60/60 Review #27: The Crying Game.

Warning: If, for whatever reason, you don't already know the twist in this movie (or anything about the movie in general)... there are spoilers ahead.

--------------------

For those of you who follow my podcast, you might remember an earlier episode with one Travis McCollum. During his turn on The Tower, he had to find the pattern between a bunch of movies... and one of those movies was The Crying Game. A running joke came from that episode when he couldn't figure out the answer--that all the movies had full-frontal male nudity--and all he could remember (and shared at great length) about said movie was, and I quote, "penis." Fortunately, I already knew the twist, and this didn't spoil it for me. And I don't believe it spoiled the overall movie for me, either.

The movie begins as IRA terrorists take hostage a British soldier named Jody (Forest Whitaker). One of his captors, Fergus (Stephen Rea), befriends him--until he's given orders to kill him. One of Jody's last wishes is for Fergus to find his lover, Dil (Jaye Davidson), and make sure she's alright. But then Fergus starts to fall in love with Dil... until he finds out her secret. The film co-stars Miranda Richardson as Jude (another IRA terrorist) and Jim Broadbent as Col (a bartender).

This is one twisted romance. A man falls in love with a woman who was in love with the man he was hired to kill, only to find out the woman is actually a man... and then get caught back up in IRA situations. And it all culminates in a scene where Dil is practically insane. I was fascinated by the relationship through the bulk of the film. However, the climax of the movie just seemed... off to me. It didn't feel right for the character. Not to mention the whole third act after the IRA peeps come back into the story just felt cliche and shallow, just added back into the story because there needed to be some action conflict.

The best part of the film, however, was the first act of the film. The bond formed between Forest Whitaker and Stephen Rea is fantastic and heartbreaking. But I do wish there would have been more focus on this part of the film, to make it seem like 3 days had actually passed. It also would have helped to know what was going on. Maybe I missed some throw-away line after he was taken, but I still have no idea why they took him hostage. The whole first 30 minutes felt rushed, despite the fact the relationship and chemistry between Rea and Whitaker was fantastic. It just would have helped the believability of going to find Dil and the conflict faced at the climax of the first act.

So yeah, the best thing about the movie was the relationships between both Fergus and Jody and Fergus and Dil. But everything else was just... OK. It was a good movie overall--I just think it could have been better. The acting was great from Stephen Rea; Forest Whitaker's strange British accent bugged me, though--and that says a lot coming from the master of bad British accents. Jaye Davidson was quite a find. Even after the movie, I had to look up and see whether he really was a guy or not. But yeah, good movie... not great, but good. And I could see why the only thing Travis could remember about this movie was... penis.


I Am McLovin!

60/60 Review #12: Brazil.

Note: For reference, there are apparently 2-3 versions of this film. I caught the longest version, which was about 2 and a half hours long.

---------------------------

I knew going into this movie that it was a strange dystopian film. But that's about all I knew. But when I fell asleep for about fifteen minutes (tiredness, not boredom) and woke up to see a guy in a suit of armor with wings running from zombie-esque creatures and fighting a giant samurai, I was really like... WTF? Of course, I rewound it and caught what I missed and then finished the movie. But still, overall, the movie is a total mindfuck.

For those that don't know, Sam Lowry (Jonathan Pryce) works for a world-running corporation that, due to a clerical error, makes a mistake and takes away (and eventually kills) the wrong man. Who they meant to take was Tuttle (Robert De Niro), one of many terrorists who fight against the oppressive government. Sam must also deal with his overbearing mother (Katherine Helmond), who is getting a major reconstructive facial surgery from her doctor (Jim Broadbent). He also has to deal with other people who work for said corporation, like his boss (Ian Holm), a couple workers (including Bob Hoskins), and a friend named Jack (Michael Palin). Sam ends up in the middle of a conspiracy when he sees a woman of his dreams (literally) named Jill (Kim Greist) and tries to figure out who she is.

That's the sanest way to describe this movie. Visually, it's fantastic. The basic visual style alone looks much more modern and clearer, especially considering this was made in the 80s. But then there's all the special stuff, like all the set designs and the fantasy sequences where Sam imagines himself flying and all sorts of things happen. It's a wonderful film to look at.

It's also pretty funny. Most of its entertainment comes from some wacky comedy. The characters can be a hoot and are written well. And the actors do well to show this. Though the whole thing isn't a comedy. One of the strange things about the film is its inconstant tonal shifts. Sometimes its funny, sometimes absurd, sometimes dead serious, sometimes freaky... it just depends on how it feels at the moment.

I don't necessarily have any major issues with the film. A lot of people complain that the movie takes forever to go anywhere and they get bored. I can honestly say I wasn't really ever bored with it, and it didn't bother me that it didn't seem to go anywhere at first (OK, so the first 30-45 minutes or so did drag at times, but it didn't bug me too bad). I can't even say that the movie eventually went off the rails; the movie was never on the rails. It's just insane through and through.

I honestly don't know how to review this movie. It's... too strange. I think I liked it. I know I didn't dislike it. It's been a day since I've watched it, and I still can't wrap my head around it. I know everything was metaphorical and/or allegorical and whatnot... but yeah. I really have nothing else I can say. So I guess I'll just leave it at that. It's an entertaining and well made yet thoroughly bizarre film.


WTF

(P.S. That wraps up "Foreign" Month. Tune in next week when I transition into "Comedy" month with my transitional film, Kentucky Fried Movie.)

HARRY POTTER AND THE HALF-BLOOD PRINCE.

Half-Blood Prince is my favorite of the 7 books. I've been looking forward to this film for so long, and after everything I've heard recently, my expectations were super high. So I finally saw Half-Blood Prince at midnight last night. I went straight to bed after I got home (as I had to be at work in the morning), so I've had plenty of time to let things sink in. But you know what? My feelings are exactly the same as last night: This movie is brilliant and blows all the others out of the water.

The movie picks up pretty much where the last one left off, and Harry (Dan Radcliffe) is about to begin his 6th year at Hogwarts. But Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) shows up and takes him on a bit of a side-journey to have a talk with an old professor of Hogwarts, Horace Slughorn (Jim Broadbent), to try and get him to come back. Later, Harry and friends Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson) notice Draco Malfoy (Tom Felton) up to something strange, beginning a bit of an obsession from Harry toward Draco. And then there's Professor Snape (Alan Rickman) who makes an Unbreakable Vow with Draco's mother, Narcissa (Helen McCrory) and Bellatrix Lestrange (Helena Bonham Carter) to help Draco out in his mission that Voldemort has set him. And this is all before they even get to Hogwarts. Once back at school, emotions run high as everybody is feeling romance in the air, including Lavender Brown (Jessie Cave), who has an enormous crush on Ron, and Hermione, who is starting to realize her feelings toward Ron, as well. And then there's Harry's growing crush on Ron's sister Ginny (Bonnie Wright). But not all is light within the school. As Draco continues his secret mission, Dumbledore puts Harry up to the task to get buddy-buddy with Slughorn for a very important reason.

I am a fan of the books and the films, so I'm going to try and make this as fair of a review as possible. I will try to review it both as a film and as an adaptation. Let's start with the actors.

Jim Broadbent's Slughorn, while looking nothing as described in the books, plays him perfectly. His acting, shifting between whimsical and serious, is spot on. Of course, we also have some of the more background players moving to the foreground, such as Draco, Ginny, and Snape (not a background player in the books, per se, but definitely has been given a smaller role in the films as of late). Tom Felton, though with few words, shows us Draco's internal struggle to do the task he has been given, and it's brilliantly played when push comes to shove and the moment finally comes. Ginny, as well, while having almost no lines in the previous films, really shows us that she can play Ginny just fine when asked.

But then we have Snape. Oh, Alan Rickman, how great you are. You've been the perfect casting choice of the entire series, and you still claim that throne. Although Snape appears to come to the foreground even in the book, he's honestly not in it as much as you probably think he is. In fact, I had a discussion just today that the person felt Snape wasn't in it as much as the book, but as huge of a role he plays in the book, he's actually not in it as much as it seems. It's kind of a "Jaws" effect. He's always around, and most things seem to center around him, but he's not always there. Is that to say he's not in the movie a lot? Absolutely not. He has a large role in the film, as well, and plays it to perfection as usual.

Then there's the Trio: Harry, Ron, and Hermione. This movie is downright hilarious, and most of it is thanks to these three (and Lavender, who was obsessively brilliant). But for the first time in a long time, I felt Emma Watson really captured Hermione again. When her hand shot up excitedly in the air to answer a question, I grinned wide. And there's even a fun bit where her hair gets all frizzy and bushy, which had to be a nudge to the fans. I also loved "drunk" Hermione (too much Butterbeer!). Then you have Rupert Grint who also, finally, found a great balance between comedy and loyalty. And then you have Dan Radcliffe, who had some exceptional moments, particularly the Cave scene and the Felix Felicis scene (which is just hilarious).

But the top bill... and I can't believe I'm actually saying this... has to go to Michael Gambon, who--for the first time--acted Dumbledore perfectly. Like Slughorn, there was a perfect mix of whimsy and serious. But the kicker? I think for the first time, I actually saw Michael Gambon smile. And boy, does that make all the difference.

Of course, there are other, smaller characters that did well, too, like Luna (who is great as always). And funnily enough, after my Flitwick complaint recently, he was actually given some dialogue in this film (although one of those dialogue moments was to mention choir practice... oh well). And McGonagall actually gets some decent screen time for once, as well.

Overall, on all the actors' parts, the movie was a great film of expressions. I mean, a lot of the parts (seriousness, heartbreak, fear, comedy) were expressed purely through facial expression, and expressed well, which really says something.

As an adaptation, besides the characters being acted perfectly, the movie does very well. Total purists might not like it for things cut out, but I felt what was cut out wasn't purely necessary to begin with (as long as they're able to include the missing information somehow in the final film, as some was important). For instance, there were three important aspects from the book that were declared cut that had some fans up in arms. These scenes were half the memories, the 'Battle', and the funeral. Let's take these one at a time.

In the book, there are about 6 or so memories into Voldemort's past. In the film, there are 3 (one being a completed version of another). These memories are important in figuring out what Harry has to go after in the final story to help defeat Voldemort. With the memories cut from the film, Harry doesn't exactly know specifics on what to go after... but it works fine. Harry knows what he's supposed to be doing, and in the final book, there really wasn't too much of a need for Harry to know specifics. And if we're lucky, the Trio will just figure it out themselves, making them look much smarter and more important in this mission (because, as we know from the book, that didn't happen too often).

And then we have the cut 'Battle', removed because David Yates felt it might become repetitious due to the battle in the final film. And I agree. There didn't need to be a battle in this one, and the way they did it was just fine. There's still destruction (and one Auror does actually get blasted), but the stealth mode worked, and it will make the final battle that much more epic. As for the funeral, again, unnecessary. In the book, Harry pretty much pays little attention to it anyway, and it's over before you know it. And there's still a nicely done gesture anyway. The movie ends pretty much exactly the same as the book... the Trio talking about what to do next. Actually, I think this is the first time in the movies that the movie has actually ended exactly how the book did. And if the movie seems to just stop, that's because the book did the exact same thing. The movie, like the book, is basically just a setup to the final installment(s).

And speaking of setup, I loved the little nudges the film gave for those who had read the final book (especially the Harry snake-head thing when he touches the ring). And I'm also glad they didn't muck things up (Luna didn't actually see Harry with her SpectreSpecs... and expelliarmus is cast at the end of the movie (which I started getting worried about when it didn't happen immediately)). And there were also some fun in-jokes for those who are knowledgeable of the earlier books/films (Like when Slughorn asks if Aragog had a family, and the tone in Harry's voice when he goes "Oh yeah" is just great).

If I had any complaint about this film, it would be the downplay of the Half-Blood Prince subplot. The potions book really is downplayed in the film, but it was never really that important in the grand scheme of things even in the book, so it's not like it really mattered. It did what it was meant to do (and by God, the Sectumsempra scene was even better than I could have hoped). Draco's mission also became much more obvious in the film than in the book (though I'm not really sure I could say that since I had the book spoiled for me before I read it). But it was still incredibly obvious what he was trying to do. Though in the realm of cinema versus books, I'm not sure that's a bad thing, really.

Some might complain about all the romance, but the book was the same way... and I thought it worked particularly well (in fact, some of it I thought was better than the book, mostly because the book couldn't do the brilliant facial expressions like the film could, not to mention some brilliant lines not in the book). The romance is rarely at the forefront of any scene, but it's a part of a many of them. I even liked how they got around one of my only annoyances of the book, Tonks' moping about mysteriously, later for us to discover is about Lupin. The film? Just puts them right together and gets it over with. Smart move, I say. But if you complain about the love and relationships in Harry Potter, you're missing the point of the series completely. As is said at the end of the Half-Blood Prince book (paraphrasing), one should be proud to see a little more love in the world... because remember, in Harry Potter, love is the most powerful magic. And what better episode to center around love than the one where Dumbledore comes to the forefront? Plus... they're teenagers.

I know this is an incredibly long review, but how could I not talk about the music and cinematography? Nicholas Hooper's score is just beautiful. I gave it a listen before the film came out, and it's just as great in the film as it is out. And the cinematography by Bruno Belbonnel (Amelie and Across the Universe) made an outstandingly gorgeous film. Every shot was so beautiful, it really set this film apart from all the others in visuals, including Prisoner of Azkaban. I really can't stress enough how gorgeous the film is.

Overall, the film was near perfect for a Harry Potter film (Deathly Hallows might trump it simply because it has 2 films to tell its story). It was gorgeous. The music was beautiful. The acting was completely, by everyone, spot on. The movie was hilarious (much funnier than anticipated). There was a perfect balance of dark and light (and when it was dark, it was pretty dark, so I'm really surprised this movie got a PG rated... I'm still not sure how). As an adaptation, there were things cut out and some things added in, and a few things changed, but everything seemed to work. What most adaptations try to do is either be like the first two films and try to put every detail in or be like Goblet of Fire and try to be true, but make it really choppy due to things cut out. For the first time, I've really felt that a Harry Potter movie took the essence of the book and made it into its own creature--staying true to the story and the book, but doing other things of its own volition that separated the book and film and letting it work on a cinematic level. I could go on endlessly about this film, but I'll spare you. Let's just say I can't wait to see it again and again.

Royale With Cheese

(P.S. Did anybody else's heart skip a beat and/or breath get caught in their throat at that final "...Please." right before the occurrence?)

INKHEART.

It’s sad that, even if you’ve never read the book the movie is based on, you can still tell when something has been changed, cut, or added. But more on that later. Mo (Brendan Fraser) has a unique ability: if he reads aloud, he can bring things out of the stories he’s reading. But there’s a rule to go with it: if at least one person comes out of the book, somebody has to go in. Unfortunately, he didn’t exactly know he had the power. Years ago, he read from a book entitled Inkheart, where he accidentally brings out some awful baddies, all led by the evil Capricorn (Andy Serkis), as well as the selfish (but good) fire-twirler, Dustfinger (Paul Bettany). But since people came out, somebody had to go in. And it just so happens to be his wife, Resa (Sienna Guillory). So now, years later, we catch up with Mo and his teenage daughter Meggie (Eliza Bennett), who travel through Europe searching old bookstores. Meggie has no idea her father’s abilities until Dustfinger shows back up in their lives, with Capricorn close behind. So now, along with help from Meggie’s great aunt Elinor (Helen Mirren); Farid (Rafi Gavron), one of Arabian Nights’ forty thieves; and Inkheart’s author, Fenoglio (Jim Broadbent), they have to figure out a way to keep from Capricorn’s clutches while bringing back Resa and getting Dustfinger what he wants most: to get back in the book.

Wow, that was complicated. But that about sums up the plot with most of the major characters. The plot really is somewhat straightforward, and it does jump from place to place (read: plot point to plot point) with no real shown travel in between (unless it serves as a plot point). And with the size of the book that I’ve seen in the stores, I know there has to be more to it than what this movie showed.

And I figure what was cut had to be all the character development. Now, the highlight of the film was the wonderful cast of characters. Ironically, this almost excludes Mo and Meggie, who are honestly the least interesting of the bunch. But the best was Dustfinger. Paul Bettany really owns this movie, and it probably helps that he’s really the only character with a satisfying character arch or development whatsoever. Helen Mirren also has an excellent character (and from what I’ve read, is one of the more faithful-to-the-book characters). The most disappointing thing with the characters was the relationship between Dustfinger and Farid. You can tell there was something there, trying to build itself like it would have room for in the book, but it ultimately falls flat. Also, how the heck does Farid teach himself how to do the Dragon’s Breath thing? I felt that was the most bizarre part that needed much more explanation.

And then we get to the ending. I won’t spoil anything, as I can give enough information without giving anything away. The climax ultimately tries to be much more epic than it really is. There’s all this chaos and fighting, but it doesn’t seem to show almost any of it, focusing more on the characters watching and reacting to what’s going on than actually showing what’s going on. And there should have been much more of a fight between Mo and Capricorn. I mean, after the history between the two characters, you’d think they’d do more than that. Then the actual ending of the movie comes in. And this is more where I was going with my opening statement. Normally, if Hollywood forces an ending change to something, they try to make it at least dovetail with what’s already been given so you can’t tell. Not this movie. Even without reading the book, I can give the exact moment where the book ending stops and the movie ending begins. It’s just too jarring. The two specific characters start walking off together, and then here Mo comes, running down the road… making most of what we just saw in the previous scene pointless. Not to mention they threw in mention of a possible romance that comes out of nowhere. There weren’t even hints or looks or exchanged words or anything throughout the entire movie, and then there’s a line like “I know you like her.” And I’m all… “Huh?”

But anyway, I know the bulk of this review has focused on some negative aspects, but you have no idea how weird I feel writing this review. I really don’t know what to talk about. I did actually really enjoy the movie, specifically Paul Bettany and Jim Broadbent (as a writer, I thought it was fun and hilarious to see his reactions to his characters being alive, which is something a lot of writers daydream about). The characters, for the most part, were really fun (even if there’s little-to-no development). And the concept itself was great. I still want to read the book, and the movie makes me want to read it even more so I can see all the development and whatnot that was removed. So overall, it was a fun movie… but not much more than that.

I Am McLovin!