He wears his French New Wave/Cassavetes influences on his sleeve here, too bad he's wearing a pretentious long-sleeved turtleneck. Nepotistic director Sam Levinson did some good work on Euphoria, but I have to say the acting was what climbed out of his need to shove every word in the dictionary through their mouths. Same goes with this film, although far more self-indulgent and frustratingly hilarious to watch. The acting is good but not good enough to climb out of the word weeds. Opinions?
Reviews
8 Reviews
Pavilion
(2012)
Hyper realism portraying moments of modern youth...
5 March 2013
...turns out to somehow lack any emotional significance for the viewer. I usually love minimal films like this. Gerry and especially Paranoid Park by Gus Van Sant, along with La Vie De Jesus, were obvious influences.
The framing of every otherwise trivial action (the film is just a series of moments) is so precise and beautiful and paced very well with the editing, but lacks any character development so in the end left me careless. I know this is supposed to represent the feeling of youth, but it's too melancholy in a way. Where are the moments of flaw. I hated Gummo, but it seems like an ultra realism marriage between this film and Gummo would be amazing.
A very stylistic and experimental first feature. I enjoyed watching it in an outdoor gay bar in Austin, Texas as well.
The framing of every otherwise trivial action (the film is just a series of moments) is so precise and beautiful and paced very well with the editing, but lacks any character development so in the end left me careless. I know this is supposed to represent the feeling of youth, but it's too melancholy in a way. Where are the moments of flaw. I hated Gummo, but it seems like an ultra realism marriage between this film and Gummo would be amazing.
A very stylistic and experimental first feature. I enjoyed watching it in an outdoor gay bar in Austin, Texas as well.
V for Vendetta
(2005)
V for Vendetta: or the Wachowski Bros learned to stop carrying and mess up Alan Moore's Writing!
18 March 2006
There are many ways to completely ruin great work. Even if you're trying really hard to be authentic to it. Let's face it, the Wachowski Brothers do not know how to write dialogs. There idea of characters are the kind on one end who have infinite knowledge of all subjects and are able to articulate them and the kind on the other end who ask the "W' rudimentary philosophical questions that represent how they interpret the audience: ignorant. So us moronic viewers have to sit through a pile of overly-articulate monologue's and then right after the questioning of them by the "Keanu" character played in this film by Natalee Portman (who to her best efforts tries to do a good job.) So beyond ruining some great Alan Moore writing, the brothers decide to let some assistant director take the helm of the director's chair. The opening sequence was like a poorly made Bruckhiemer movie (as well as the ending sequence). Laced with melodramatic musical score and some editor who loves to cut, never letting us look at a single shot for more than 1 second. It was disorienting, especially compared to how most Moore comic books are sequenced, in a very cinematic way. I'm glad I saw it, because I realized why Moore disowned it and it's unfortunate that no one has able to give any of his work the appreciation it needs.
Tears of the Sun
(2003)
An enjoyable, but melodramatic war film.
10 June 2003
The characters are too one-dimensional to begin with, in the film, which is okay, if the audience eventually learns more about them. Unfortunately, we never get to see any development or potential for characteristics. This leads us to believe that these soldiers are actually robots, who have somehow gained emotion.
Bruce Willis plays a subtle, cold-hearted Lieutenant who spontaneously gains a conscience after learning that he must leave behind a group of Nigerian Refugees. He turns back and stays with them, urged on by Monica Belluci's character (a humanitarian doctor from Spain). His troops, a group of about several men, follow him, some for the idea, some against it. At the climax of a slaughtering of the village from which the refugees came (by Nigerian Rebels), all the soldiers suddenly gain consciences along with their Lieutenant.
This film followed a lot of elements in the typical humanitarian war movie, but it also avoided many. An enjoyable melodramatic war film that redeems itself with lack of back story and the constant vulnerability of the protagonists.
I loved how it all took place in the Nigerian jungle and didn't have to track back to explain the soldiers' origins. But I did hate that it used unrealistic melodramatic moments to manipulate us to tears.
Bruce Willis plays a subtle, cold-hearted Lieutenant who spontaneously gains a conscience after learning that he must leave behind a group of Nigerian Refugees. He turns back and stays with them, urged on by Monica Belluci's character (a humanitarian doctor from Spain). His troops, a group of about several men, follow him, some for the idea, some against it. At the climax of a slaughtering of the village from which the refugees came (by Nigerian Rebels), all the soldiers suddenly gain consciences along with their Lieutenant.
This film followed a lot of elements in the typical humanitarian war movie, but it also avoided many. An enjoyable melodramatic war film that redeems itself with lack of back story and the constant vulnerability of the protagonists.
I loved how it all took place in the Nigerian jungle and didn't have to track back to explain the soldiers' origins. But I did hate that it used unrealistic melodramatic moments to manipulate us to tears.
No Man's Land
(I) (2001)
Brilliant! An uncommon delineation of war
9 October 2002
One of the most eerie resolutions to a film that I've ever seen. This film is more than just one of the only depictions of the Bosnian/Serbian struggle: this movie is about the selfishness of humanity. It takes a dive into the upheaval of indifference, and reveals the true childishness of quarrels.
This was very well written, with dramatic elements as well as stark wit. This is more than a dark comedy, but a realistic depiction. I guess life is often dark and amusing, I don't know. Anyway, it's one of the best scripts of the year, that's for sure. The photography is always fluid, but very slow; which, in a way, fits the stories tempo. I loved the acting and i loved how terrible the ending was. (storywise, i'm not badmouthing the movies chosen ending.)
More people need to see this film, as it was quite under-rated. One of the best films of 2001, amidst many good films.
This was very well written, with dramatic elements as well as stark wit. This is more than a dark comedy, but a realistic depiction. I guess life is often dark and amusing, I don't know. Anyway, it's one of the best scripts of the year, that's for sure. The photography is always fluid, but very slow; which, in a way, fits the stories tempo. I loved the acting and i loved how terrible the ending was. (storywise, i'm not badmouthing the movies chosen ending.)
More people need to see this film, as it was quite under-rated. One of the best films of 2001, amidst many good films.
The Devil's Backbone
(2001)
A great story, crafted with perfect rising action!
9 October 2002
Through it's grim visuals, "El Espinazo del Diablo" (The Devil's Backbone) tells a hopefull tail in the midst of a post-Spanish civil war. The premise centers around a ten year old boy, who's father died previously in the war. Now, he is being sent to a remote orphanage to live. As the story unfolds, the boy never really settles with his environment.
Throughout the film, each character displays themselves very well. Although, small, these characters are remarkably dynamic and serve as great propositions to the climax. I was surprised at this movies depth, due to the director behind it, Gullimero Del Toro. I say this because after seeing Blade II, I didn't think too highly of him.
This film utilizes it's environments with great photography, special effects and editing. It endorses it's story with dynamic characters and good acting, without taking away it's visual complexity.
All in all, this is a brilliantly gritty film, with great acting by the cast and all of the children. Beside being a bit predictable, this was one of the better films to come out in 2001!
Throughout the film, each character displays themselves very well. Although, small, these characters are remarkably dynamic and serve as great propositions to the climax. I was surprised at this movies depth, due to the director behind it, Gullimero Del Toro. I say this because after seeing Blade II, I didn't think too highly of him.
This film utilizes it's environments with great photography, special effects and editing. It endorses it's story with dynamic characters and good acting, without taking away it's visual complexity.
All in all, this is a brilliantly gritty film, with great acting by the cast and all of the children. Beside being a bit predictable, this was one of the better films to come out in 2001!
Memento
(2000)
The most innovative film ever to grace the cinema!
9 October 2002
`What if I just forget about what I've done.what if I just pretend it never happened.' This is a quote from Leonard Shelby (played by Guy Pearce) as he speaks of his own acts in the film `Memento'. Written and Directed by Christopher Nolan, adapted from a short story by his brother John Nolan; `Memento' is one of the greatest films I've ever seen. This is such a tough film to break down, due to its complexity; but I believe once you do break it down, you'll have a feeling of accomplishment that you would never have figuring out any other movie.
Looking at this film broadly, it seems so simple: `Memento' is a psychological thriller about a man seeking revenge on his wife's rapist and killer. This is definitely a classic storyline. As you indulge yourself deeper into it, you find that the main character has a memory condition called Short-term Amnesia. This is a rare case where you remember your past before your accident, but you can't remember what you've done fifteen minutes ago, after your accident. To top that off, the film is edited where the last scene is the beginning and the beginning scene is the last.
Although the film is structured oddly, many claim that this film is non-linear, but it's actually more linear than most films. If this film weren't as linear as it actually is, it wouldn't even work. The only obstruction is that the film is shown chronologically backwards by scene.
As the film unfolds, the audience sees the darker side of the protagonist, which wasn't often seen in Classic Cinema. This is also true with the storyline; like the character, the stories weeds off and changes the audiences' perspective. The balance in the film is barely apparent and the key to this film, I believe, is disruption. This film was meant, among other things, to trick the audience. The great part about this film is, other than the disorder of scenes chronologically; this film hardly ever manipulates the audience with tricky character placements and camera shots. The only way it does, is through it's main character Leonard Shelby and this is due to the fact that he has a memory condition. Therefore, his mind is foggy and very uncertain. This mentality of the main character transcends beautifully upon the audience. This is one of the only films to ever do this.
Technically, this film is a basic marvel. Veteran editor Dody Dorn: who was nominated for several awards, superbly pieced this film together. I loved the subtle photography and the ambient music and sound. Any dramatized musical score would have probably ruined the film.
All in all this is a great story powered by great acting from the entire cast. The editing is sheer and flawless, with obstructions of only intentional means. The screenplay couldn't have been better, even from the simplistic basic story that the film displayed. Christopher Nolan is a prime example of a dedicated filmmaker, with so many aspirations for originality. A marvel accomplishment and one of the greatest films of all time!
Looking at this film broadly, it seems so simple: `Memento' is a psychological thriller about a man seeking revenge on his wife's rapist and killer. This is definitely a classic storyline. As you indulge yourself deeper into it, you find that the main character has a memory condition called Short-term Amnesia. This is a rare case where you remember your past before your accident, but you can't remember what you've done fifteen minutes ago, after your accident. To top that off, the film is edited where the last scene is the beginning and the beginning scene is the last.
Although the film is structured oddly, many claim that this film is non-linear, but it's actually more linear than most films. If this film weren't as linear as it actually is, it wouldn't even work. The only obstruction is that the film is shown chronologically backwards by scene.
As the film unfolds, the audience sees the darker side of the protagonist, which wasn't often seen in Classic Cinema. This is also true with the storyline; like the character, the stories weeds off and changes the audiences' perspective. The balance in the film is barely apparent and the key to this film, I believe, is disruption. This film was meant, among other things, to trick the audience. The great part about this film is, other than the disorder of scenes chronologically; this film hardly ever manipulates the audience with tricky character placements and camera shots. The only way it does, is through it's main character Leonard Shelby and this is due to the fact that he has a memory condition. Therefore, his mind is foggy and very uncertain. This mentality of the main character transcends beautifully upon the audience. This is one of the only films to ever do this.
Technically, this film is a basic marvel. Veteran editor Dody Dorn: who was nominated for several awards, superbly pieced this film together. I loved the subtle photography and the ambient music and sound. Any dramatized musical score would have probably ruined the film.
All in all this is a great story powered by great acting from the entire cast. The editing is sheer and flawless, with obstructions of only intentional means. The screenplay couldn't have been better, even from the simplistic basic story that the film displayed. Christopher Nolan is a prime example of a dedicated filmmaker, with so many aspirations for originality. A marvel accomplishment and one of the greatest films of all time!
Road to Perdition
(2002)
A subtle masterwork of a great forthcoming director!
9 September 2002
This couldn't have been better. The strong restraints on Mike Sullivan's expressions couldn't have been portrayed in any other way. Tom Hanks delivers the best performance of his career. Young Tyler Hoechlin drives an emotional wheel; playing the basis character for the story. And veteran Paul Newman gives one of his best character performances in a long time.
This film is based on a bold graphic novel by Max Allan Collins and Richard Piers Rayner. This is a father/son story which basically employs the two candidates solely unfit for the roles. Mike Sullivan had no father as a child, so John Rooney took him in. Although a generous man, Mr. Rooney involved himself in organized crime. Therefore, the debt of Sullivan was only to be paid off in involving himself in the business. Now, Sullivan has a wife and two children and is trying to keep his children safe, but at the same time pay back his boss. The events to follow, will test Sullivan's loyalty and embrace his family's fate.
With a great adaptation by David Self, the dialogue comes out seldomly, but yet very virtuous. The story unfolds in a beautiful 1930's setting (Brilliant Art Direction by Richard L. Johnson & Nancy Haigh) covered with a dark rainy (snow on the ground) exterior. Driving the story, is Thomas Newman's wonderful Irish score, settling in only when necessary.
But the most important technical element in the film is Conrad L. Hall's beautiful photography. This is some of the best cinematography I've seen; and I watch a lot of films. The scene when Mike and Michael are in the car, entering Chicago is quite impressive. The shot starts at the front of the car, revealing Mike(Hanks) through the windshield. It subsequently dollys around to the side of the car, to see Michael(Hoechlin) awakening and peering out his side window. As it continues, it trucks sideways and dollys back, completely around the car and reveals a gorgeous scenic 1930's Chicago.
With a great cast and crew, the principle man creates a brazenly amazing film. I'm talking about Sam Mendes, who made his feature film debut in 1999 with American Beauty. (won him various awards) Before American Beauty, Mendes worked as a play director for the British Theater, but decided that he wanted to move on saying that there was nothing new for him in theater. With only two films, Sam Mendes has marked himself in my book as one of the great directors (In a list of about twenty-five).
The film illuminates a brazen genre that has its hits and misses and expresses the true theme brilliantly. The photography, acting and story is phenominal. I'm still waiting for Scorcesee's Gangs of New York, but for now, I'm fully confident in saying that this is the "Best Film of the Year". Considering it's competition (Signs, Insomnia, Minority Report) thats a strong statement.
This film is based on a bold graphic novel by Max Allan Collins and Richard Piers Rayner. This is a father/son story which basically employs the two candidates solely unfit for the roles. Mike Sullivan had no father as a child, so John Rooney took him in. Although a generous man, Mr. Rooney involved himself in organized crime. Therefore, the debt of Sullivan was only to be paid off in involving himself in the business. Now, Sullivan has a wife and two children and is trying to keep his children safe, but at the same time pay back his boss. The events to follow, will test Sullivan's loyalty and embrace his family's fate.
With a great adaptation by David Self, the dialogue comes out seldomly, but yet very virtuous. The story unfolds in a beautiful 1930's setting (Brilliant Art Direction by Richard L. Johnson & Nancy Haigh) covered with a dark rainy (snow on the ground) exterior. Driving the story, is Thomas Newman's wonderful Irish score, settling in only when necessary.
But the most important technical element in the film is Conrad L. Hall's beautiful photography. This is some of the best cinematography I've seen; and I watch a lot of films. The scene when Mike and Michael are in the car, entering Chicago is quite impressive. The shot starts at the front of the car, revealing Mike(Hanks) through the windshield. It subsequently dollys around to the side of the car, to see Michael(Hoechlin) awakening and peering out his side window. As it continues, it trucks sideways and dollys back, completely around the car and reveals a gorgeous scenic 1930's Chicago.
With a great cast and crew, the principle man creates a brazenly amazing film. I'm talking about Sam Mendes, who made his feature film debut in 1999 with American Beauty. (won him various awards) Before American Beauty, Mendes worked as a play director for the British Theater, but decided that he wanted to move on saying that there was nothing new for him in theater. With only two films, Sam Mendes has marked himself in my book as one of the great directors (In a list of about twenty-five).
The film illuminates a brazen genre that has its hits and misses and expresses the true theme brilliantly. The photography, acting and story is phenominal. I'm still waiting for Scorcesee's Gangs of New York, but for now, I'm fully confident in saying that this is the "Best Film of the Year". Considering it's competition (Signs, Insomnia, Minority Report) thats a strong statement.
Tell Your Friends