Oceans17 Reviews

Agora (2009)

My favorite movie ever

[10/10 · 10 October 2009]

For me, this movie has everything or, at least, tells everything about human nature: intellectual curiosity, love feelings, forgiveness, violence, political and religious oppression. All of them (and their complex interrelations) convincingly portrayed in the context of a historical turning point, make a truly classic film with a lot to tell about the conflicts of contemporary time, of every time.

Rachel Weisz is more than perfect as Hypatia of Alexandria.

Beautiful views of the ancient city. Don't miss the incredible zooms.

One of the very few films to effectively express the intimate emotion and awe of scientific discovery.

In the theater where I saw this film, the audience was clearly impressed by the movie as a whole.

The Bourne Ultimatum (2007)

Greengrass' ultimatum + Happy Birthday Great Actress Joan Allen

[10/10 · 20 August 2009]

***Spoilers ahead!*** Greengrass' ultimatum to action movies: get a brain, my movies have it.

And stamina, of course. In fact, most other action movies seem so silly when compared to the Bourne series that even the James Bond franchise openly imitates it in the last two films (the ones with Daniel Craig).

Both Bourne's physical skills and intelligence are realistically portrayed, which is very refreshing, specially the portrayal of his wit: his logic and his tricks are so simple that they convince you. You and me could eventually figure out things or invent tricks like Bourne does, only that he thinks much faster than us. But his "mental stunts" are always reasonable: you understand them, which makes the film much more effective (it would work even with much less action, thanks to intrigue).

By the way, Happy Birthday Joan Allen (great, classy actress, beautiful and elegant). Pamela Landy adds another touch of realism: if you look in the real world, you will see super-professional women just like her. Perhaps Bournes do not exist, but Pam Landys certainly do.

The trademark (and landmark) fight sequences reach their top in the series (one of the aspects imitated by recent Bond films) and Julia Styles' Nikki is there to stare in disbelief as Bourne battles his hardest adversary. The close up on the face of this very fine actress (excellent Desdemona in "Hamlet 2000") is much more shocking than, for example, showing the bloody corpse of the deceased killer.

Original and bold plot move, placing the last scene of "The Bourne Supremacy" in the middle of "Ultimatum" (of course they are the same scene, in spite of minor differences!), thus playing with the viewer's memory.

This time the car chases, another trademark, become self-consciously over the top and almost self-parody, with Bourne getting a police car and taking more risks than ever.

Awesome final confrontation in the buildings of the secret agencies, with Bourne and Landy communicating by subtle hints they are sending each other.

I can't hardly wait to see "The Bourne Legacy".

21 (2008)

Stylish "life experience"

[8/10 · 7 January 2009]

***Spoilers ahead***

Many people pinpoint plot holes as if they were very smart, or as if the plot holes were very obvious, and I think they don't realize films need not to be taken too literally. In fact, the obviousness itself can be a signal to the clever viewer, telling her/him that she/he is being presented with a metaphor, a narrative license, an excuse to be stylish, or simply a joke. Why are they going always to the same casino? Because it represents all casinos, and Larry Fishburne is a symbol for all security guards: the filmmakers chose an arena for the struggle, and a character to be the antagonist. Why are their gestures so obvious? In the first place because they are being clearly shown... of course, it's a film. And also because Jill is very, very sexy crossing her arms like that (and we also expect some "glamour" in a film that happens to happen in Las Vegas). If the director had chosen to tell with painstaking detail all the shifts from one casino to another, from one gesture to another, then instead of plot-hole hunters we would have the other kind of people who always complain about films being confusing. Film narrative should be clear. If your attention span is high, then you can entertain yourself catching the tiny little bits of information that the filmmakers let there for us between one scene and the following. And the board discussion about the first and last scene reminds me a similar one about "The Bourne ultimatum". Please! Cinema is a symbolic art. So: those discussions are pointless. Of course they were the same scene, in spite of the obvious differences in clothing, etc., because they were the same at a symbolic level, and that's what counts. The book is just the inspiration for an atmospheric thriller with a sexy bias, which is in fact the kind of film we all love, and "21" is a nice, stylish and well conceived one. If you are interested in the mathematics of BlackJack, or want precise instructions to beat a casino, look elsewhere.

The Dark Knight (2008)

The metaphysics of plot twist is back!

[10/10 · 13 September 2008]

I think all that discussion about this film's greatness or lack thereof is irrelevant. Nolan has proved that he is a true original, and the question is: has he directed a truly Nolan film? Somewhere in the middle of the film I was worried that he had failed... How could I lose my faith? Then a major plot twist occurs, then another and I realize that the Nolan team is in excellent shape. I had overlooked the clever preparation of the plot twists: once they happen, the exposition of Nolan themes soon follows, enforced by the testosterone of a very exciting action film, and his themes are identity, ethics and the actions that define us. And a great metalinguistic sub-theme, a Nolan's favorite: the philosophy of plot twist, of the tightly woven screenplay, of plots within plots within plots... plots and counter-plots that escalate in the wit matching between extraordinary adversaries, between mind titans, and eventually between good and evil themselves. If evil has no self-imposed limitations, and good by definition does... how could good prevail? You can find some answers in this film... and some of them are really dark.

Star Wars: The Clone Wars (2008)

Lucas made the difference... accept it or not

[10/10 · 4 September 2008]

Star Wars Spoilers ahead!

Again Lucas is in the line of fire for those who miss that childhood iconic visually groundbreaking moment of the giant star destroyer sliding over our heads in the 70's and the feeling of knowing for sure that the following two hours would be a paradigm-shifting roller-coaster.

May I humbly inform you that such a special historical circumstance is impossible to repeat, and it's not Lucas' responsibility to reproduce it for us. In fact he engineered at least two paradigm shifts (Star Wars and Indiana Jones) and perhaps more if we consider all that Pixar has given us from that delightful Luxo Jr. to The Clone Wars.

Again plot hole analysts are here to show their poor imagination or lack of attention to detail: Jabba has a son and therefore a wife? Well, he is an alien and who knows how he breeds. But you can see his possible wife in The Phantom Menace, in the pod race scene.

Plothole attackers don't realize that even reality itself has plot holes: we either ignore them, or consider them mysteries or eventually find an explanation. And any fiction can be rewritten or reinterpreted to make it narratively consistent if you are creative or attentive enough. But in fact, Star Wars as a whole is pretty consistent (much more than hostile plot hole analysts would admit).

Example: Padme convinces Ziro the Hutt to confess the plot by Dooku. How does she manage, if Ziro knows that the Hutt clan will severely punish him? No doubt heroic Padme is resourceful, but it could seem a weak plot point... until you realize that in a clever touch of character creation, Ziro the Hutt is portrayed as a decadent millionaire who has given in to the pleasures of the Coruscant underworld: no doubt Padme is able to scare him into a full confession.

Examples from Star Wars not from The Clone Wars: the fact that Luke and Leia are brothers is hinted at in The Empire Strikes Back (Yoda says that "there's another", Luke and Leia communicate telepathically when Luke needs to be rescued), and even in A New Hope (that kiss before crossing the Death Star shaft always seemed pretty innocent to me: it was clear Leia's real love interest was Han because they were always in a quarrel). The fact that Vader is Leia's father is hinted at in The Empire Strikes Back: see how he pushes down Bobba Fett's weapon when the bounty hunter is going to shoot, and how Leia looks at Vader as if she is wondering why. Even in A New Hope (!) Vader seems to be protecting Leia: don't miss when he is convincing Tarkin not to kill her off. The fact that Luke finds Leia still alive in the Death Star was a real plot hole until we knew she was Vader's daughter. Also, Vader says that her resistance to mental probing is remarkable (of course, she was a Jedi!). And when Alderaan (Leia's foster parents planet) is destroyed, Vader is holding Leia's shoulder: notice how that scene is immensely more powerful emotionally if we know Vader is her real father.

Not only SW is consistent: plot holes even seem to be solved by themselves!

Plot holes? Please! Star Wars storyline is incredibly tight if you look attentively enough (and creatively enough!).

10 out of 10, and in this installment we manage to see Obi Wan at the peak of his Jedi ability (as in Episode III).

Echoes of the Sun (1990)

The best 3d movie I have ever seen

[10/10 · 11 April 2008]

Science turned into awesome visual experience. Only the much more recent Beowulf 3D comes close visually (at least among 3d films I have seen) and "Echoes of the sun" is more fascinating for its scientific content. It's not only the 3d pov motion through space, but also the 3d pov shrinking of scale, all at the same time, as the virtual camera (and the astonished viewer with it) moves and shrinks to explore smaller and smaller scales from plant tissue to plant cells to blood cells to molecules. From this point of view (pun intended) this film is unique.

Quantum phenomena like the formation of molecules are vividly displayed, and the viewer feels surrounded by myriads of water molecules shivering and passing him by.

Many years of Japanese technical expertise and know-how, concentrated in half an hour which is the dream of a science teacher come true. In the theater where I saw this film, a woman in the audience near me spontaneously murmured "...the eye of God".

It's a good description: seeing "Echoes of the sun" you acquire an almost all-knowing vision, at least to the extent of contemporary molecular biology.

Too bad that films like this are so rare.

A spectacle with no parallel.

Wings of Desire (1987)

If cinema can ever aspire to greatness...

[10/10 · 11 April 2008]

...it surely is to be found in "Der Himmel über Berlin" (or "Wings of Desire"). The great painters like Da Vinci or Vermeer teach us that there is something spiritual in the lighting of a scene: the images in this film achieve this, as they do in Dreyer's films or Tarkovski's. Yes, spiritual, not only because there are angels in the film (with, interestingly, minimal or no mention of God or religion), which would be too obvious, but because of the dialog, the poetry (R.M. Rilke and Peter Handke), deep feelings with a touch of humor, the music, the all-encompassing verbal texture, a perfect use of B/W vs color, even a perfect use of architecture, and, why not, those angels that respect, value and cherish every human life, however lonely, despaired or miserable.

If you have lived enough, this film could act on you as a mystical catalyst. If it does not, wait until you get tired of films full of explosions, car chases, deaths and nonsense. Then you will discover that you can still watch "Wings of desire" and enjoy a motion picture.

Wim Wenders pays tribute to Ozu, Truffaut and Tarkovsky. Surely in the future others will pay tribute to him.

A perfect experience of a movie.

The Silence Before Bach (2007)

A film on pure beauty

[10/10 · 18 March 2008]

A truly cinematographic film about beauty in its purest forms: Bach's music, silence, human conversation, the human body, music instruments... Everything is shown with good taste, as if everything could represent beauty itself, even mechanical devices, old river boats or trucks painted with religious icons.

The movie itself is conceived as a music work: tensions are created and released (or not) or reformulated, there are visual leit motivs and textual leit motivs (for instance, the same words spoken by two different characters, centuries apart, in different scenes). There are reflections on music, on its formal aspect, on its almost divine reach.

A film about music through music, about beauty through beauty, self-referential and self- conscious. Humble, austere, simple and witty at the same time, like Bach's variations or Vermeer's paintings: cinematographic poetry can not get much better than that.

Too bad if it is not released on DVD: the producers and director should think better. Some people don't go to cinema just because they are ill or unluckily confined: they, too, have the right to enjoy a work of art. Isn't the director a left-wing intellectual?

Murder by Decree (1979)

We have unmasked madmen, Watson, wielding scepters...

[10/10 · 2 January 2008]

Awesome movie and an overlooked gem.

***Spoilers ahead!*** (and minor spoiler for "The sign of four" too)

Being a Sherlock Holmes fan from my childhood, I came across this movie at the age of 12 and it instantly became an absolute classic for me. As a young boy, I didn't dare to look at some of the scenes, but I saw those full black eyes in close-up and knew that the movie didn't need to rely on blood to be scary: I like movies that explore real fear, psychologically, not by disgusting you with a splattered screen.

Some commentators miss the portrayal of Holmes abilities that other films have used us to... Please, read again the canon or watch the very canonical Brett's Holmes and perhaps you will discover that both Conan Doyle and the Granada TV screen writers made an effort to develop other virtues of the character: he is not a disembodied brain, but a man of action (unlike his brother Mycroft, more brilliant according to Sherlock himself, but stuck to his armchair of the Diogenes club), he can be dry but he is compassionate with respect to suffering people and very caring of his friend Watson (this is clearly shown even in the Rathbone movies where Watson is unbearably dumb and Holmes is shown as an eccentric that tries to brush off flies with a violin pizzicato).

Besides, in "Murder by Decree" Holmes spots the erased words that Sir Charles wanted to disappear, and uses a chemical trick to uncover them. He analyzes the grape remains in his laboratory, identifying its origin and possible buyers. Then he matches his list with an independent list made by Watson at his request, and only one common name shows up: if it was set today, such a scene would involve the use of computers with flashy displays of the list search and the matching results. He deduces a lot from the fact that they are NOT being followed (in the tradition of the dog incident at midnight) and Watson catches up immediately in a nice portrayal of both their longtime friendship and the fact that Watson is not dumb: indeed, he must have above average intelligence to be accepted by Holmes as best friend and collaborator. After all, he is a doctor who served in the Indian army and in some pretty canonical portrayals even an elegant womanizer (see Hardwicke in "The sign of four" where he seduces the beautiful Jenny Seagrove in the time he bites an apple).

But I digress: in "Murder by Decree" Holmes deductive abilities are intact, only they are not thrown in our face with an over-complex chain of reasoning: real intelligence need not be spectacular, and in fact Conan Doyle's original holmesian deductions were so much more simple and natural than the ones we often see in Holmes less serious movies.

The grape analysis and list matching is pure Sherlock Holmes because he, well, Conan Doyle, precisely anticipated modern research methods, as Vidocq and the French police had done already (for instance with the introduction of fingerprinting and serious anthropometry).

It is perfectly understandable that Holmes is deeply moved by the fate of Annie Crook: he is a free mind and a privileged intellect, so Crook's fate, imprisoned and driven to madness, is probably the incarnation of Holmes' worst terrors. However cold he is, his reaction, first attacking the custodian (with the energy we could expect from a man of action) and then crying with compassion, is perfectly fit, and gives Holmes a dimension of humanity that enriches the character and the movie. Moreover, it reminds us that Holmes is deeply moral, that he did not choose the good side at random, just because outwitting Moriarty was funny, but for the sake of his convictions and sense of justice.

I have not yet mentioned Christopher Plumer and James Mason. What could I say? Christopher Plummer is my canonical Sherlock Holmes, even more than Jeremy Brett, just because that late childhood experience of seeing "Murder by decree". James Mason is one of the very first actors whose name I learned to pronounce (with Alec Guinnes, Peter Cushing, Rex Harrison and Richard Burton... John Gielgud came later to my knowledge, but he is in "Murder by Decree" too). The portrayal of genuine friendship that Plummer and Mason do is one of the best aspects of this overlooked masterpiece.

Absolutely incredible that the same Bob Clark made "Porky's". This confirms my theory that masterpieces of all sorts (cinema, painting, literature) create themselves. We people are just antennas for concepts.

Forbidden Planet (1956)

Awesome prologue to any future meta-technology

[10/10 · 14 October 2007]

***Major spoilers ahead***

Cheesy FX and a robot from the 50s may hide the most intellectually powerful sci fi movie before 2001, Tarkovski's Solaris, Planet of the Apes or Blade Runner. In fact, in terms of science fiction, it is impossible to surpass Forbidden Planet because its extrapolation of technology is complete: what happens if you have a fully accomplished technology, i.e., an immediate control of mind over matter? You must face the roar of your unconscious mind (the ID monsters) which of course you can not avoid because you (human, krell or whatever) are the product of a biological evolution and even your most sophisticated reflections are build upon the instinctive layers of the brain. All other great sci fi movies, or books, tell us the same: no matter how fast you run away from yourself riding the technological wave, you will ultimately clash with the limits of your self. Turn into the next step of evolution (2001), into an alien (Solaris), an ape (Planet of the Apes) or an android (Blade Runner): you still are somebody, and everybody has an ego.

Forbidden Planet is ultimate science fiction, and as such it hints that the only way out of the trap of our mind is self-knowledge.

The shots within the huge Krell machine are awesome, specially when you see three tiny men (Morbius, the captain and the doctor) on a catwalk in the middle of an extremely wide shaft. They appear to be real people walking, not animated FX (they even cast shadows on the catwalk), and the composite with the shaft background is perfect, even with the camera moving! I still wonder how they managed to do that in the 50s: visually and conceptually awesome. At least that FX shot is not, and will never be, dated.

Ten out of ten. A gem for those able to appreciate it.

The Blair Witch Project (1999)

Morons willingly run into a scary forest and toss common sense away

[5/10 · 21 August 2007]

I give this film a pass (just 5) because it managed to scare me (at a purely psychological level) towards the end. But the sheer stupidity of the characters is simply impossible to swallow: one of them throws the map, which in their situation is like a parachutist throwing his parachute. And, worst, when they are walking in circles, they don't think that they could just follow the river, which by the laws of physics flows downward and therefore would lead them somewhere. They could follow the river downwards, until they arrive to the sea or to civilization, or upwards, until they reach a high point from which they could see their surroundings. There's no excuse to walk in circles when there's a river in sight.

I admit that the shot of the upper half of the actress' face is pretty effective, but an inspired shot does not a good film make.

Pair this with "Mindhunters" and watch both if you think that the "play" button is at the same time the "turn off" button for your brain. If not, watch "The Shining" instead.

Don Juan in Hell (1991)

Beautiful and imaginative view of Don Juan confronting his limits

[10/10 · 21 August 2007]

Beautiful, imaginative, poetic and almost surrealistic approach to Don Juan in his late years. Rich in powerful images, like a giant shell being carried on wheels across the fields or in front of ancient buildings. The man who has found it in the sea is accompanied by his living shadow impersonated by a masked person who makes the same movements.

Herald of sensual and intellectual freedom in a decadent empire tormented by religious fears and the concept of sin, Don Juan seeks reconciliation with his legitimate wife and his father, as he seems to prepare for a change in his way of living, or perhaps even his death. He is accompanied by his loyal servant Esganarel, that suffers much of his master's leg work (and other unpleasant situations) but at least is treated like a human being, almost a friend, by a Don Juan that foreshadows modern thinking.

Witty dialog and elegant rhetoric merge effortlessly in the tradition of Moliere and of the classical Spanish writers. A pair of elegant touches of eroticism (one of them reminiscent of Velazquez paintings) and veteran Spanish actors like Fernando Guillén (fitting very well in his character) or perpetually beautiful Charo López contribute to this unpretentious and overlooked masterpiece by excellent director Gonzalo Suárez.

Mindhunters (2004)

Failed wit matching hides under gruesome booby traps

[2/10 · 21 August 2007]

I give 2 points to this unfortunately flawed film:

One point for the promising beginning, with nice cinematography and lighting, plus cool laser pointers, then some jargon that made me expect a high octane action-packed CSI-like intrigue, a blueprint of "Agatha Christie meets James Cameron in the CSI lab": pity that Renny Harlin is no James Cameron, the writer is no Agatha Christie, and the Grissom team must be eating ice-cream in a tourist-filled tropical island.

Another point for the one and only really clever twist in the whole film: Sarah reveals that she secretly set the clock 15 minutes earlier than the real time, a fact only hinted at when Sarah is seen staring obsessively at that clock (but this nice hint fades into the excess of hints at the mental weaknesses of the characters). But even this good twist is full of plot holes: the other profilers would realize the change (don't they wear their own wristwatches? or don't they just feel the passage of time?) and the murderer should be clever enough to use gloves when he/she is manipulating things, just like all murderers have done in cinema and TV ever since those delightful B&W films where Margaret Rutherford played Miss Marple.

I liked Renny Harlin's "Cutthroat Island" a lot, but just as in that film the abundance of pirate clichés was enjoyable (not unlike the abundance of western clichés in the equally enjoyable Kasdan's "Silverado"), what we expect of a new thriller is an original turn on well-known clichés, not an encyclopedia of them lacking realism or even internal coherence.

In films like "Desperate measures" or "Panic room" the characters were given strong motivations to do unlikely things (Andy Garcia's character risked his career and life, but he did so to save his child; Jodie Foster's character entered the claustrophobic "panic room" and leaved its protection, but she always had a strong motivation to do so, again the safety of her child).

In "Mindhunters", the filmmakers don't bother to psychologically justify the character's unlikely actions, like Nicole picking the cigarette: was this a metaphor of the suicidal behavior of smokers? Or Sarah telling the wheelchair man to hide, just when they had tied his wheelchair to a pipe or something: this was cruel, and unrealistically portrayed (neither him nor Sara, the most empathic character, protested at the incoherence).

In fact, after being drugged they could simply sat together, avoid eating or drinking, and wait to be rescued: their presence on the island is known by the people who sent Gabe as an observer. Well, of course they should pray that the coffee was not poisoned with a long term poison... but this would have been a too poorly elaborate way to kill a bunch of morons that seem to come right from the forest of "The Blair witch project" (at least those were not supposed to be top criminologist's).

Of course, a few gruesome deaths are there to hide the lack of brainpower under the rug... or under the viewer's limbic system.

"Mindhunters" seems the failed blueprint of a much better film. Pity that bad screen writing spoiled the idea for many years to come, until somebody gathers courage and narrative skill enough to pop out again saying "let top brains match wits to death in an isolated place".

If this happens, bring Lawrence Kasdan, Christopher Nolan and James Cameron to do the job, perhaps with some screen writing help by David Mamet to guarantee his wonderful trademark plot twists.

Don't waste your time with this one: watch Mankiewicz's "Sleuth" instead.

Dune (1984)

A beginning with Virginia Madsen can not fail

[9/10 · 23 July 2007]

Lynch's creative imagination gives a film with a high rate of intense images per square inch of celluloid, beginning with two consecutive solemn scenes: a brief introduction with an impressive Virgina Madsen as Princess Irulan and narrator of what we are about to see, and the vision of a desert where the wind blows with an epic music.

Intensity does not decay, as we found ourselves in an operatic exaggeratedly luxurious palace, the center of an already decadent empire, where very fine actors like José Ferrer and Siân Philips are dressed in spectacular dresses and matching wits with an octopus-like space- time navigator (and all that in less than a few minutes, compressing many pages of Frank Herbert's book).

If that's not original enough for you, perhaps you should wait until a giant worm that causes mega-volts of static in the desert sand swallows a huge harvesting machine, or until you see a long row of men on the dunes waiting for an even greater worm and an aspiring messiah to confirm a prophecy in a mysterious death-defying ritual.

If you think that stories are excuses to create powerful images, specially in a widescreen, that long row of men standing in the desert (while Paul walks towards his dangerous future) should not disappoint you, even if you are not a fan of Frank Herbert (I am not). As an image, it is one of the most powerful and cinematographically beautiful that I have seen. Lynch is to be credited for such a vision.

Plus an endless list of top quality actors like Francesca Annis, Max Von Sydow, Linda Hunt or Dean Stockwell to name a few, wonderful characterizations (Jurgen Prochnow is just the right actor for Duke Leto Atreides, or Lynchian Everett McGill for Stilgar) and of course Kyle MacLachlan as the charismatic heir that becomes hard-boiled leader.

9 out of 10 for a film with enough ideas and emotions to fill many films. A friend of mine had "Dune" as the only film in his VHS video collection: I bet he left the tape inside the VHS player and eventually broke the "eject" button.

Bram Stoker's Dracula (1992)

Let Francis Ford Dracula fascinate you: your neck will not regret it

[10/10 · 21 July 2007]

Brilliant inspiration by Francis Ford Coppola, and a delightful homage to the beginnings of cinema (Lumière, Mélies). Besides, it is a 100% romantic film, much more than a horror film. Traditional visual FX and modern make up FX merge effortlessly and very successfully, the photography is excellent and the production design spectacular. Wonderful costumes by Eiko Ishioka, some of them barely seen. Incredible music by Woiciek Kilar for an incredibly atmospheric movie.

Enjoyable Anthony Hopkins as cynical Van Helsing, and Gary Oldman as charming Dracula: a clever transposition of sympathies. There is abundance of cultural references to art history (the Gorgon, oriental art, paintings, 19th century gardens...) and to the time in which Stoker's novel is set (e.g. Van Helsing saying something about electromagnetic fields, then the state of the art in science, cinema itself and, interestingly, Mina naming Mme. Curie).

There are so many details to discover, that you can watch this film again and again.

10 out of 10. Almost every frame is beautiful like a painting.

Blade Runner (1982)

The best metaphysical thriller since "North by Northwest", but much darker.

[10/10 · 15 July 2007]

Underneath the spectacular and somehow sad shots of the futuristic urban landscape, deep and disquieting questions are creeping: Are my memories real? Are they my own? And if not, who am I? Was I born, or created with a banal purpose? Is my disappearance preestablished even since before my existence? Will every thought be lost? Not only my thoughts, but all of them? How do we price life?

The eye concentrates all "Blade Runner" simbology: consciousness, conscience, and the unconscious, the faking of emotions, identity, sadness facing an unfriendly future, and the killing of creators: in fact, the murder of aspiring deities. That postmodern Prometheus named Eldon Tyrell could have thought better than creating cold-hearted creatures: his demise at the hands of one of his creations (after an almost incestuous kiss) is coherent in a film obsessed with eyes.

Unforgettable scene when Pris, created to be a living sexual doll, but with a mind of her own that grants her the ability to suffer, is hiding among genuine mindless dolls. And then there is the lyric aspect of the film: a sensible romance and wonderful music, and of course that final monologue just before the last mortal replicant releases his soul (symbolized, in a very classical way, by a bird).

All this is present in both versions of the film, but the director's cut is better, more noir, more conclusive, and with a richer layering: in the commercial cut, Gaff's little figures (besides their symbolism of Deckard's situation) only serve a minor revelation, namely that Gaff had been at Deckard's home and let Rachel live, while in the director's cut the (now absolutely necessary) unicorn dream sequence turns this into a major revelation, because Deckard's intimate thoughts are known by Gaff, which means Deckard is a replicant.

Ridley Scott has never equaled himself, not even in "Thelma and Louise" or "Gladiator", and the merit of his co-workers can not be overlooked: Hampton Fancher and David Peoples as screenwriters, composer Vangelis, designer Syd Mead, FX wizard Douglas Trumbull, etc.

Not to forget Philip K. Dick's inherently philosophical literature, much of whose anticipation will continually catch us in the next years, as unfearful scientists begin to play with the possibility of creating artificial minds: beware of your offsprings!

10 out of 10 for Ridley Scott and all the rest, and perhaps for a masterpiece that, in a certain sense, created itself at the right time.

North by Northwest (1959)

Ultraperfect synthesis of romantic comedy and metaphysical thriller

[10/10 · 15 July 2007]

Until the 50s millions of elegant romantic comedies were produced, with tons of wit that screenplays seem to lack ever since. Since the 60s, millions of action thrillers have been produced, with tons of high octane fuel we can even get tired of. And in between, namely in 1959, Hitchcock placed the more than perfect merging of the two genres.

The ultimate blueprint for lighthearted adventure, with subtle metaphysical overtones such as identity without existence, overlapping layers of lie, truth and ambiguity, and not only one but two consecutive enigmatic endings, one in a stylish house (with a climax where the hero is mostly off screen, while we hear gunshots that are not even real fire, as we know later in a quite humorous way) and the other with the backdrop of the presidents' giant faces, epitomizing the whole film: a meaningless pursuit under cold, great powers that largely surpass the characters.

But even against this stone-cold backdrop there is place for a real cliffhanger and some romance, concluding with a funny visual metaphor... Summing up, Hitchcock at his best. I prefer this playful Hitchcock over the solemn ("Vertigo", "Torn curtain") or scary one ("Psycho", "The Birds") although his films always have an humorous undercurrent, again lacking in most contemporary films, that provides a necessary distance between both sides of the screen: too many films today pretend to be serious and real (in a shallow sense, of course).

A 200% perfect film, with an unforgettable Cary Grant and the beautiful Eva Marie Saint, top class villains James Mason and Martin Landau, elegant title sequence and extraordinarily thrilling music by Bernard Herrmann.

10 out of 10. You can endlessly dwell in this genuine encyclopedia of the adventure genre.

Casino Royale (2006)

Bond uses a cell phone just like yours instead of lighting cigarettes with Q's mini-flamethrower

[8/10 · 8 July 2007]

Among the best Bonds, thanks to Martin Campbell's expert direction and Daniel Craig effortlessly fitting in the wardrobe of his predecessors.

Besides the good balance between realism and acrobatic action, this Bond succeeds in avoiding a frequent mistake of the previous ones: the excess of gadgetry, now wisely turned into abundance of multimedia technology that we are all familiar with (well, the embellishments in the geographic search were very cool but perhaps a little too much).

Less gadgetry means less Q or R (none is seen in this film) and, thankfully enough, more M played by that wonderful and distinguished actress, Judi Dench, whose presence alone puts any film in the top class.

Good chemistry (more believable than usual) between Craig and extremely beautiful Eva Green, who delivers a multi-layered performance much above the usual needs of Bond films but very welcome in this one.

Plus an excellent villain and spectacular highlights that don't diminish the rest of the film: in fact, there is a good amount of intrigue that does not need to be fueled by gunshots but is sustained by sheer interest and anticipation, as in the best suspense films.

8 out of 10 for the film, 10 out of 10 for the cast (and please, bring back the villains that survived: Mathis, Mr. White...) I had never been so satisfied to read in the end credits that "James Bond will return".

The Hunt for Red October (1990)

Very cool technological thriller with wonderful music

[9/10 · 30 June 2007]

***Spoilers just ahead*** Why "cool technological thriller"? In one of the highlights of the movie, Sean Connery, the coolest submarine captain since James Mason's Captain Nemo, decides to navigate blindly thanks to an exact cartography of a narrow path between underwater mountains. His officers reluctantly accept: they know it's difficult but possible for a prepared crew. Few minutes later, the captain enters the bridge and orders a faster navigation: this implies fast recalculations for which, again, the crew is well prepared. Then they are attacked by a torpedo, which implies even more recalculations, stopwatch in hand, by Sam Neill, the perfectly confident and loyal first officer, while you hear a solemn and thrilling music. That's cool enough for me.

Why "wonderful music"? Basil Poledouris has been very successfully inspired by the Russian classics, but at the same time knows what to do in a McTiernan film. Some of the "background tension" music is symmetrical in time: it sounds exactly the same played backwards, and perhaps this explains why it sounds so enigmatic and familiar at once. Truly classical.

Action and music merge effortlessly in a "Cold War" film where Russians are portrayed as human beings and not as clumsy villains.

9 1/2 out of 10 for McTiernan and his crew.

Invention for Destruction (1958)

Jules Verne + Cinema = Karel Zeman

[10/10 · 26 June 2007]

***Spoilers ahead*** My late childhood had two cinematographic icons: Star Wars and this film by Czech genius Karel Zeman. A Jules Verne encyclopedia where XIX century illustrations come to life in exquisite black and white photography, combined with stop motion and conventional animation. Verne's spirit of adventure is fully present throughout the film, as well as a very modern questioning on the moral limits of power and advanced technology. In fact, it brings atomic energy into Verne's universe in a very elliptic and elegant way. Also elliptic and elegant is the demise of the villain, with a (probably nuclear) explosion sending his hat flying over the sea. The resolution of the film is symbolic and very satisfactory, something very rare today, when a lot of films don't seem to know how to end themselves.

I was fortunate to catch this gem in reruns on local TV in the late 70s: it enhanced my enjoyment of Verne's fiction and of cinema.

10 out of 10 for Karel Zeman, under-appreciated master of imagination.

Highlander (1986)

My favorite "bad" movie

[8/10 · 25 June 2007]

In fact I even enjoy the much worse "Highlander 2"!

Why do I like "Highlander"? Certainly not because an ancient warrior turns a punky psycho-killer and mad driver (probably an immortal would calm himself down across the centuries), or because of that wrestling opening sequence, or Sean Connery loosing a sword fight (and his head) to an ugly barbarian.

I like "Highlander" for its vital optimism (Ramirez and McLeod running by the sea), the idea of millennia of accumulated experience (not very developed, of course: if interested, you can read "The boat of a million years" by Poul Anderson), those stylish perspective shifts that work as transitions between ages (Mulcahy playing Ridley? They produced "The Hunger" together) and some swashbuckling (with back flips like the ones Daryl Hanna's Pris did in "Blade Runner"). The energetic music does not bother me at all.

And, of course, very nice views of the Highlands. Funny that Lambert plays a Scotsman, and Connery instead plays someone called Ramirez (but he could be Scottish too: it is clear that he has traveled a lot, even to Japan, which is logical for an immortal to avoid revealing his gift).

Summing up, a "bad" film much more enjoyable than lots of other more pretentious, and supposedly better, films.

8 1/2 out of 10 for a quintessential popcorn evening.

Things to Come (1936)

Inspiring extraordinary anticipation

[9/10 · 25 June 2007]

Geniuses William Cameron Menzies and Herbert George Wells craft this extraordinary anticipation film, with ambition and scope hard to find today. They predict World War II and the way Great Britain was attacked, and also the fact that the war would be followed by a space race. They change the timing; in the film the war and the space exploration are much longer, but there are so many qualitatively correct things that it's amazing. We even see an helicopter (the film is older than them).

Unforgettable giant planes and a futuristic meritocracy of scientists that seem Romans with bubble-helmets: if you can see through those funny costumes you may appreciate the state of the art architecture by masters from the 30s, Well's vision of a rationalistic society, interesting reflections on the nature of power, and John Cabal as archetype of the adventurous and inventive human being, the one that chooses to shape reality and not to be shaped by it.

9 1/2 out of 10. Inspiring like that final monologue by John Cabal.

Brainstorm (1983)

Strong ideas turn visual as scientists play dangerously with mind

[8/10 · 22 June 2007]

Douglas Trumbull should make more movies.

The depiction of working scientists is quite realistic, with their obsessions, fears and friendships, and specially their effort to do research in spite of corporate rivalries.

Plus an almost Jacques Tati-esquire sequence of machines gone crazy.

Plus stunning visual effects of extreme motions and flight.

Plus a device that can record the soul in a golden tape and send it by phone: no doubt in that near future (we see a few very nice futuristic buildings) phone lines have very broad bands, but then... why do phone boxes seem to belong to 1983? Are they retro style? Plus concepts for a mature audience: the absurdities of sexual obsession, the danger of psychological damage in kids, a couple regaining mutual love, and interesting (in fact very classical) depictions of hell and heaven.

Plus Christopher Walken as the good guy (for once) and enigmatic Natalie Wood as distinguished scientist.

8 out of 10 A feast for the eyes that makes you think, too.

Tron (1982)

Visual paradigm shift to 3D freedom

[9/10 · 22 June 2007]

My parents taught me that cinema had cultural and entertaining value. But when Tron was released I had already seen "Star Wars" and learned another, perhaps more basic, lesson: you go to movies to see things that you had never seen before (like that huge space ship in the opening of SW). Could that wonderful "loss of visual virginity" be experienced again? It could, thanks to the computer wizards of Tron and futurist designer Syd Mead ("Blade Runner") equaled in imagination only by Jean Giraud (Moebius).

Like in SW, the camera could fly freely everywhere, no longer limited to slow travelings, zooms or attachment to the wing of an airplane. The virtual point of view was free and truly tridimensional. What in SW was achieved thanks to Dykstra's computerized camera, in Tron was by means of a fully digital world, and the camera motion was "only" a matter of calculation... Enter amazing networks and awesome ever-shifting perspectives over apparently infinite geometrical patterns, faceted mountains and very original hypercool vehicles (even the "real" helicopter is cool, with those red fluorescent lines).

"Computer world" strict, military hierarchy, adopted its aesthetic from video games, or was it the other way around? Anyway, I saw Tron at age twelve and understood the computer concepts very well. I had seen other sci-fi movies with less realistic robots or computers, and many scientific documentaries on computers, and Tron was a confirmation more than a revelation. In fact, I felt anchored in the past during years, until very recently (now we have Internet, cell phones and multimedia laptops). Even the idea of molecules suspended in laser beams has turned not only real but routine.

That flight of transition into the "computer world" made me move in my seat, with real feelings of speed and acceleration, something I had only experienced with, again, Star Wars films (nowadays it's a usual feeling with all that CGI). No need of 4D moving seats: I even feel the motion when I watch Tron or SW on my TV at a normal distance.

And that butterfly-shaped solar sail... What I said: I go to movies to see (beautiful) things I have never seen before.

9 1/2 out of 10 Make a sequel now!

Batman Begins (2005)

Is batman a Nolan archetype?

[9/10 · 20 June 2007]

What I enjoyed most in "Batman Begins" was its effort to be realistic: Batman's suit is made of a special material, whose properties are realistically described and portrayed. His car does things we have seen in TV shows and in footage from real car chases: realism is more important than speed in this car and in the film itself.

But don't be fooled: Nolan does not try to convince us that a "batman" could exist thanks to a strong will, intensive training and modern technology. Realism is just the perfect guideline to make a fiction more complex, deeper, and more interesting to analyze (if you want to), with a richer texture and many details that you can pick on second viewing.

This batman does not live in our universe, but at least his universe is almost as complex as our own, and not that oversimplification of the previous batman films. Nolan creates an interesting atmosphere, as he does in his other films, and brings back his usual obsessions on identity, the illusions of mind and the actions that define us.

And after all... in what film do you hear someone talking about "jungian archetypes"? Another touch of realism and a psychological joke, something you could expect from the director of "Memento".

9 out of 10. I can't wait to see "The Dark Knight".