Read Description

Yesterday, I had the opportunity to see Michel Hazanavicius' lovable The Artist, a film about a silent film actor's fall from stardom as Hollywood made the transition from the Silent Era to the Sound Era in 1927. My love for The Artist sparked my interest in The Jazz Singer, the very first feature-length film to incorporate synchronized sound into its story. Its popularity at the time led to the Talkie Revolution seen in The Artist. I feel that The Jazz Singer's legacy and impact on cinema is much more impressive than the actual quality of the film itself. It is one of the most historically important and influential films of cinema, but by today's standards it is rather dull and has aged very poorly. The acting in particular is somewhat awkwardly portrayed. The storyline of a man running away from home to pursue stardom seems overdone and cliche, but that is not to say that it wasn't original in its time. Perhaps this story was creative or daring in 1927, but it's nothing new for a modern audience. The flow of the film feels clumsy and disjointed as it repeatedly switches back and forth between silent and sound film. The film is even a bit racist at times as well.

When The Jazz Singer is viewed through the eyes of a modern audience, it is difficult to comprehend the impact this seemingly insignificant film had on cinema. It spurred what many view as the greatest revolution in the history of film. Despite its many flaws, I cannot bring myself to fail it, as it has influenced films in so many ways. I can also be somewhat generous with my rating because it had the challenge of being the very first film to be done in this manner. After decades of silent films with title cards being tradition, I can imagine that it would have been hard to make the very first film of its kind, not having any other examples to go by. The Jazz Singer is full of holes but its historical significance cannot go unnoticed.

My my, what a lovely film. The world of Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers seems to be a completely different world than the one we live in - it's lavish, sparkly, delightful and carefree. It's exactly what the world needed to forget the troubles of The Great Depression. Fred Astaire charms and Ginger Rogers lights up the screen. Their chemistry couldn't be better. It's pure magic watching the grand, energetic musical numbers. In my personal opinion, the "I'm in Heaven" scene ranks with "Singin' in the Rain" and "Over the Rainbow" as one of the greatest musical numbers ever filmed. "Isn't it a Lovely Day" is another bright spot in the film. Top Hat is pure bliss to watch. It's a movie I just want to hug.

The Heiress is one of the most cynical, heartless and cold films in history - and I mean that in the best way possible. What starts out as a very passionate romance soon leads to a very cold-hearted, compelling drama. I usually am not fond of period pieces, especially ones about wealthy people (since I find it hard to feel sorrow for them), and I've never actually been impressed by a William Wyler film enough to give it any more than an 80%, but The Heiress is an exception to both rules. Like Bette Davis, Olivia De Havilland isn't exactly what you would call a "classic beauty" in the same sense as Rita Hayworth or Marilyn Monroe, but she makes up for that with her awe-inspiring talents as an actress. The Heiress, which she won her second Academy Award for, displays De Havilland at her all-time best, proving herself to be one of the most talented actresses of the Golden Age. Montgomery Clift's performance is a little stale, but supporting actors Miriam Hopkins and Ralph Richardson's performances surely compensate for Clift's shortcomings. That, combined with a razor sharp script, filled with many interesting plot twists, makes for a very memorable film.

To call The Battle of Algiers a haunting film is a gross understatement. Though it is an Italian-produced film, it is set in Algeria and follows the true story of the Algerians' struggle for autonomy from France during the mid to late 1950s. It blends the bleak realism of Schindler's List with the social commentary of Battleship Potemkin. This is accentuated by vivid depictions of mass genocide, authentic performances and a mesmerizing music score by Ennio Morricone (who is well known for scoring many Sergio Leone westerns in the 1960s). Though it was released forty five years ago, The Battle of Algiers still packs a visceral punch unlike any other film from its era.

Its style often resembles a documentary film with its raw cinematography and realistic footage. Being the neo-realistic film that it is, almost all of the acting is performed by no-name actors. While this may sound like a bad thing at first, it only adds to the realism, making every torture scene, every shooting, and every death seem as if it were true. Remember, the Hays Code (which would be abolished two years later) was not effective in Italy, so there were practically no restraints on the amount of graphic imagery allowed to be depicted on screen. With this authentic tone, I felt like I cared for the characters much more than the ones in most Hollywood fare of the 1960s. Ironically, they felt much more life-like than the ones characterized by professional Hollywood actors.

The Battle of Algiers is an achingly human experience, enhanced by down-to-Earth direction and authentic character portrayals. It is a bona fide masterpiece of world cinema and has retained every bit of its power since its initial release in 1966. I would be hard-pressed to find a film that has aged as well as The Battle of Algiers has.

Fun fact: This was originally supposed to be a Hollywood film starring Paul Newman. I can't see it conveying the same realism or emotion as in the version we now know.

Another masterful work from Studio Ghibli, Grave of the Fireflies is essentially about two Japanese orphans, struggling to make-do with what little resources they had during 1940s war-torn Japan. It also delves deeply into themes of isolation and is one of the most thought-provoking, haunting films I've ever had the pleasure to watch.

Let me start off by saying that Grave of the Fireflies is, by far, the most mature, down-to-Earth animated film I've seen in my life. Unlike most animated movies which draw the viewers' attention with whimsical characters and slapstick humor, Miyazaki chose a powerful story with shocking images instead. There's no epic battle scenes, no explosions; its simplicity is really what drives it to greatness.

For the most part, the visuals are nothing to get excited about. The colors are very neutral and dull. But that's the thing; it doesn't need vivid colors and flashy gimmicks for it to work. In fact, the dull colors only benefit the film, as it adds to the gloomy, melancholy atmosphere. However, occasionally, there are some truly beautiful scenes such as any of the scenes involving fireflies, which were incredibly breathtaking.

This movie isn't for everyone, especially children. Like I said, kids just won't be interested by the visuals, won't be able to appreciate the story and will most likely be traumatized by the constant images of death. However, if you're above the age of about 13, I HIGHLY recommend this movie. Not only does it further prove that Studio Ghibli has a knack for producing beautiful, wholly entertaining masterpieces, but it also proves that animation, as a whole, is not just for children.

(Btw, if you're planning on watching it, I suggest you watch it in Japanese with subtitles. Setsuko's voice can be a little annoying when dubbed in English)

Pulp Fiction is filled to the brim with eclectic dialogue, ironically-funny violence and originality. The star-studded cast does an incredible performance and the soundtrack is brilliant. What more could you ask for?

(My first review in a long time, and given my rating, you probably won't like it.)

For years, I had been ashamed of not having ever seen The Matrix. Time and time again, it has been hailed as the pinnacle of action movies, and has been blowing minds since 1999. Yet, upon finally having seen it, I was left scratching my head wondering what all the fuss was about. I won't even begin explaining the convoluted plot, since it's far too complex and frankly, I don't have the time.

The direction of the film left me feeling cold. While it's undeniably slick, it was all very mechanical, very inhuman. It's hard for me to stay emotionally invested in such a lifeless, hard-boiled film. If that's your poison, then that's great, but it's just a directorial style that doesn't appeal to me personally. It left me indifferent to the livelihood of any of the characters who, although are "bad-ass," just don't engage me.

My biggest problem with The Matrix, and I know this may sound weird, was that it was too logical. Now I've got YOU scratching yours heads, don't I? Well hear me out. It tried too hard to turn its perplexing plot into something that actually makes sense, but in the process it just made itself simultaneously more confusing and less interesting. Take David Lynch's Mulholland Drive for example, a film I love very much. That film makes infinitely less sense than The Matrix, but I'm okay with that because it's not trying to make sense. All logic is thrown out the window, and if you go into it with an open mind, what you'll get is a transfixing expression of David Lynch's wild imagination. It's fun to marvel at its mesmerizing imagery without worrying about the rationale behind what's happening. The Matrix, on the other hand, is far too worried about explaining itself. The explanations only create further tedium. It's certainly creative and inventive, that's for sure, but it's also lacking in the fun and whimsy of other, similar mindfucks.

The Matrix is often grouped into the same category as other "cool" '90s films that young men seem to be horny for, such as Pulp Fiction or Fight Club. However, the key difference that separates those films from The Matrix is that they have a sense of humor. They aren't completely dreary. Instead of mixing a bit of comic relief into the action, The Matrix drains away the fun with its drab tone and stone faces. Its solemness also makes it difficult to believe such an unrealistic tale. While watching it, I was still attached to reality, instead of this world they were trying to create. If it had a few quirks of its own, the film might be more interesting. I wasn't quite absorbed into this world, and felt it needed a little more zest.

I feel like I've been talking solely about what The Matrix could have been, and not what it is. So what is The Matrix? First of all, it's pretentious. Let's get this straight - there is a difference between being clever and being complex. Anyone can dish out a muddled, confusing story, but that does not make it clever. Because The Matrix is so complex, it seems to think that it's much more clever than it actually is. It's proud of this nonsensical story and its lackluster explanations.

The film is also obnoxious and filled with overbloated action sequences. The CGI, for the most part, does hold up surprisingly well twelve years later, but it's not quite enough to merit such overuse. I believe The Matrix could win an award for the highest EPM (Explosions Per Minute).

The Matrix was watchable, but at times tedious. My contempt for the action genre may also be the root of my opinion of the film. My fears are what typically what drives my adrenaline, not explosions or fast cars, which is why the horror genre is what gets my heart pumping more than fast action. I prefer a hair-raising build-up rather than loud noises and big bangs. Maybe I've been blinded by the fact that I'm relatively unaffected by action movies. Maybe The Matrix is every bit as good as they say it is and I just can't see it because of my dislike for the genre. Or maybe it's just cold, overly-serious, inhuman, obnoxious, and pretentious.

In many ways, it resembles a darker, deeper, more creative version of Alice In Wonderland that has more story structure and character development.

Moulin Rouge! is an incredibly innovative, over-the-top (albeit, cliche) feast for the eyes that single-handedly resurrected the musical genre, which had long been dormant since the 70s. It stars Nicole Kidman and Ewan McGregor, whose surprisingly organic, soothing voices blew me away. The use of popular, well-known songs (which at first I was a bit skeptical of) was actually very innovative and added a certain familiarity to the musical numbers.

However, I do have a few grievances with the film. I felt that the pacing was a bit awkward. Some scenes were incredibly overwhelming and flashy, yet some just fell flat and felt dull and uninspired. The first half an hour or so was near perfection, but after that it was mostly hit-or-miss, to me. It was also filled with ridiculously cheesy dialogue such as "Love is like oxygen. Love is all you need" and "I will always be with you..." which turned me off.

Moulin Rouge is definitely not for everyone. It has a notorious reputation for being very polarizing. Most people either love it or hate it. It's a romantic musical so it will most likely be more popular with the female audience. But if you can get past its short-comings, what you'll be left with is a very memorable, ambitious spectacle of a film.

Slumdog Millionaire is a brutally honest tale about a "slumdog" from India who was a contestant on "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?" and won. He is accused of cheating because he is poor and uneducated. However, he claims "You don't have to be a genius to get the questions right" and most of the film is about him trying to prove this.

Although it is harsh and has a shocking truth about prejudices, it is very much a feel-good film. The soundtrack is incredibly upbeat and there's even some humor thrown into the mix.

What irked me though, was that its non-linear storyline was meant to be clever, but came off as formulaic and repetitive to me. The story can be summed up as: The slumdog is asked how he knew the question, he has a flashback to his childhood, which proves he knew it. Then they move on to the next question and it repeats in this manner about 8-10 times. This was only a minor issue for me though.

What amazed me the most though, was the cinematography. Every scene shines with dazzling, vivid colors and the lighting enhances them. Even the subtitles were enclosed in delightfully colored boxes, which is a bonus since the subtitles are used quite often. The immense beauty of Slumdog Millionaire really absorbed me into the film and is part of what made the movie memorable.

Do I think it was deserving of its Best Picture win? Not really. However, it was still very entertaining and possibly one of the most visually stunning movies I've ever seen.

UPDATE: After a rewatch, I now believe it deserved its Oscar. :P