threebest scores this year. It manages to render the perilous air, reigning all overthe Earth.

What about acting?

Recently,I have been facing this problem: what to say if actors are great? how can Idescribe their acting? with the help of another bunch of praising adjectives?Since I'm not that talented that's the only way to deal with it but I'm justtired of it. Overall, no one is miscast. The most celebrated players, KateWinslet, Marion Cotillard, Matt Damon, Gwyneth Paltrow, Jude Law, LawrenceFishburne, Elliot Goulde, are fantastic as usually. The interesting thing isthat no one can be considered a lead; they all have rather tiny parts but forsome reason they are not underused. Itwas nice to see John Hawkes for the first time after his breakthrough Oscar-nominatedperformance in 'Winter's Bone' (2010). The less known Jennifer Ehle who has acrucial part in the story was a great choice as well; by the way, she hasappeared in a bunch of really good movies recently; should we keep an eye onher career? I wouldn't say "no". Another fact is probably a triviaone: both Monique Gabriela Curnen and Chin Han appeared in 'The Dark Knight' (2008)in supporting parts as well as here.

What did it make me feel?

Thisfilm is unquestionably eerie and made in a realistic fashion. I enjoyed everybit of this thriller, and it made me empathize with characters.

Any chance of re-visiting?

Definitelyyes! And I recommend it to you.

Conclusion

StevenSoderbergh uses a captivating screenplay, cast, and original score to make a catchingthriller 'Contagion' that does justice to what could happens in reality.

Rating:4 ½ stars (see what that means)

Whatdid you think of the film? Do you think it differs from other bio-disastermovies?

The Three Musketeers (2011) Film Review

2011-10-25T17:32:00.000+03:00

2 ½ stars

"There were four of us, against forty of them." (Porthos)

Fora little while, the director Paul W. S. Anderson decided to draw back fromhorror action in favor of action adventure, set in France in the 17^thcentury. For this reason Alex Litvak and Andrew Davies adapted a novel by thegreat Alexandre Dumas who is incidentally one of my favorite classic writers,which made me look forward to the film and which made me utterly upset as Icontemplated the flick that I have seen.

What is it about?

Franceis on the verge of war, as the young King Loius XIII (Freddie Fox) is obsessingabout fashion and his unsettled relationships with the Queen Anne (Juno Temple),while Cardinal Richelieu (Christoph Waltz) weaves plots alongside spiteful Ladyde Winter (Milla Jovovich) who happens to be a double spy for Duke ofBuckingham (Orlando Bloom). Meanwhile, the defamed musketeers Athos (MatthewMacfadyen), Aramis (Luke Evans) and Porthos (Ray Stevenson) encounter thehot-blooded provincial D'Artagnan (Logan Lerman), and the four of them try to provethat the musketeers' heyday is not over.

Was it made look good (by those who work in pre- andpost-production or behind the camera)?

Yesand no. Mainly, no. When I came to the theater and was settling down to see themovie, I was unsure that 'The Three Musketeers' was as bad as everyone said; infact, I was inclined to like it. The film starts with a fighting scene andthose first minutes were the moments of truth as I could observe how badlystaged was that sequence. However, I'm not gonna say that all of those fightswere totally nondescript: some of them were rather decent but you can spoil that"decency" by overusing slomo, especially when it's Milla Jovovich,dressed up in a puffy gown of the era. But now worries. She is not alwaysdecorated like that. Being a prominent action figure in this film, Lady de Winterperforms some kind of a striptease in order to do some more action stunts.Undoubtedly, it may be appreciated by some people but goodness you must see howridiculous it looks.

Interms of story, I will not be the first to say it, but poor Monsieur Dumas. Howwould it feel if your rather amazing novel is adapted into something totallyoutlandish? Flying ships, scantily clad Lady de Winter, who kicks ass betterthan the musketeers… What’s it all about? Obviously, there were other Dumasadaptations that were a bitludicrous: let's go back to 1998 and recall 'The Man in the Iron Mask', whichis a screen version of 'The Three Musketeers' sequel, as I believe, of 'TwentyYears After' and 'The Vicompte de Bragelonne'. Indisputably, that film is a bitridiculous, but just a bit! Let's say, it's over-the-top at its best, while'The Three Musketeers' is over-the-top at its worst.

Asfor other aspects, the art direction is good enough. As much as I love periodfilms, the lush costumes appear over-the-top as well. The original score by PaulHaslinger terribly reminded me of Hans Zimmer's music in 'Sherlock Holmes'(2009).

What about acting?

Themusketeers Macfadyen, Lerman, Evans and Stevenson are okay; not that they arebad but they are pretty forgettable. I know they were there; I can recall thatthe three older ones indulged in the self-pity; I can recall that the youngerone was all that impetuous and opinioned of himself, but sadly, that's it.Somehow, more forgettable are those characters who play supporting parts. After'Inglourious Basterds' (2009), Christoph Waltz still hadn't a film of that quality andimportance (maybe, except for the upcoming 'Carnage') but his presence in afilm makes it worth watching at least those scenes with him. As for MillaJovovich, apart from above-mentioned aspects, I actually expected her to bemore annoying in the role of Milady but forget the slomo and stripping, she wasgood. Orlando Bloom as a villain is a rather interesting thought and I guess hehandles this part well. Nonetheless, it seems that he can't bid goodbye topirates. Mads Mikkelsen as Rochefort is sadly forgettable. Strange as it mayseem, Juno Temple's minor but monarchic part is to my liking for she portrayedAnne with youthful tenderness and cuteness. I definitely have to say somethingabout the actress who plays Constance, Gabriella Wilde, but for now, a simplemention will do.

What did it make me feel?

Itmade me feel that Dumas' classic is violated. It didn't make me bored though.At times, it also made feel embarrassed for the film creators. But this moviewas bearable because my best friend sat by me. Actually, I didn't dislike 'TheThree Musketeers' that much right after viewing but as I had time to ponder…

Any chance of re-visiting?

Yesterdayit was "NO". But I think I could re-watch it someday just to seemaybe it's not that bad.

Conclusion

PaulW. S. Anderson directs 'The Three Musketeers' in a ridiculous fashion, and thisfilm can offer nothing but a totally ludicrous interpretation of a Duma'sclassic.

Rating:2 ½ stars (see what that means)

Extrathought: Milla, please, stop blaming Summit Entertainment for bad marketing.The film bombed for a reason. But yeah, the posters were awful. The one that Iused is the best I could find.

Whatdid you think of the film? Does it deserve the criticism it has been getting?

Guest Post — Revenge of the Sequel

2011-10-23T20:00:00.000+03:00

Helloeveryone. Today I present you with a guest post that deals with sequels. It waswritten by Maxwell Hubbard who lives by the sea in Broadstairs, Kent, and StudiesCriminology and Psychology at Canterbury Christ Church University. Despite allthis, he has a real passion for movies, he is a huge fan of Quentin Tarantino,while his favorite film of ever is 'True Romance'. Max started writing articlesand reviews just recently, and some of them can be found at the site Max & Tom Squared. You can also follow Max on Twitter.

Revenge of the Sequel

Whyis it that almost every time a new and groundbreaking film comes along thattakes our breath away, it only takes a few months to pass and a sequel isproduced? Most of these sequels are not based on having more story to tell, butmore to do with the film companies having deep pockets to fill. Compared to thesuccess of the original, these sequels are often rushed, poorly written,predictable and simply disappointing. Some of these include Basic Instinct 2, Battle for the Planet ofthe Apes, Son of the Mask, Rocky V, Jaws 3D, Speed 2, The Matrix Revolutions,Batman and Robin, Dumb and Dumberer, Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2, Oceans 12,I Still Know What You Did Last Summer, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallenand the list goes on…

However, on very rare occasions, these sequels can and have surpassed itsoriginal. I have selected five sequels that I believe demonstrate this.

5.The Dark Knight (2008)

ChristopherNolan’s re-imagining of this classic comic book super hero franchise continueswith ‘The Dark Knight’. Compared to its predecessor, ‘Batman Begins’, thissequel jumps straight into the action and cuts away the slow build up that‘Batman Begins’ had and reveals one the greatest movie villains of all time,the Joker. This is made all the more enthralling by Heath Ledger’s portrayal ofthe Joker. It was to be his penultimate role, with the performance of alifetime, and whose tragic death before its release no doubt added to thisfilms calibre. Ledger’s performance is so good in-fact that it makes JackNicholson’s interpretation of the Joker in ‘Batman’ seem like an actual joke.Nolan clearly sets the scene in ‘Batman Begins’, which lets ‘The Dark Knight’off the leash with amazing action sequences and fantastic story telling alongwith award winning acting. It has redefined the way in which movies should bemade and told. This film, although a darker story, shows how a sequel should bemade and the result was not only one of the best films made to date but also abox office smash.

4.Terminator 2: Judgement Day (1991)

Theoriginal film 'The Terminator' was a great success at the cinema, so what makes'Terminator 2: Judgement Day' a worthy sequel? Firstly, James Cameron'spulsating spectacle keeps its story moving at lightning speed. Terminator 2:Judgement Day sees the coming of age of CGI and marks the first time humanmotion was used for a character. Set 11 years after the events of the first‘Terminator’ movie, this sequel reverses the roles of Arnold Schwarzenegger ashe is no longer the villain, but the hero. He is sent back through time toprotect the future leader of the humans fight against the machines, JohnConnor, the son of Sarah Connor from the new Villain the T-1000. Played byRobert Patrick, the T-1000 comes away from this film as a screen icon with someof the most memorable scenes in cinema history. Not only is this film litteredwith breathtaking action sequences but fantastic character development and notto mention some very memorable catchphrases, "I'll be back".

3.Aliens (1986)

Following on from Ridley Scott’s masterpiece 'Alien', James Cameron strikesagain and produces another fantastic sequel with 'Aliens', but what makes it sosuccessful? Firstly this movie changes pace and genre from the sciencefiction/horror and turns it into a science fiction/action movie. Many criticsregard it as a benchmark for all films of this genre. 'Aliens' moves away fromthe suspenseful mystery of the original and replaces it with a testosteronefilled adrenaline rush of revenge. Cameron does what he did with Sarah Connorin ‘Terminator 2’ and turns Ellen Ripley into even more of an iconic movieheroine. Without question or doubt, what Ridley Scott produced with 'Alien' isan unrivalled cinematic masterpiece. However, what Cameron has done is stuck tothe story and doubled the action, carnage and raised the stakes, resulting in afantastic film worthy of being a sequel to the original.

2.The Godfather: Part II (1974)

FrancisFord Coppola’s 1972 masterpiece ‘The Godfather’ is regarded as one of the bestfilms of all time. The sequel entitled ‘The Godfather: Part II’ was going tohave to be an impressive film to equal or better this original. Firstly, thisfilm is both a sequel and a prequel to that of its original, 'The Godfather',and continues to portray the dark side of the American dream. Co-written byFrancis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo and also directed by Coppola, this filmsticks with what worked in the original.

The film follows the reign of Don Michael Corleone as the head of the Corleonefamily as well as showing flash backs of his father, Don Vito 'The Godfather'Corleone, slipping into his life of crime and coming into power. As MichaelCorleone rises as a mobster he gains the world but loses his soul. It shows howMichael can never really come to terms with the fact that his father’s empirewas built on love and respect, whilst his is built on fear, violence andtreachery. As Michael realises that his allies are trying to kill him, hebecomes paranoid and soon discovers that his ambition has crippled his marriageand turned his own brother against him. Michael soon turns his attention todealing with his enemies, completing his own corruption. It is thisjuxtaposition that makes this film so brilliant. The success of this film comesdown to its continued story and the same cast. With performances of a lifetimefrom Al Pacino and Robert De Niro, stunning cinematography and eleven AcademyAward nominations, it's no wonder this film is regarded as one of the bestsequels ever made.

1. Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980)

You will have to go a long way to find someone who has not heard of ‘StarWars’. Following the huge success of the original 'Star Wars' (Star Wars:Episode IV – A New Hope), comes 'The Empire Strikes Back' (Star Wars: Episode V– The Empire Strikes Back). It’s partly due to this film that it’s now a setcriterion of a sequel that they must be darker than that of the original.George Lucas now gives the director’s seat to Irvin Keshner and originallyreceiving mixed views from critics, it has now grown to become one of the mosthighly rated films of all time. The original film 'Star Wars' had greateffects, especially when you consider the time it was made, appealingcharacters, along with impressive action and cinematography, which left fanswanting more. 'The Empire Strikes Back', on the other hand, is better. Thestoryline is much better, there is even more action starting with the immenseand memorable ‘Hoth Battle’. There is a lot more character development in thisfilm and there is the addition of some new very memorable characters such asYoda and Lando Calrissian. With plenty of brilliant performances most notablyfrom Harrison Ford and Billy Dee Williams, it's easy to see why this film ishighly regarded as not only one of the best sequels ever but one of thegreatest and most influential films ever made. The films climax is thelightsaber duel between Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader. Full of suspense, dramaand the stunning revelation, it’s the ultimate battle between good and evil,father and son. 'The Empire Strikes Back' turned 'Star Wars' into somethingmythical and sparked a worldwide devoted following.

So there you have it, my top five sequels of all time. I know that there aremore good sequels out there but I selected these five mainly because theiroriginals were already fantastic and iconic films, therefore to equal or betterthese in my opinion is an amazing achievement.

Writtenby Maxwell Hubbard

Whatdo you think of these sequels? What are your favorite ones, apart from the above-mentioned?

The Skin I Live In (La piel que habito, 2011) Film Review

2011-10-22T18:00:00.000+03:00

4 ½ stars

PedroAlmodóvar adapted the novel 'Tarantula' by Thierry Jonquet and made an amazingdisturbing mystery thriller, starring Antonio Banderas and Elena Anaya. Rarelywatching non-English language films, I was glad that I went to see 'The Skin ILive In' for it is a fantastic dark tale that should not be left out this year.

What is it about?

Beinghaunted by cruel tragedies from the past, a brilliant plastic surgeon Dr.Robert Ledgard (Banderas) invents the way to create a type of undamageable syntheticskin that according to his truth he experimented on mice. However, he keepscaptive a mysterious woman Vera (Anaya) in his mansion and he is helped by thelong-time servant Marilia (Marisa Paredes), and they all seem to be shrouded ina gruesome mystery.

Was it made look good (by those who work in pre- andpost-production or behind the camera)?

Firstoff, the non-linear structure doesn't work just well; it works terrificallywell. Characters say or do something that you can't understand and keepquestioning yourself what the heck happened? why did she do that? why did hesay that? But with Almodóvar's storytelling tendencies, you leap back and forthin time and gradually everything falls into place. As a director, he makes the moviefulfilled and complete: no filmmaking aspect strives for a change. Although Iwouldn't call it exceptional, I really liked the use of cinematography here;there was nothing special or outstanding in it but I thought that it was donejust super neat, with a longing to benefit a story. The original score byAlberto Iglesias is truly beautiful and definitely one of the best that I haveheard this year. Click here to listen to an example.

What about acting?

Ihave never been a fan of Antonio Banderas but in 'The Skin I Live In' he isjust mesmerizing to watch in the role of such a complex character. At thebeginning, he seems to be a self-controlling and emotionally stable personality,but deeper we dig into his backstory, more layers of his insanity we unveil.Banderas creates a villain to hate a lot and an antihero to pity a bit.

Therewere talks that the female leading role would be handled by Penélope Cruz butI'm glad that ultimately the part went to Elena Anaya who is a relativelyunknown fresh face to viewers not familiar with Spanish cinema, and her task toportray Vera was challenging as well. She plays with a precision and totaldevotion to her work, revealing a great gift for acting. I honestly hope that afterthis film we'll see her more often on the big screen.

Therest of the cast — Marisa Paredes, Jan Cornet, Roberto Alamo, Blanca Suarez —are quality supporting actors that make it easier for the leads to tell theirscreen story.

What did it make me feel?

'TheSkin I Live In' is not a type of a film that would make me feel emotional aboutthe themes it brings up but I was much affected by the way this motion picturewas made. The film is beautiful and I'm amazed that such a stunning visual creationexists. It is difficult to talk about what it really is about without spoilingit. I don't want to ruin this for anyone; I went to see it, knowing almost nothingabout it, so I strongly recommend you to avoid any spoilers and just enjoy a gripping story.

Any chance of re-visiting?

Yes.I believe films like this one should be seen at least twice.

Conclusion

Spanishfilm virtuoso Pedro Almodóvar and the stars Antonio Banderas and Elena Anayamake 'The Skin I Live In' an unforgettably beautiful picture about ugliness oflife and troubled past. It is a thrilling cinematic experience that can't bemissed.

Rating:4 ½ stars (see what that means)

Whatdid you think of 'The Skin I Live In'? If you haven't seen it, are you goingto? What do you expect it to be?

Guest Film Review: Moneyball (2011)

2011-10-20T20:00:00.000+03:00

This year's best sport film, 'Moneyball' has beengetting terrific reviews, and thanks to another great contribution for Eternityof Dream, we have a chance to read Laura Grande's take on this motion picture.Laura is a Toronto-based writer and movie buff working in media relations. Shemaintains a site of her own, City Lights: A Film Blog, and you can follow heron Twitter.

DirectedBy: Bennett Miller

WrittenBy: Aaron Sorkin and Steven Zaillian

Basedon the Book By: Michael Lewis

Starring: Brad Pitt, Jonah Hill and Philip Seymour-Hoffman

"It's hard not to be romantic about baseball." There's alot of truth behind that quote, uttered by Brad Pitt in the lead role asOakland Athletics General Manager, Billy Beane. There's no denying the longlove affair that American cinema has had with the sport -- more than any othergame it looks and sounds the best on the big screen, from those slow-motionpitches to the sharp crack of a bat. It's a sport filled with long and quietlulls, punctuated by moments of euphoria and excitement, much like weexperience in life.

Adapted from Michael Lewis' 2003 novel Moneyball: The Art of Winning anUnfair Game, director Bennett Miller'sfilm closely examines the 2001-2 season of the down-on-their luck Oakland A's.As Billy (Brad Pitt) explains to his teamsscouts, "There are rich teams and there are poor teams, thenthere's 50 feet of crap, and then there's us." Billy is, essentially,completely handicapped by the lowest salary constraint in the big leagues.Where teams like the New York Yankees boast millions of dollars to pick andchoose from among the best prospects, the A's have a middling few hundredthousand to spend. When Billy recruits Peter Brand (JonahHill), an economics major from Harvard, as his newassistant GM, Billy risks alienating his entire staff as he and Peter play astrange numbers game in an attempt to lure cheap, seemingly mediocre players tofill their roster. Billy and Peter are under the assumption that they canassemble a playoff-worthy team under budget by using a computer-generatedanalysis created by a factory worker named Bill James to draft players. To themajority of scouts and owners, Billy has lost his mind and irresponsibly erasesdecades worth of how baseball franchises go about forming their teams.

Moneyball is one of the best sports genre movies released in years. It instantlymade my top five favourite sports films list (which also includes baseballclassics Bull Durham, Field of Dreams and A League of Their Own,along with the underrated soccer gem The Damned United). However, unlike theother films mentioned, Moneyball delves into thebehind-the-scenes drama and inner workings of what it takes to build a winningteam. There's more drama behind office desks than on the field.

With AaronSorkin and StevenZaillian's sharp dialogue and expert pacing, Moneyball managesto take what, on paper, may read as a dull plot and crafts an inspirationalsaga about a team of underdogs.

The chemistry between Pitt and Hill is what really drives the fantastic scripthome. They have an instinctual knack for comedic timing, yet both demonstratethey have the dramatic chops to keep the film grounded. This odd couple carriesthe weight of the film on their shoulders, with occasional help from anexcellent Philip Seymour-Hoffman inthe small role of A's manager Art Howe.

This is Pitt's maturest performance to date -- he's subtle and nuanced, even inthe lighter comedic moments. Whether spitting tobacco or tossing aside chairs,he's both a loving father and a quick-to-anger former athlete who loves thegame of baseball. Billy is the outcast at the centre of a struggling sportsfranchise and, while all eyes are on him to turn things around quickly, heultimately becomes the beating heart of the team. He doesn't just want to win,he wants it to mean something.

Moneyball examines the harsh realities that face major league teamswhen they are unable to take it all the way and the pressures that come with arestless fanbase and hovering owners breathing down your neck. Movieslike Moneyball force us to remember that, despite theabundance of riches in professional sports, there are those who really do care-- for love of the game.

FINAL GRADE: A

Written by Laura Grande.

What did you think of 'Moneyball'? Many peopleinsist that it features the best Brad Pitt's performance; do you agree?