The Tempest (2010)

Shakespeare's final masterpiece about revenge and sorcery is adapted by Julie Taymor to feature Helen Mirren as "Prospera," the exiled wife of a duke who practices magic to lure those responsible for her exile to an exotic island thriving with spirits. 

     I've been waiting for this movie for so long. I adore Shakespeare, on stage or on film, and Julie Taymor is one of the few directors I would trust with it. Her decision to change the main character from male to female was terrifying to me at first, but when I read the cast bill that said "Helen Mirren," my dread turned to euphoria. I was not disappointed. She was magnificent. Her voice is feminine and powerful all at once, her eyes are like burning coals, and her experience with the language of Shakespeare ensures that she will perform it perfectly. Ben Wishaw as Ariel was also very good. He was bone-white, naked, without any sex organs. Sometimes it looked like he had a woman's body, but then not. He appeared in water, trees, fire, and air. His movements were not classical, they weren't him simply flying around, he was definitely part of whatever medium he was moving in. 

    What I was disappointed in was Caliban. He is the one of the most confusing and mysterious characters in Shakespeare. They call him "a monster," and he is the son of Sycorax, a witch who imprisoned the spirit Ariel in a tree. However, most modern editions of "The Tempest" cast Caliban as a black man, a native of the island who is mainly "monstrous" because of his skin color and lack of Western behaviors. This makes the relationship between Proserpo/Prospera and Caliban very interesting and blurs the line between villain and hero. In the movie though, Caliban was very straightforward in my mind. He was animal-like, not very smart, naive, and difficult to understand. His looks complicated his character, his skin is patched with whiteness, as if he's supposed to be both black and white, but it wasn't really explained in any way. I did like the tribute the text with giving him one blue eye, since Sycorax is described as "the blue-eyed hag." The other moment of confusion was when there is a moment where Prospera and Caliban face off, just staring at each other. The whole movie they have been enemies, there is no doubt. But in that moment, there's a feeling of loss, almost as if they somehow harbor affection for one another in some strange, unexplained way. I wish that would have been studied more in the film.

     The filming location was excellent, Hawaii, and the music was exceptional. It was weird and wide and deep and alive with different kinds of instruments. When there was a song written in the text, it was performed in the movie. Supporting actors were great, I didn't like Ferdinand very much, but I didn't like him in the play either, so he served his purpose. In a nutshell, it helps the experience to be very familiar with the play or at least a lover of great language and Helen Mirren, or else the movie would drag on and be hard to follow. I hope it gets recognition at this year's Academy Awards. 

Chronicles of Narnia: Voyage of the Dawn Treader

The third installment of the Chronicles of Narnia series finds Lucy, Edmund and their obnoxious cousin Eustace drawn back to Narnia where Caspian, now the established king of Narnia, is voyaging on the sea to find the seven lords who were loyal to his dethroned father. 

     The thing about the Chronicles of Narnia movies is that they take many liberties with the plot C.S. Lewis established in the books. However, the movies are true to the spirit of Narnia and have even added many character layers that C.S. Lewis didn't include. "The Dawn Treader"  is a strong example of this kind of tweaking and adding, but it works. 

      The character of Lucy is greatly expanded upon, who in the other movies was seen as the young, unquestioning youngest sister. With Susan gone, Lucy now takes center stage as the front female character. The actress has aged well, and is able to maintain that wide-eyed adoration of all things Aslan in combination with new doubts and fears that arise with maturation. The other character that stands out is Eustace, the newest addition to Narnia. The actor is very good for his young age, capturing perfectly the "priggish" nature that the book lays out. The only weakness is the lack of a good transition; the character experiences a lot of growth, and the movie simply ran out of space to include it. A small, but I believe, important note, is the fact that Ben Barnes (Prince Caspian) has lost his HORRENDOUS Spanish accent and stays true to his English heritage. Thank heaven. 

     The movie has a good script and includes most of Aslan's original lines, which are really the most important in the book. He isn't present in the movie much, but his spirit is very much alive, and the use of filming his shadow and hearing a distant roar constantly remind the audience that he is the most important figure in Narnia. This movie changes the plot more than in "Prince Caspian," but it is much better. The acting is better, the characters are less frustrating, and the movie is more beautiful. Where "Prince Caspian" was all wet grass and shadow, "Dawn Treader" is sunlight on water, exotic islands, and one heck of a sea monster that again proved how close to the PG/PG-13 line these movies dance on. I can't wait to see how they do the next one.

Gegen die Wand (2004)

Drug addict Cahit decides to end it all by driving into a wall. While in therapy, he meets Sibel, an odd Turkish girl who wants to marry him to escape from her family. 

   I hated this movie. It was everything I dislike about modern German movies: bloody, sexually graphic, and random. The story itself was decent, nothing terribly interesting, but well-written. The problem was the lack of an obvious meaning or message. It was lost in a girl smashing a bottle and shoving it into her arm vein, drug-induced sex, and drunk, sweaty men. Blah. Interesting music, though.

The Stoning of Soraya M. (2008)

Based on a true story, this film details the tragic story of Soraya, a woman in Iran oppressed by a violent husband who arranges her execution by stoning in order to marry a 14-year old girl. 

    This is a powerful film. It makes you want to stand up and scream at the men who push and punch women and who teach their young sons to do the same. There needs to be change and justice. These kind of brutal crimes cannot go unrecognized.

      Shohreh Aghdashloo stars as the aunt of Soraya who tells her story to a journalist passing through. She is beautiful in the role with her strong personality even in a culture that represses women and furious love for her family. If there are women like this in the world, there is hope. Soraya is also good in her stillness, unable to move for fear of being struck, but she also harbors boldness that is punished with death. She is a martyr. 

    This movie is rated R for one scene. The stoning. It is truly brutal and seems to drag on and on. Her cries are absolutely heart-wrenching and the attitude of the crowd is to be abhorred. They will be receive their due in the afterlife, for sure.

Let the Right One In (2008)

Based on the best-selling Swedish book, "Let the Right One In" tells the story of Oskar, a young boy bullied by his classmates, who meets Eli, the mysterious girl next door who is not as innocent as she appears. 

     Best vampire movie ever. Absolutely breath-taking. The atmosphere is dark and chilly and gritty. The gore factor is relatively low for this kind of movie, but seeing beautiful little Eli with clotting blood all over her face is definitely disturbing. The little boy who plays Oskar is gorgeous, his skin is transparent and his hair the whitest of white-blond. It's the perfect contrast to Eli, who has dark hair and almost grayish, blueish skin. Their acting is exceptionally subtle, almost emotionless, which balances out the extreme, horrifying events of the movie. 

    The only flaw is there are lots of unanswered questions. For people who read the book, the movie makes perfect sense, but most of Eli's back-story is not stated in the film itself. This makes several things confusing. 

     This is such a good vampire story. You feel both terrified and enchanted by Eli, she's animal-like in her hunt for blood, but her tenderness towards Oskar is more human than many of the other characters. The movie questions the very nature of evil and innocence. What is a "vampire?"

The Secret of Kells (2009)

 Nominated for best animated picture in 2009, this film takes a fantasy twist on the history of the famed Book of Kells, Ireland's most valuable artifact.

   I knew that "UP" would win the Oscar, it's Pixar, but "The Secret" is probably the most beautiful animated movie I've ever seen. Every frame is unique and drawn with such care, the music is crystalline, and the story is simple but drenched in historical significance and spirituality. The problem with that combination of simple and layered is that if you are not familiar with the Book of Kells, that history is lost on an audience. The Book of Kells is a beautifully-illustrated collection of the Four Gospels. If you don't know that, the book could be anything. Knowing that is the Word of God, the story of Jesus, makes it more understandable why the monks would be willing to protect those papers with their lives. However, the sheer beauty of the film overwhelms the weakness of the story. It's a beauty that doesn't take itself seriously, there is lots of humor in it, but never losing that feeling of sophistication. This is not "Cars." This is something deeper, something artistic. If I were an animator, this is how I would want to animate.

Blue Beard (2009)

Shot as a story within a story, two young girls read the gruesome fairy tale "Bluebeard" in the 1950's while the audience watches the action unfold in the 17th century.

   This is definitely a "WTF" movie. It's very short, not even an hour and a half, and it's beautifully-filmed, but I really did not understand the purpose of the film. The story is very straightforward, it's "Bluebeard," no question about it, but the last two minutes or so completely blow the movie into the bizarre and you're left feeling devastated and utterly confused. I have a feeling the director tried to be too....vague, maybe? Not necessarily artsy...I don't even know what was going on in her mind. I really liked Bluebeard and the young girl as a couple in terms of filming though, her smallness was exaggerated by large furniture and the giant who played Bluebeard who happens to wear like 100 pounds of clothing. There's a brilliant scene where they're eating breakfast side by side and he has this huge ostrich egg and she's eating these tiny quail eggs. He's very gentle with her, they barely touch in the movie, and he seems so devastated when he knows he has to kill her, I question the very foundation of the story and WHY he has to do it. In the original fairy tale, it's pretty clear he's just crazy, he gets really mad and drags her by the hair, but in this, he seems to rational and like he really loves her, it makes me think there's more going on than what the simple story portrays. Again, I feel this confusion is a shortcoming of the film itself.

Deliver Us From Evil (2006)

Using interviews with victims, their families, and Oliver O'Grady himself, this film chronicles the horror of a priest who is responsible for molesting children for over 30 years.

   This is probably one of the more disturbing movies I've ever seen. It's an excellent documentary. There is no voice-over and minimal text. Most of is pieces of interviews, images of newspapers, conferences, etc. It really grips you with absolute horror. This is evil. A man with a priest's title who can slide into your house and your heart, earning your trust, and then causing such damage...it's the stuff of nightmares.

   What is most disturbing is the long interview with O'Grady. His voice is completely normal, completely matter of fact. There is no tone of regret, nothing. He even laughs when he's describing going to confession and telling the other priest of an incident with a young boy. You are absolutely dumbstruck by this man.  

    One is also pretty shocked by how the Catholic Church dealt with it. The bishops and archdeacons were sending this man across California, switching from parish to parish, trying to escape the eye of the police. It's unbelievable. 

   This is not a movie for everyone. It pretty graphic in terms of describing of the actual incidents. However, it's a major issue, especially recently, and this is the documentary to see on this topic.

Jesus Camp (2006)

An indie documentary looks into a charismatic camp where young children and teenagers are taught to be "warriors" in the battle to reclaim America for Jesus.

    This was an interesting movie to watch as a Christian. Part of me thought that the documentary was unfair as it was of course biased in some way, but the other part was absolutely horrified that this sort of thing goes on in churches.

    Religion should not be mixed with politics. That is not something I will back down on. No where in the Bible does it say that Christians should be taking over government. Jesus didn't do it. These kids are being taught to battle against "extreme liberals," they pray over a cardboard cutout of George Bush, and they are all home-schooled by their mothers, free from an environment where some of their beliefs might be tested. Indoctrination is the only word for it. The minister who leads the Jesus Camp of the film, Becky Fischer, openly advocates for indoctrination in the movie while debating a radio host. I was deeply troubled by her statements.

    The only other thing that bothered me was the use of "tongues." The children are told, "Come on, we're going to speak in tongues now." They then begin speaking illegibly, weeping, and waving their hands. I have nothing against passion for Jesus. I know that people speak in tongues. But children of this age? Upon command? I'm not convinced. I just don't think that an eleven-year old, an eight-year old, a five-year old, can possibly comprehend the nature of spiritual warfare and be fluent in tongues. I'm not saying it's impossible, but there's no way to tell when people like Becky Fischer are instructing them so intently. 

    This movie is hard to understand if you are not a Christian or a Christian who leans more toward the charismatic. There were a lot of things that I noticed and I thought, "Oh, I do that. It's really not that strange." But when you're on the outside capturing it through a film lens, it can look strange. 

Devil (2010)

Five strangers are trapped in an elevator. All of them have corrupt pasts. One of them is the devil, seeking their souls.

*Contains minor spoilers* 

    This was a fascinating movie. It took what is best about M. Night Shyamalan (his ideas) and got a director and screenwriter who could do it justice. It reminded me of "Signs" with its use of religion as a story thread but was much more like "The Happening" and "The Sixth Sense" with its gore and suspense. It is certainly a step up from M. Night's past three films. Having separate people write the screenplay and direct seem to a good idea for M. Night.

     I loved how this was filmed. Many of the shots are highly symbolic and besides being just visually "cool," as a viewer with a religious background, bursting with meaning From the beginning upside down sequence to the ending right-side up sequence, you enter the movie with a tingling sense of "something being wrong," and then it is resolved at the end. There are random shots of cross-shaped objects, such as the top of the elevator during the opening credits. There's at least two places where the name "Bethel" is used, which means "House of God" in Hebrew. The idea of the absence of action is used perfectly - the elevator is often flung into complete darkness and the audience can only hear what is happening. When the lights come on again, we face the aftermath of what occurred. 

     The writing was quite good. It was generally very natural and not overly-dramatic. The only character in particular I had a problem with is one of the security guards, a Hispanic man, who has to play the part of the "religious guy." His lines are pretty shallow, he gets to sound crazy most of the time.  There were a couple of lines that really hit me. When the devil is finally revealed at the end, the dialogue is strikingly but also subtly religious, one character says, "Take me instead." The devil responds by shrieking, "STOP SAYING THAT!" It stroke me because that it what the devil hates to hear because it is what Jesus did when He died, He was a replacement for mankind. The last line of the film is also very powerful. I won't print it here, but I will say it offers hope during an otherwise terrifying movie. 

    As a Christian, this movie affects me differently than it will a non-Christian. I am not terrified of the devil, but I appreciate the movie addressing him as he is to a non-believer: terrifying. He is very real. He comes in many forms. However, there were people in the theater who chuckled at the speeches about the devil taking revenge. There were people who proclaimed loudly, "That was dumb." One couple left during the climax. I think your personal beliefs about the devil and God will affect your opinion of the movie. I thought it was well-done and powerful because I do believe in the devil. I believe in God. I don't expect everyone to see the movie the same way.  

The Name of the Rose (1986)

An intellectually nonconformist monk investigates a series of mysterious deaths in an isolated abbey.

    First of, do NOT eat dinner while watching this movie. It was surprisingly stomach-turning, but excellent. The atmosphere was perfect, lingering on the edge of pure terror. It reinforced the fact that the 1300s was an awful time to live, and was chock-full of commentary and symbolism.

    I disagreed with a friend of mine when he said he thought Sean Connery was the most handsome alive. However, upon seeing this film, I changed my mind. I have no idea where they got so many ugly people, or at least, makeup artists so skilled as to completely transform a man's face. The presence of such physical imperfection creates a sense of fear and mistrust instantly when our heroes William and Adso ride up on their donkeys. William (Connery) has a intelligent, dignified, and rugged handsomeness while his young novice Adso (Christian Slater) is beautifully-featured and innocent. The monks with their warts, humps, impossibly long and rotten teeth, and frightening eyes are such a contrast you know instantly that something is wrong in the abbey. And you would be right to think so. Monks begin dying mysteriously, each with a blackened finger and tongue. 

     The film explores a lot of religious issues of the time, most notably the role of "secular" reading such as Aristotle in the church. One monk goes so far as to forbid his inferiors from laughing, saying, "Christ never laughed." Homosexuality and temptation is initially a big part of the plot, as an albino library assistant eyes Adso shyly across the dinner table, and Adso himself is captivated by a beautiful but animal-like peasant girl. William finds himself battling his fellow monks as they insist the devil is at work, while he believes a mysterious book written in Greek is the reason for all the murders in the abbey. What will win out in the end? Knowledge? Or spirituality? Is logic truly the enemy of faith? 

The Other Guys (2010)

Two mismatched New York City detectives seize an opportunity to step up like the city's top cops whom they idolize -- only things don't quite go as planned.

    I liked this movie. I thought it had a good balance between smart, random humor (how priceless is Mark Wahlberg referencing "Touched by an Angel?") and the usual sex stuff that most people expect from guy comedies. It fell into an odd group of movies - the genre parody. In this case, it was the buddy cop movie, and it was done very well. 

     Wahlberg was not the best actor in this, his strangely soft, high voice reminded me painfully of his terrible role in "The Happening," but that just meant Will Ferrell works twice as hard and we reap the benefit of that. An early sequence involves Will Ferrell shutting Wahlberg down by spewing off a long explanation of why he, a tuna, would destroy Wahlberg, a lion. It reminded me a lot of something Dwight from the T.V. show "The Office" would say. Eva Mendes was also pretty funny, as Ferrell's adoring, "scalding hot" wife. I've only seen her in dramas, and she is AWFUL. She should stick to comedy if at all possible. Michael Keaton has a good role as the police captain, and he was probably one of the highlights for me. Although I was initially shocked by how he's aged, I eventually saw that he actually has aged well. He has a funny gag involving TLC references. 

   What saved this movie from being a bad parody was the writing. It was like a combination of Fox's "American Dad!" cartoon, "The Office," and Hollywood comedy writers. As mentioned in my intro, it had smart jokes, satirical jokes (the best example is when Ferrell and Wahlberg are surprised by an exploding building and collapse in agony) and sex humor to please the guys (Mendes' mother is forced to walk back and forth between Mendes and Ferrell, delivering intimate messages). This was parody done well. A very fun, worth-9-bucks, summer movie. 

House (2008)

    Struggling couple Jack and Stephanie's car breaks down, leaving them stranded at an old inn with another couple. There's something strange about the family that lives there, but strange turns to terrifying as a masked killer known as the Tin Man vows to kill them unless they produce one dead body before dawn. The supernatural begins to emerge as the house itself turns on the two couples. Based on the novel by Christian horror/thriller authors Frank Peretti and Ted Dekker.  

First of all, the book wasn't even that good. It was fast, it was freaky, but it was one series of cliches strung together in a row. That fact is made even more clear in the film.
     It's seriously Texas Chainsaw Massacre meets Silent Hill. There are creepy Southerners, a guy in a mask, a disappearing/reappearing little girl. There are sudden thunderstorms, strange water, turning handles, screaming women, and frightening one-liners like, "I'm home." Hello? That was already done, much better I might add, in The Shining. Also copied: sheets of paper shoot out of a printer all with the same words written on it. Wow.
    The acting is not good. The first three minutes were super awkward and things only got better when all our heroes had to do was scream. That's not that hard to do.
    The one thing about the book that makes this movie slightly better than a lot of others, is that it's based in Christianity, so the concept of sin and redemption are strong throughout, more so in the book, but copied vaguely in the movie. It becomes kind of like Dante's Inferno, where one's punishment is tied to the sin, making it ironic. Also, oddly enough, as the film on, it starts to resonate. After all, we all have a house. We all are tortured by the things we've done wrong, it's an internal prison. And light will destroy darkness. House stands out as one of the few horror movies (though not the most well-done) in which good triumphs over evil. 

Clash of the Titans (2010)

The remake of the 1981 film tells the mythological story of Perseus, son of Zeus, and his quest to defeat the Kraken, a powerful titan who threatens the city of Argos and its beautiful princess.

     This movie made me laugh it was so bad. The acting was strange. Sam Worthington tried to hide his Australian accent, but by the end of the movie, he had just given up. The women were all straight-faced and tried to sound mysterious, the men were over-the-top, especially Ralph Fiennes as Hades, he was certainly in rare form with his smoker voice, and Liam Neeson obviously just phoned it in. That's the only explanation for his overwhelmingly shiny body armor. The story was entertaining and had potential, but there were so many plot holes, nothing seemed to make much sense. The worst part though were the video-game graphics. Seriously, it looked like the animators had run out of time and sent their film off half-finished. This movie tried so hard to be epic, but it was just campy. A good laugh, though. 

Inception (2010)

In a world where obtaining information through dreams has become possible, expert mind thief Fisher (DiCaprio) assembles the perfect team to conduct a seemingly impossible mission. 

   First of all, I felt this movie was a little deceiving in how it seemed eerily similar to "Minority Report" with Tom Cruise. The tagline seemed to capture that film perfectly, "Your mind is the scene of the crime." However, the movies are actually very different - while "Minority Report" was about murder and catching crimes before they happen, "Inception" is about stealing information right out of people's dreams. 

    It's a bit too earlier to say, but this movie could very well be Christopher Nolan's masterpiece. We know he was a good filmmaker; his recreation of the Batman saga was nothing short of brilliant, but that wasn't an original film. "Inception" is. The story is very complex, with just about every detail carefully considered so as to create a seamless plot that can be traced beginning to end and back and make nearly perfect sense. There are a few interpretations of the movie, which I think adds to the creativity of it. It's not a cut-and-dry sort of film. Like dreams, there are many answers. 

    The actors were well chosen. Nolan uses a few of his "Batman Begins" cast, including Ken Watanabe (who gets a much better part in "Inception" then he did in "Batman"), Michael Caine (only in "Inception" for about seven minutes of screen time), and Cillian Murphy, who all add interesting layers to the plot. The real stars are DiCaprio and Marion Cotillard. My respect for DiCaprio has grown over the years, he was never a "bad" actor in my mind, quite the opposite, but he just never really stood out. Once I saw him in "Shutter Island," he was cemented in my mind as a very intense actor, even if he's not terribly versatile. He has piercing eyes, a furrowed brow, and a dedication to his character that many actors lack. You really believe him in this movie. Marion Cotillard was perfect. She was addicting to watch, whenever you see her come into the frame, your blood runs cold and you know something big is going to happen. She's absolutely beautiful, as well. Ellen Paige was in it, which was a little odd. It felt too much like an indie actress just wandered on the set. She wasn't bad, but watching her wasn't comfortable, it didn't feel like she "belonged" in the movie. 

    This is an epic movie, I'm not sure to call if it should be called sci-fi or fantasy, or some combination of both, but at 2.5 hours with almost no breathing time, it's definitely a ride. It's complex, it's thought-provoking, it's fascinating to watch...one of the best films of the summer.  

The Fifth Element (1997)

In the future, a former military officer and current cab driver encounters a strange woman who is the key to mankind's survival 

     This movie was like the funnier brother of "Blade Runner." It had very similar elements such as the futuristic setting that's still very familiar to our world now, a rather grungy hero and his mysterious love interest, and a very vivid world in which our characters live in, complete with fast food places and flying Asian food stands. However, it was a lot more cheesy, less disturbing, and just more "fun" than "Blade Runner." 

    What made this movie light was just how over the top it is. It had a lot of humor in it from Bruce Willis' New York-style tone to Chris Tucker's flamboyant DJ to the alien villains reminiscent of Jim Henson's Muppets. Even Gary Oldman, our main villain, has a lot of fun with his role, even giving him a strong Southern accent. Of course, the minute I saw him, I was eerily reminded of the character of Beauregard LaFontaine from "American Dad." I am convinced Seth McFarlene used Mr. Zorg as inspiration. 

    The story is typical sci-fi: reluctant hero must save world. The plot is pretty predictable, too, but this movie was a lot better than most sci-fi that comes out these days, probably because it did copy "Blade Runner," which is just one of the best movies ever made. 

     There was one plot point that really bugged me: Bruce Willis' character Dallas attempts to hide a group of military officers in his fridge and later retrieves them. They looked VERY dead. Much later in the movie, they're busy in the office with the president keen on saving the world, and I was very confused. I guess in the future they can just unfreeze dead people and they're fine. Makes sense, since a huge part of the movie depends on completely rebuilding Milla Jovovich from a burned chunk of glove and flesh in under two minutes. Ahh, science. 

Jacob's Ladder (1990)

Vietnam vet Jacob Singer's life begins to take a horrifying shape when he begins to see demonic creatures and reality itself begins to wrap before his very eyes.

    This is a terrifying movie. The best thing about it is its direction, which focuses in on the chaos of Jacob's terror as the people he loves, both dead and alive, begin to take on different, hellish forms and sift in and out through so that he doesn't know if he's awake or asleep. Neither does the audience. 

    The coloring of the movie is very well-done, it's very gritty, almost as if the camera lens is rubbed in dirt and cobwebs, and the violence is shadowy, so you're not quite sure if what you're seeing is human or demon. One of the most frightening scenes is when after being thrown from a car, Jacob is taken to a hospital where the doctors say to "take him down to X-ray." Suddenly, the atmosphere changes from normal, white-light hospital to flickering, filthy bulbs, a rickety hospital cart upon which our poor hero is strapped, and a hall populated by misshapen "patients" who alternately bash their own heads on bloody windows and strewn with body parts. You're just as confused and scared as Jacob is. 

   The movie is a little slow, but that adds to the suspense as you climb up Jacob's ladder (ha ha ha) to the shattering climax. 

A Single Man (2009)

British Professor George Falconer (Colin Firth) has lost his lover of 16 years and goes through a day in which he explores issues of death, life, and sexuality. 

    This is a very interesting movie. It's relatively short at an hour and 40 minutes, but it moves slowly. Fashion designer Tom Ford's direction is fascinating especially in how he uses color to express certain states of mind - gray means hopelessness and grief, while much brighter, saturated tones represent youth and life. It wasn't my favorite movie because I found it very sad, but Colin Firth is brilliant.

    Homosexuality is the key in this movie - Colin Firth's character is gay and Tom Ford is gay, so we see things from that perspective. If that sort of thing makes a person uncomfortable, there are several scenes in this that will make them turn away, but it's all handled very tastefully. 

     I don't want to say much more about this because it's hard to describe the film without giving anything anyway, but I will say it is very slow, very sad, and very well-done in its genre. For a first film, it is excellent. I absolutely loved the art direction and costumes, they were beautiful and made the whole film look like the classiest fashion ad I've ever seen. My favorite scene: Colin Firth gets a phone call about his lover's death, and for about three minutes we watch him gradually begin to break down, run out in the rain, and weep in Julianne Moore's arms. That should have won him the Oscar.

Shrek: Forever After (2010)

The fourth "Shrek" movie finds everyone's favorite ogre getting exhausted from his married life with children, and so strikes a deal with Rumpelstiltskin, with horrible consequences that has Shrek racing against time to get back the life he loves. 

    Wow. This has been a long quadrilogy. I remember where I was when I saw the first Shrek, way back in 2001. I was not especially pleased. Then the second one came out in 2004. It was much better. Then the third, which I actually saw a few hours ago, after I saw this fourth one. The third one was painfully forgettable. But I digress. This last Shrek tried to bring together what made the movies unique, but fell prey to what happens to so many of these series: repetition and crowding. 

     The concept of the "Shrek" franchise is brilliant: fairy tale satire. It was achieved best in the second movie because the filmmakers still had a lot fairy tales to work with and gags to pull: there was the Puss in Boots, the Prince Charming, the Fairy Godmother, Pinocchio, the Frog Prince, and many other little nuggets of fairy tale gold. They also axed the excessive gross humor of the first and focused more on wit. The problem with this fourth one is they basically ran out of ideas. Sure, we have the witches. That was good, but how long can that go on? We have Rumpelstiltskin, but he is pretty straightforward. The story was stolen from "It's a Wonderful Life," and the movies have been spaced out far enough where you can get away with a few repeated jokes. The concept is tired. 

    The other problem is the overcrowding of characters. No voice actor gets more than a few lines, it seemed, and there was just a crowd of witches and ogres. There were a few standouts in this gumbo of faces: Kathy Griffin as a witch, Jane Lynch as an ogre (who sadly had only one line where you can actually tell its her), and Craig Robinson as an ogre. In the second movie, we were introduced to King Harold, Prince Charming, Puss in Boots, and the fabulous Jennifer Saunders as The Fairy Godmother. Those were memorable characters. No one will remember any one witch or ogre from this fourth film. 

   Like the third Shrek, this movie wasn't terribly "bad," it was just very flat. There wasn't anything I felt I hadn't seen already. 

Ondine (2009)

An Irish fisherman finds a mysterious woman in his net. His daughter believes the woman is a silkie, a mythical creature who takes the form of a seal and also a woman. 

    This is a rather sweet movie. It uses a very interesting concept to explore what truth is and its mystery keeps you watching. However, I felt it could have been a lot more powerful, and where it fell short is the acting. 

     The main problem I have is the casting of the daughter. She is supposed to be the wonder aspect of the movie, she is the character who drives the fairy-tale of the plot as she becomes convinced this strange woman is a silkie. The actress is sweet to look at, but she is very limited both in her voice dynamics and expressions. If she had inspired tears, the movie could have been much better. Also, I thought Colin Farrell could have improved his diction, he once again proved himself to be the least understandable Irishman EVER, his accent is so thick and so soft it's nearly impossible to hear about 40% of his lines. Other than that, he was decent. The Polish actress who played Ondine had the easiest role, I felt, she just had to look mysterious and alluring, and she did. Kudos to her. 

    The story was good. There were a couple of rather baffling moments, where we ask ourselves: why is this happening? Also, a couple of plot holes. To describe them would be to give the ending away. 

   All in all, this was a good movie, a lot better than most of the romance movies in theaters now, it's very classy, very beautiful, and it doesn't rely on formulaic funny moments or overdone plot twists, whatever surprises we find in the film were set up long before they happen, and so they make sense. 

Toy Story 3 (2010)

The "Toy Story" saga continues in this third installment, which features Woody, Buzz and the gang dealing with their owner, Andy, going off the college. 

   This is a great sendoff to the best trilogy in Hollywood. Everything about "Toy Story" is brilliant - the characters, the story, the animation, the franchise...this third one beautifully sums up all those things that make the movies great. 

    First, the story. It's magnificent. Some might think it's cheesy, but to me, no movies have better summed up the progression of children growing up while maintaining razor-sharp creativity than "Toy Story," and this third one captures the bittersweet aspect of growing up. Andy is going to college. He is moving on from childhood things, including his toys. This is the saddest movie of the three, but also the most touching. The final 5-7 minutes are sheer genius. Oh, and the movie also has hilarious moments. 

    The animation is amazing. Technology has come so far from the original Toy Story done in 1995, it's incredible the kinds of expressions these toys can have. The 3D is done very well, it's not distracting, it gives the movie that beautiful layered look. My favorite scene in the movie involves a tortilla and toys parts, and it amazed me how funny just those few simple items could be. 

    Pixar is absolutely brilliant. They spaced these movies out over the course of fifteen years, so when that final goodbye has to inevitably come, you really feel that you know and love these characters. I grew up with them. It also makes me very, very glad none of my toys are actually alive....or are they? 

    

Paris (2009)

A French film centered around the lives of various Parisians explores the culture of Paris and humanity in general

   More foreign films. This was my first French movie and it was VERY French. The film style was decidedly not American or German, the music was all very jazz-techno-cafe-like, and the acting was so natural some might see it as simply bad acting. However, it was a charming movie that very closely detailed just a short while in our characters' lives. 

    The color of the movie was interesting to me. It was all very brown, gray, and other pale colors. The only real color was in flashbacks of one of the characters, a sick ex-Cabaret dancer who wears a silver suit and blood-red shirt. It rained a lot in the movie, too, or snowed. It looked rather drab, but it added to the grungy realism. 

    The acting as stated before, was very natural. The emotions were raw, characters were neither bad nor good, and most of them were very confusing. Like real people. 

    This is a very long movie. It's over 2 hours, and I wouldn't recommend it as a first foreign-movie experience. It's so European that American audiences would find it tedious. As a film though, it's very well-done, if a little disappointing. 

The Young Victoria (2009)

The story of Queen Victoria's rise to the throne and her love for Prince Albert

   This is a cute movie, if any movie about English monarchy can be called "cute." A lot of people might find it very dull, as nothing terribly dramatic ever happens, but for history buffs and those who understand that true cinematic boredom is found in many films by Merchant & Ivory, it's quite enjoyable. 

    One of its advantages is that it's a short 1 and 44 minutes. It this movie had tried to be a sprawling epic, it would have fell flat. It's not about battles and wars and intrigue, it's about the challenging transition a young woman must undertake when she becomes queen at seventeen. 

   Emily Blunt is very charming as Victoria. She's much prettier than the queen was in reality, but she captures the queen's naivety and desire to work hard well. The actor who plays Prince Albert is also quite good, though very subtle. They have very sweet chemistry. 

    This was not an especially memorable movie, but it's a good family movie as there is no violence, no language, and only one brief sex scene - no nudity- taking place on a wedding night. 

As Far As My Feet Will Carry Me (2001)

Based on a true story, this German and Russian foreign film follows a German prisoner-of-war as he escapes from a Siberian work camp in a dangerous journey to find his way home to his wife and children. 

   Another foreign film. I enjoy them. They're intense and feature pieces of history few are familiar with. This raises interesting questions, like did any of these German soldiers "deserve" their treatment in Russia? Or is this an example of fighting evil with evil? Who should be held responsible for the crimes in WWII? The young German soldier forced to remove all his clothes and stand freezing to death by order of his Russian guard? More than this, it's a look into the strength and determination of one man as he fights to be with his family. 

    Our hero is played by an interesting actor. He captures the desperation and hysteria of a man subjected to things no man should ever be. His antics are both humorous and heart-wrenching. After having traveled across the frozen Siberian wasteland, he sees a small spindly tree and proceeds to run to it, laughing, and throw his arms around it shouting, "Du ist ein Baum!" or in English, "You're a tree!" For most of the movie, his eyes carry complete terror, as would mine no doubt.
    It's a long movie, but it's interesting because of all the different kinds of characters: the brutal Russian officer, the two cutthroat hunters, the indigenous healers our hero encounters, Central Asia street vendors...
   It's an incredible story. It's victorious. 

Heart of Darkness (1993)

A TV movie adaption of Joseph Conrad's iconic novella stars Tim Roth and John Malkovich as the infamous Kurtz. 

     Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" is probably one of my favorite books of all time. The author was able to capture perfectly the evil of King Leopold's conquest in the Congo as personified in the mysterious Kurtz without being preachy or judgmental. It's timelessness is almost horrifying, as that heart of darkness in mankind has risen up again and again, through the Holocaust, ethnic cleansing in Rwanda, modern war crimes, and countless other unnoticed incidents in society. This adaption tries so very hard to imitate what the text accomplished, but it just became rather sad and confusing.

    I thought the location was beautiful. It was exactly what I pictured when I read the book. You could almost see the heat rising off the jungles and the rivers, and there was no actor who wasn't gleaming with sweat and dirt. 

   There wasn't another especially bad with the acting, either. Tim Roth was a little blank, but given the text, Marlowe does seem rather unresponsive to the events around him. Malkovich was decent too, given what little screen time he actually had. I didn't dig the American accent, but that hardly ruined the entire character.

   I think the problem with this adaption was its overuse of symbols and subtlety. There were a lot of seemingly "unnecessary" scenes that one might only understand if the book itself had been analyzed in depth. It was very long, too, over two hours, and not much actually happened. I think "Heart of Darkness" is just one of those books that extremely difficult to transition to the screen. It's Conrad's words that really contain the power of the message, and so trading them in for a script and images waters down that power. "Apocalypse Now" had a better idea, I think: Take the message and change the setting to something fresh and still painful. I believe it served Conrad's message more effectively. 

Robin Hood (2010)

Featuring the "Gladiator" team of Russell Crowe and director Ridley Scott, "Robin Hood" takes a more historical look at the man behind the legend and how he became the outlaw as we know him.

    This movie is very close to being epic. It's not there, but it's so very close. I believe the main flaw was it assumed too much of its audience, it assumed that we were quite familiar with the actual history surrounding Robin Hood and would recognize subtle references to the Magna Carta, the reasons and results of King Richard's Crusade, and the mindset of English royalty as it had existed for many, many years. One viewer who wrote a review on IMDB complained that he/she had no idea what was going on. That's a problem.

     However, for me, a relatively astute historian, I respected the historical approach. The movie really did capture the heart of what was going on that time if not all the details and did an excellent job of setting up a serious, realistic base for Robin Hood's exploits as they exist in legend. It was good to see a Robin Hood movie where our hero doesn't resemble some sort of Medieval court jester and Marian actually has a personality of her own. 

    Speaking of Marian, I am SO glad they cast Cate Blanchett. For a while, they considered Natalie Portman, which would have been atrocious for many reasons, such as she is a terrible actress and way too young for Russell Crowe's somewhat-grizzled Robin. Blanchett proves yet again she can be simultaneously feminine and threatening, playing her Marian as a hard-working woman of the field who loves her family, her village, and her freedom. No way "Padme" or whatever her name is could pull that off. 

    In a nutshell, it's a worthwhile movie. It's very long, but it's definitely a worthy entry in your "Russell-Crowe-with-two-expressions-angry-or-angrier-and-still-somehow-being-completely-baddass-while-doing-it" collection. "Gladiator" is better, but "Robin Hood" is good. 

North Face (2008)

Based on a true story, North Face is a suspenseful adventure film about a competition to climb the most dangerous rock face in the Alps. Set in 1936, as Nazi propaganda urges the nation's Alpinists to conquer the unclimbed north face of the Swiss massif - the Eiger - two reluctant German climbers begin their daring ascent. Summary written by Irishlass240 

    And so my fascination with German films continues, "North Face" being one of the more striking examples. It's nail-bitingly suspenseful, historically-interesting and visually-stunning. It's a little-known story, at least in the US, I would imagine, but another example of Germany's mindset in the 1930's right before the war, but deeper than that, a glimpse into the sheer fearlessness climbers have to possess to do what they do, and the cost of that fearlessness. 

    I liked the acting in general, although the film's heroine Luisa seemed to have two states: happy or devastated. She has the face of a less-structured Cate Blanchett but lacked the timelessness and elegance, which worked, because her character is a country mouse at heart. Maybe that innocence explains her polarized expressions, but I dunno. The two climbers were much more interesting, Andi and Toni. Toni appears to be the elder, at least at heart, with a melancholy nature and longing eyes. Andi is excitable and the bolder of the two. They had wonderful chemistry as best friends. 

    The true star of the movie though is, of course, the mountain. The camera work is excellent, capturing angles I can only begin to imagine to perform. The north face is merciless and barren and definitely earns its place as the most dangerous slope in the Alps. In the movie, it's known as "The Last Problem of the Alps." 

Date Night (2010)

Steve Carell and Tina Fey star as a married couple whose dinner date turns into something they least expected. 

    Honestly, I didn't have high hopes for this one. There wasn't anything terribly original about it, and the papers didn't love it. However, I was once again reminded that just because the critics don't it, doesn't mean I won't. It was fun.

    What made this was Steve and Tina, who are, individually, some of the funniest people today. If it had been any other actors in their parts, the movie has the potential to be horrible, but because of their perfect timing, chemistry, and super-likeability, they sold it.  

    There are almost no real "extras" in this movie, any random part could be played by someone recognizable from either movies or tv, so that was fun to see who would pop up next and if one can identify where they're from. 

    This is a good "date movie." Ha ha ha. It's a good length, has consistent if not constant laughs, a sweet message, and Steve Carell dancing. A good, light way to spend an evening. 

    

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead (1990)

Based on the award-winning play of the same name and directed by the author, this film focuses on two minor characters from Shakespeare's "Hamlet" and explores their interaction with the play's characters and events. 

    This is a perfect movie. Everything about it is absolutely brilliant. Tom Stoppard took his stage play and transitioned it flawlessly to the silver screen without losing any of the play's original punch and hilarity. I love this movie.

    The actors are all cast perfectly. Tim Roth and Gary Oldman are charming, adorable, clueless and tragic all at once as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, childhood friends of Hamlet who seem to remember nothing of themselves and are trapped in the web that is Shakespeare's "Hamlet." Their chemistry is sparkling and without it, the movie would be boring as so much of the text is dialogue between the two best friends. Richard Dreyfuss is also magnificent, which surprised me as I'd only seen him in "Jaws," "Close Encounters," and "What About Bob?" He is simultaneously hilarious and menacing as the Lead Player, the head of the troupe responsible for the play that convinced Hamlet his uncle had indeed murdered the king. Throughout the film, you get the sinister feeling that Dreyfuss knows what's going on somehow, and one scene in particular where the actors put on a play for the castle's servants, your suspicions are confirmed but never explained. 

     The whole look of the film - sets, scene transitions, camera work - is so layered and adds so much to the movie, I was in awe of Stoppard's pure genius. The movie almost looks like a theater stage where our heroes wander about, sometimes going in circles no matter how hard they try to get somewhere else. The characters from "Hamlet," Claudius, Gertrude, etc, all overact as if they were on stage, but still maintain enough subtleness that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern do blend into the tapestry. 

    When you see this movie, prepare to think. Prepare to think about it for a very long time. It's been a few days since I've seen it and I still have occasional dreams about it and still get super excited whenever it crosses my mind. I feel like there's still so much that the movie is trying to teach me. That's the sign of a perfect movie. This is that movie.  

Tremors (1990)

Natives of a small isolated Southern town defend themselves against strange underground creatures which are killing them one by one - imdb.com

    This is one of those comedy/horror movies, more on the comedy side I'd say. The monsters are not especially interesting and, quite frankly, horribly made. They're scarier when you can't see them, I will admit, it is not a pleasant thought to be dragged under the ground and torn to bits by something. The reactions of Kevin Bacon, Fred Ward and the rest of the gang are fun.

     This is an ok monster movie/comedy - it's fast and focused on the humor. It's really about the character interactions with each other and the monster, so if you want to see lots of special effects and gore, this is not the film for you. Kevin Bacon is a good actor, so he does the best he can, given the bizarre circumstances he finds himself in. He's relatively natural though, I can picture a lot of people reacting like him. His name in the movie though...Valentine. Really?! They call him "Val," but STILL. 

    Ok, the truth must come out. I saw this movie because it was Reba McEntire's film debut. I thought it would be funny to see her in a monster movie since my experience of her is limited to her family comedy TV show and duets with Kelly Clarkson. It wasn't as funny as I thought it would be. I would skip this one if I were ya'll. It's not worth it. The ending is horrible. 

The Princess and the Frog (2009)

A fairy tale set in Jazz Age-era New Orleans and centered on a young girl named Tiana and her fateful kiss with a frog prince who desperately wants to be human again. 

      Promoted as a return to old-school Disney, this movie features the first African-American princess ever and the first hand-drawn Disney in five years, the previous being Home on the Range. This was a very good movie. It has a lot of elements of classic Disney moments but also updates the formula by having our princess' (though she's actually a working girl) dream being operating an upscale eatery and the unique setting of New Orleans. 

     The voice acting was excellent. The highlight for me was Jenifer Cody, who plays Tiana's rich best friend. She takes the role of a ditzy side character to a whole new level with voice inflections to rival Scarlet O'Hara and a speaking speed so quick it can make your head spin. She's hilarious. I also liked that, as in Beauty and the Beast, all the voice actors did their own singing. 

     The animation was very pretty. I felt it was a bit over the top in some places (a scene featuring three swamp-men hitting each other for what seemed like way too long), but one song sequence in particular where Tiana sings about her dream to her mother was very unique and well-done. 

     The key difference in this film was the villain. As a voodoo man, known by other characters as The Shadow Man, our villain is incredibly evil. All of his song sequences are extremely dark (singing masks, voodoo dolls complete with pins dancing and beating drums, shadow demons chasing our heroes) would disturb many parents and young children. Towards the end of the movie, the level of frightening images seemed too high and unnecessary. 

    The music was good. Again, Randy Newman composed it, but thankfully, I don't recall him singing. The highlights were "Almost There" and "Down in New Orleans," two of the Best Song nominees for this past year's Oscars. Tiana has a superior voice to most Disney princesses, and the character singing of her co-stars gave a different flavor to the score. All in all, a very well-done, albeit darker, Disney princess movie. 

Gloomy Sunday (1999)

A fictionalized story of the composition of the song "Gloomy Sunday" which became known as The Hungarian Suicide Song. Written for love, the song soon becomes the theme for a tale of tragedy. 

     First of all, the label on this movie is deceiving. It says "based on a true story," but just about every character is fictional so do not rely on this movie for the actual story of the song "Gloomy Sunday." However, as a story, this one is frighteningly beautiful.

     The movie focuses on the relationship between the owner of a fancy restaurant, his beautiful waitress lover, and the young pianist they hire. Soon, the pianist falls in love with Illona, the waitress, and composes "Gloomy Sunday" for her birthday. The song quickly becomes a hit in Hungary and all the world, but leaves behind an trail of tragedy as several people who hear the song commit suicide. Things become complicated when Hitler's army begins to implement The Final Solution and the love triangle's life is threatened. 

      Some viewers might be very annoyed by Illona, who lives her life rather selfishly, claiming that she needs both men to be happy, and they comply. However, I found that her character is almost angelic and that she has a mysterious power over people that makes her behavior excusable, at least, that's what the movie is trying to say. The actress playing her is very beautiful and subtle. The men playing her lovers are also very good, very different, and they both adore her.  

    This is a depressing movie. There's not a sense of happiness at the end of the film, but I suppose there is a sense of victory. The song "Gloomy Sunday" is magnificent, it is a brilliant thread that connects all the people and events in the movie. The whole idea for the movie is very creative, too. The movie is long, almost two hours and seems longer, but it has to be finished once it's begun. We do become attached to the characters. 

*Lots of nudity* 

The Producers (1968)

A sneaky producer and continuously nervous accountant team up to make a huge profit on creating the worst play on Broadway.

    Old school comedy! The movie that spawned the play that birthed the movie! This was truly a classic comedy - super quotable lines, imitable characters, and the time-tried combination of an aggressive anti-hero and his twitchy sidekick. Who couldn't love it.

     This movie redeemed Gene Wilder for me. I have seen him as Willy Wonka and vowed I would despise him for the rest of my life. I saw him as young Frankenstein and it was affirmed that I would never get that screaming, shouting, frantic voice out of my ears. Then, I saw him as a producer/accountant. He was adorable. I think it was because he only shouted twice in the movie and for a very short time. Zero was the funniest, though, of course, I just love him in an early scene where he tries to calm down a hysterical Gene Wilder by tossing water at him and grinning. They had chemistry most actors only dream of sharing. 

     It was a great length at a clipped hour and a half, so the style of humor had not gotten stale. It isn't everyone's cup of tea, I guess, there's a story-line woven throughout where Zero's character romances elderly ladies for cash so he can produce his plays. That might disturb some. It's a kind of bawdy humor, not "sexual," per say, like today's comedies (Knocked Up, The Ugly Truth), but it uses the idea of sex for humor. Regardless, it's very Mel Brooks, a very well-done comedy, and those lines will be in your brain forever, just waiting for the opportunity to be spouted off. 

Vier Minuten (2006)

An elderly piano teacher at a women's prison trains an extremely talented but violent young prodigy for a contest. 

     The music really makes this film. It expresses the emotional life of the characters when words can't and it binds two very different women together. This was a very interesting film, it didn't exactly feel like a foreign film, but the use of subtlety and homo-eroticism was definitely very European. 

     The acting was very good. I loved how Bleibtreu's stern agony contrasted so brilliantly with her young costar's, who is all grinding teeth, blood on the piano keys, and sweat-drenched rage. The supporting characters blended in the background nicely, it's not really about anyone else besides these two women, but they have their place. There's the prison warden, the childishly-selfish guard, the young nemesis...it all fits.

     The one thing about this movie I felt was unnecessary was that homosexual element. Ok, so this elderly woman never loved anyone except for a summer love who happened to be female. We get it, being lesbian makes it interesting. I felt that was a rather blunt attempt to be different. Maybe she should have lost a daughter or a husband, I dunno, there are lots of options besides a lesbian lover.

    The story is predictable, but that makes it satisfying. There's no unnecessary moments of clarity and rapid healing, you don't assume these characters are all going to be "all right" from now on, they just have been touched. It all unfolds slowly, there's no pre-story jammed down the viewer's throat, we have to watch and gradually get to understand the characters and why they do what they do. It's great.

The Jane Austen Book Club (2007)

A group of women and one man form a book club devoted to Jane Austen novels only to find their own love lives taking on the shape of those classic romances.

     As someone familiar with Jane Austen, this movie definitely falls into the category of smart chick-flicks. It's got heartbreak, male-female dynamics, sex, and a certain sweetness to it that I found positive. However, it wasn't perfect.

     Because the movie focuses on so many characters, there's bound to one that slips into the cracks. In this movie, it was the lesbian daughter of one of the main women. It made her seem like a childish bed-hopper who finds random women on the sets of her numerous injuries. A certain montage of the relationships shows her and her current girlfriend as if we were just as invested in her love life as we were in the other character's, when really we feel like it's just another doomed one-night stand. It made lesbian relationships seem shallow. 

     I loved Hugh Dancy. He had the perfect balance of being physically attractive and yet non-threatening, creating an adorable sci-fi geek who is eager to experience everything and totally comfortable to sit around on a patio with older women. Alas, men like him do not really exist. Emily Blunt was another of my favorite's as well, though she did struggle with her character's writing, it was very hard to make her character likeable, but with a face like Blunt's, who could see her crying and not jump up to comfort her? Seriously. 

   This movie was like a shooting star - it was quick, its star trail quickly fades, but while it lasted, it was completely charming and hopeful. It wasn't bogged down by crudity or sex jokes, it was about romance and the pursuit of love in all its missteps and victories. It was a movie that makes me smile.

The White Ribbon (2009)

Strange things start happening in a tiny German village in the year 1913. It seems that the children seem to be at the heart of the mystery.

     This is one of those foreign films that is so far superior to American films, it's shocking. The subtlety, the symbols, the characters...it's all done so well, so delicately, it's like looking at a classical painting brought to life. 

    As with most foreign films, it's very long and slow-moving. Lots of interesting things happen though, it could have been a lot worse. The movie also has one of the most beautiful love stories I've ever seen, which was a tiny glimmer in an otherwise very dark story. Another beautiful scene involves a small child and his father, it gives hope to the viewer that purity and love can survive even in the most parched of environments.

    I read that the movie is a symbol of the birth of the Nazi mindset. I believe that, but I think there are many layers to a film this complex and well-done; it explores issues with class, family, sexuality, but the repression that is key to the movie definitely supports the mental ripening of Germany for Hitler, even though it takes place just before WWI when Germany was utterly decimated. This is a terrific movie to study and- for those interested in the German language - the dialogue is relatively simple so it's easy to follow. 
    Foreign films FTW!

Shutter Island (2010)

 

In 1954, U.S. Marshal Teddy Daniels is sent to investigate the disappearance of a murderess on Shutter Island, a hospital for the criminally insane.

     I waited so long for this movie to come out. I counted down the days, realized it wasn't released in October, and then counted more days till it finally came out this month. It was indeed a fascinating film.

    It's hard to describe it without spoilers, but I will say it is an excellent example of a true thriller- heavy on psychological thrills, a fair dash of blood and guts, insane people, all set during a wild rainstorm on a tiny island ringed in rock. 

    One of the reasons for its success in my mind is the acting. No one plays furrowed brow and blood-shoot eyes better than Leo, and his transformation from hard-business cop to wounded man shocked at the horror around him is beautiful. Kudos to you. The supporting characters are all excellent, too, Ben Kingsley is deliciously unnerving as the head doctor of the hospital, almost unnerving as all the mental patients who twitch and mutter or shriek. 

   I hated the soundtrack. It was awful. It was all blasting strings, foghorns, and no melody. I honestly wanted to cover my ears. The movie was best when it was silent and all you could hear was the drip of water from the flickering lights of a cell-like building. 

    It's a relatively long film, so get comfortable and pay attention. Luckily there are no boring moments. This is definitely a movie to savor.

The Others (2001)

A woman who lives in a darkened old house with her two photosensitive children becomes convinced that her family home is haunted.

    This is a masterpiece of thriller. Nearly everything about this movie is perfect in its subtle detail and ambiance. You doubt everything and everyone. Every dark corner is suspicious and every ray of light may reveal some mystery. Love it, love it.

    The first standout is the acting. Kidman is magnificent. It's incredible to watch her icy, uptight visage gradually crumble and melt with terror as everything she believes in crashes around her. Of the two child actors, my favorite was the little dark-haired boy with his pouting lips and mother-worship. The daughter is a stark contrast and I found her nasty tendencies hard to swallow. She serves her purpose well though, and her acting improves as the movie goes on. Irish actress Fionnula Flanagan with her bird-like eyes was perfect as Kidman's new servant. I've seen her in other movies. I wish she was in more, she's underrated. 

    The setting of the ancient family house occupied by children and a slowly unraveling woman reminded me of The Innocents and I loved the old-school thriller opening credits with the pencil illustrations and haunting violin score. The set-up of the rooms reminded me a play, with each old table or music box carefully set in its place to create the perfect scene. 

    There were only two things I disliked about this movie: 1) A rather random appearance of a character, though I do understand its purpose, it still seemed weird and 2) the gardener's acting, I thought he was terrible. Everything else...thriller perfection.