Change Your Image
yes_i_am84
Reviews
Troy (2004)
Fine entertainment - purists might have some issues,
I happen to be quite fond of Greek mythology. Since I was a kid, I used to enjoy immensely the "stories of gods and heroes", as my book labeled them. Building on that, watching this movie I often found myself thinking : No, the war of Troy was not a blitzkrieg. Yes, Patroclus was Achilles' "young protégé", with all that this implies in the culture of the time, not his cousin. Yes, gods and divine messengers are overwhelmingly present in the Iliad, while they are nowhere to be found in this movie. Yes, ancient Greek, Persian and Roman cultures and histories seem to be mixed here in a colorful pastiche in pure Hollywood fashion. And so on.
I forgot to mention that maybe Greek temples have been temples at some point before being ruins, that Homer would have worked a lot more on the oh-so-corny dialogs that Paris and Helen are forced to utter in this movie, and that it is kind of childish to *always* make the bad guys utterly ugly, as well.
That being said, I enjoyed this movie a lot. After all, suspension of disbelief is (or should be, at least) easier to achieve in a fictional story based on another fictional story, than in a "true account"-type of work. And there are a lot of things in this movie that make it easier.
First of all, the cast. I was all prepared to dislike Brad Pitt's Hollywoodized portrayal of Achilles, but you can't help to be entertained by his amazing screen presence, "super-hero" aura (that does not prevent a handful of secret tears on Hector's body) and yes, even the bombastic lines he shouts from the Myrmidons' ship. I won't add a lot of words to the general praise that Eric Bana deservedly received for his charming, well-rounded portrayal of Hector. I will just limit myself to an enthusiastic agreement. Orlando Bloom is just as irritating and childish as he should be in his role as Paris. The ladies - Diane Kruger, Saffron Burrows, Rose Byrne and Julie Christie in a cameo as Achilles' mother Thetis - all do more than good jobs. In particular, I thought that Saffron Burrows stole every scene she was in in her relatively small role as Andromache, her beauty and intensity almost outshining Kruger (that does a very "human" and down-to-Earth Helen). Brian Cox and Brendan Gleeson as Agamemnon and Menelaus respectively, Sean Bean as Odysseus, and especially Peter O'Toole as Priam, all deserve their part of the accolades.
Secondly, the visuals - inaccurate as they may be with respect to techniques and fighting styles, the battles rock, especially the first one on the beach. They succeeded much more that the ones in "300" to involve my attention. And a special mention should go to Achilles' and Hector's duel, very skillfully choreographed and performed.
Thirdly, the costumes and scenarios - once again, fantasy has in more than one case yielded to faithful reconstruction, but one ends up not thinking a lot about it in the jubilation of colours and action.
All in all, I would still go for the great "Odyssey" brought to the TV screen by Dino De Laurentiis in Italy and Europe when my parents were kids. But "Troy" is not bad, looking at it with an open perspective. Not bad at all. Raise your hands, anyone who didn't feel some satisfaction at the moment in which Hector appears in front of Troy's walls to meet his rival? :)
Brokeback Mountain (2005)
This *blew* me *away*...
While the closing credits of "Brokeback Mountain" were scrolling down my TV screen yesterday night, what I was feeling was, most of all, the need to sit in front of my computer and share the emotions this movie had caused in me right away. I had to wait until the next morning to do it, but now that I'm here... I said it in the subject line, and I'll say it again: this blew me away, and as another reviewer has said, it is a movie very likely to make history.
Director Ang Lee and lead actors Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal take the best advantage of a meaningful and thoughtful script that appeals to the emotional intelligence of the viewer with very, very few over-the-top moments. It would have been so easy while dealing with such material! But in such hands, no way. And the result is this gem of a movie.
Ang Lee puts in this all the care and gentleness already displayed in the direction of "Sense and Sensibility", a movie that, at a first sight, bears very little resemblance of contents both to this one and to the "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon"-like productions of the director. Yet Lee's trademark can be found in all of these, and his ability of picking good stories and directing them with the best level of emotional intensity is evident in the green landscapes of Wyoming as it is in Austen's England or in a half-fantasy, half-reality Far East.
Heath Ledger is stunning in the leading role of Ennis, and as much as I admire Gyllenhaal's performance as Jack, too, I pick him as the true king of this movie. His role is maybe the more demanding of the two, as his character is the one that is less eager to become aware of the attraction he feels for his friend, and more worried that someone might know about their relationship. His internal struggle bring the best acting moments of the movie, like the goodbye between the two men after the sheep herding season is over. "We might see each other again..." "Yes. Might be." One word about the ladies: they may not have the big screen time, but they are all amazing in their small but wonderfully written roles. Anne Hathaway, Michelle Williams, Linda Cardellini, Kate Mara and Anna Faris add a lot to the already great mosaic of thoughts and feelings that this movie is.
Its dealing with homosexuality in a relatively explicit way has brought this movie to the spotlight, but it would be a tremendous and unjust simplification to reduce it to a story of two gay cowboys. In fact, it would be a simplification to reduce it to any stereotype at all. It is, most of all, a movie of subtly and intelligently conveyed feelings that I cannot recommend enough. Let it speak to your heart.
Notting Hill (1999)
Funny and uplifting... and I don't usually like romantic comedies
The simplest story you could ever think of... and quite unrealistic at the same time, isn't it? Nice but anonymous guy meeting by chance the most famous actress in the world, and a relationship - somehow - starts. Romantic comedies aren't my thing, usually, so when a friend asked me, a few years ago, to go to the cinema with her and watch *this*, I was very skeptical. Two hours later, I got out of the séance with a smile on my face, feeling refreshed and uplifted. As regards romantic comedies, and comedies in general, you'll hardly find anything better than "Notting Hill", at least in the last twenty years.
The simple and unrealistic story - yes, that one - turns out to be handled with such skill and talent from screenwriter Richard Curtis that, very early in the movie, you find yourself *captured* already. From the "Rufus-the-thief" scene on, you smile, you laugh (softly - the humour of the many memorable quotes in this movie is too nice and... well, British, to laugh out loud), you smile again, until the press conference climax is reached. You care for every single character, just because they are making you smile. Julia Roberts' Anna and Hugh Grant's William, despite their being a representation of two categories of stereotypes, turn out to be someone you want a good final of the story for, and the two actors are perhaps the two more suitable actors for their respective roles (Grant in particular, even if he can be irritating in some other roles, he is really created for this one). But the honorable mention is actually deserved by the supporting cast, William's circle of friends, everyone of them would deserve a screenplay for his own character only. Very enjoyable.
"Notting Hill" isn't a masterpiece, neither has it any deep meaning... but come on, don't be snob. It's cute, it's cheerful, it's smart and it deserves your staying at home and watch it on a quiet TV evening.
Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)
There is something to admire. But...
"Either you'll love him or you'll hate him", has everybody told me about Quentin Tarantino. No other alternatives. His style is an extreme, unrealistic, grotesque one, and you can't help but adoring it or hating it. (In my circle of friends, actually, there are much more people feeling the first way.)
Well, I have to say that I disagree. My feelings were actually disappointment, some boredom and a touch of admiration for some aspects of this over-discussed movie, aspects that I will point out later. Let me tell first what I found disappointing.
After having watched "Pulp Fiction", I kept wondering about what people was so enthusiast about in that mess of violence, if it wasn't for one thing: that the gore was coupled with a witty script that, as regards dialog, was reached by very few films I ever saw in my entire life. As a lover of words, I found a lot to enjoy on this side. But what about "Kill Bill", at least about Volume One we are talking about here? If you take a look at the "Memorable Quotes" section here on IMDb, there is the totality of the dialog in the film. The strength of the movie doesn't lie in the use of words.
But there is violence. So much that, in half an hour, you find yourself laughing out loud at the screen as heads and limbs are cut off, leaving only rivers of cartoonish blood coming out from everywhere. Well, as I was laughing, I told myself - Is this really a healthy thing? Is it good that so much people enjoy that much watching a hour and a half of tomato juice - because the director's style wants to remind us every single moment that this is what we're dealing with, tomato juice? Is it good that a supposed masterpiece is made up of a pregnant woman beaten up to a near-death, then shot, then raped throughout her 4-years-long coma; a mother killed in front of her daughter; a pre-teen girl seducing the pedophile killer of her family and having her revenge in bed with him; and so many, so many, SO many limbs cut off? I don't think that this is a healthy thing, and this is why I'm angry every time that I find a Tarantinophile telling me that there is no greatest director in the world. Because all these people will watch the movie with their 6-year-old children and think "oh, no, my God, there's no problem! Even a kid could easily tell that this is fake!"
And so? What is the positive point then? We can turn around this as much as we want, but in the end, what we have here is a non-existing story filled with pointlessly over-acted acts of violence from the beginning to the end. And we find excitement and pleasure in watching them, because they are well-presented, skilfully told and nicely directed, with every right camera angle you need. I'm not sure that this is enough to make "Kill Bill" a masterpiece.
I promised that I would later have pointed out what the interesting elements of the film are, in my opinion. Of course, there are some. The last thing you can say about Tarantino is that he suffers from lack of originality! And this originality lies precisely in his ability of "putting the puzzle together", adding to the mix of citations and past cinematic references the quality of vision he undoubtedly owes at the highest level - and that you can't help but admire, whether you approve him or not.
For example, and this is to be found not only in "Kill Bill" but in all his production, he's the man of the soundtracks. You can sense it since the opening sequence when you're hit by the voice of Nancy Sinatra with "Bang Bang (My Baby Shot Me Down)" - in this movie, he makes perhaps his best soundtrack achievement to date. The best evidence of it is that it is totally unsuitable to be turned into a Cd compilation, and in this form it is very hard to listen to, but if "married" to the images, it perfectly suits every movement, every glance, every breath. Music provides also the only few moments of pause in the entire movie, like the simply adorable "Lonely Shepherd" by Zamfir which accompanies the already-classical words by Michael Madsen "That woman deserves her revenge, and we deserve to die." Brief but wonderful musical gems are to be found throughout the film and add a lot to the visual experience.
Another good thing is what I couldn't describe in any other way than a "touch of magic" that you can feel, here and there, in some moments of the movie, despite all the gore and all the violence. The moment in which The Bride, after the furious and oh-my-God-how-long fight with the Crazy 88, goes to the final battle with O-Ren, is one of them. The scene changes abruptly and all the blood is cancelled by the snow, in a white Japanese garden surrounded by a dark blue sky. For a brief moment, you experience peace, and this sensation is without a doubt provided by the director's talent. And this is not the only noteworthy moment - even in the overlong fighting scenes, which I am not a fan of, there is something "more" than an immediate level to find.
The man definitely has a thing for imagination, and he knows he has. He also knows how to let the public be part of his imagination. I can only warn this public that he also knows - more than any other director I've watched in my life - how to manipulate the audience. When you watch a Tarantino film, "Kill Bill" in primis, admire his talent, but try to be aware of this.
Deep Impact (1998)
You can't help but feeling empathy for these well-acted characters
I always glance in amazement at those people who tell me that, yes, "Armageddon" isn't a masterpiece, but at least it is enjoyable and you care about the characters. What?? I mean, can you REALLY feel empathy for anyone in Armageddon prior to falling asleep?
"Deep Impact" isn't a masterpiece either, obviously. There are some flaws in the plot, both scientifically and as regards continuity and some coincidences that basically don't happen in ordinary life. But there is quite a lot to enjoy. I'm not an avid fan of flicks dealing with the possible end of the world or of the human race (like, as I said before, Armageddon - and then Independence Day, Godzilla, and so on) but this one shines in its own right, as an earnest attempt to create a series of three-dimensional characters in an action-based film and take time to show their intimate side. The writers and the actors deserve some praise to have put up a gallery of men and women you can't help to care about. A lot of critical reviews about this film deal with the "boredom" they have suffered from watching "Deep Impact"... but what about the hour and a half of total mess and dumb dialogue "armageddon" is filled with? And you tell me that you care about the characters? Please. There should be characters first!
For example, like Téa Leoni's Jenny: a young reporter in search of a scoop who finds herself projected in front of a camera having to tell the entire world what destiny it is facing, while she is struggling with her family's complicated and sad past. Vanessa Redgrave's Robin, Jenny's mother, a woman who should have been born in another century, devastated from her not recent at all but painful divorce - yet, still worried of saving her seventeenth-century desktop by donating it to the National Gallery, and concerned about her make-up and dress when she decides to commit suicide. Robert Duvall's brave but sweet Captain Fish, last man on the Moon, who gradually becomes a father for his crew and, ultimately, for all mankind. Elijah Wood and Leelee Sobieski's Leo and Sarah, the two teenagers strongly in love with each other, a symbol for all the people who desperately struggle to survive. Morgan Freeman as the President, and then Laura Innes, Maximilian Schell, Mary McCormack, all provide touching supportive performances.
If you feel in the mood of watching an action flick with a different perspective, watch "Deep Impact", and you won't help but care about the men and women involved in a believable enough disaster. If you want to eat a popcorn after another, rent "Armageddon" and enjoy the mess.
Tre metri sopra il cielo (2004)
Not fully convincing, but not bad either
I walked out of the cinema in which "Tre metri sopra il cielo" had just been shown with mixed feelings. At an immediate level, I was pleased to have seen a nice teenager flick, well acted by promising young people, a captivating story, and so on. But when I discussed the film later with my friend, I found myself to be somewhat angered. Like they had made a fool out of myself.
POSSIBLE SPOILERS: 3MSC is about the world of teenagers in Rome, and the juxtaposition of two worlds: Babi's (a good student, a perfect daughter, a virgin dreaming of a Blue Prince) and Step's (a violent boy, doing anything of his life except earning some illegal money at clandestine motorcycle races, even if he is the son of a rich man). Despite all their differences, the two young people end up falling in love (of course). And of course all their differences will bring Heaven and Hell, moments of joy but lots of troubles in their relationship. Fine. Nothing very original, but it's soooo difficult do produce original flicks nowadays! What worries me a bit (and the reason of my little anger) is "what lies beneath", the thesis of the film: it is obvious that you are supposed to sympathise with Step. Babi's world is fake, full of formal habits that make the lives of this upper-class family empty. Step's life, on the contrary, is the adventure, the excitement, the way to experience the new. This is the film's thesis. But this, even with my 20 years of age and my being a sinistrorse, I can't accept. Nothing could ever convince me that I have to stay on the side of someone who always solves the troubles he faces by beating everyone; who steals; who thinks that the better way to obtain something is to shout louder than the other people around him. No, I won't accept it even if this someone is twenty, has green eyes, a fine smile (when nobody has beaten him in return) and a handsome physical appearance. No, I'm sorry. And I'm sorry because a lot of 14-year-old girls will see this film and walk out of the cinema with an innocent smile on their faces thinking "THIS is the guy I WANT TO MEET in my life". And at this delicate age, this is quite dangerous. That's why I was angered.
I don't want, saying this, to destroy totally this film. As I said, at an immediate level you can actually enjoy a story not very original, but finely shot,&acted by two young actors (Riccardo Scamarcio and Katy Louise Saunders) we'll see often in the future. The important thing, if you are a 12-to-19 person, is not to get badly influenced by what I told before. An average flick? Sure. But a "Film of Cultural Interest" (as they say at the beginning of the film)? A "Cult"? (as on the first page of the book on which the film is based)? Please. Italian cinema nowadays offers far better.
Monster's Ball (2001)
A film that digs deeper and deeper... (possible spoilers)
Just a preliminar advice for you: this is not a film you can watch with an eye on the screen, another on the beautiful boy/girl on your side, while eating popcorns and talking to your friend three seats far. Because it is made up of emotions, feelings and little movements, so you must enter the characters' mind and think with it if you want to get involved. And believe me, there are occasions to be involved in this disturbing, desperate yet sometimes tender story.
The passion between the two main characters, Halle Berry's Leticia and Billy Bob Thornton's Hank, is only a part of this movie where other lifes are shown: an Afro-American "dead man walking", Leticia's husband, whose crime remains almost unknown; Hank's despised and deeply unhappy son, Sonny; Leticia's obese son, who suffers for the lack of a father; Hank's father, a kind of racist and full of fake bravery, but prisoner of his illness. Of course, the attraction between two desperate people who have lost everything is the climax, and how could it be different with a sex scene like this? (by the way, I agree with other commentators saying it was necessary: watch it with your brain, not with your hormons), but there's a lot to discover in this movie. An European comment: it's strange that Halle Berry got the Oscar for it. Not because of her performance, which is great, but because usually Hollywood doesn't like films that show the dark side of America, like this one does. Racism, flaws in the attribution of capital punishment, obesity, poverty... this is a postcard from U.S. that isn't exactly what the Academy wants to show. Far better, gladiators, tigers, the good hero, the beautiful woman and the bad king...How in the hell did they give an Oscar to "Gladiator"? But this is another story, and as regards "Monster's Ball"...I highly recommend it. 4 stars out of 5.
Earth 2 (1994)
It helped some of my teenage Augusts being less boring
I was tiding my room a few days ago and found out a video tape whose existence I had forgotten, which contained some of the last episodes of "Progetto Eden" (i. e., Earth 2 in Italian). After I saw the last episode again, the question that had haunted my summers of three-four years ago (when it had been broadcast a couple of times) came back: "What happened to Devon? Please someone tell me!!!!"
Apart from jokes, this series really helped me to pass some of these middle-August afternoons when there is nothing to do and I was really disappointed they cancelled it. When I see the ridiculous creatures and dumb plots of Star Trek 12345678... INFINITE, I think that they could have given a second chance to Earth 2. In fact, despite some flaws in the plot and an ingenuous approach sometimes, there's a lot to enjoy there. Mainly, the cast of characters; Debrah Farentino as Devon Adair, the loving mother and brave explorer; Clancy Brown as John Danziger (the chemistry between the two characters, made up of rivalry, friendship, adoration for their children, struggle and a touch of love is VERY enjoyable); Antonio Sabato, Jr. and Jessica Steen as a pilot and a doctor in love with each other (actually the second is perhaps the best actress in the series, also because her character is a torn one, between her duties as a doctor and as a...spy, and her love for Alonso); Rebecca Gayheart and John Gegenhuber as the selfish Martin couple; then the children who are good too.
Another thing I really like is the absolute beauty of the landscapes and sunsets, never seen before in a sci-fi series. An example among all: the beach where Devon, John and Alonso finally meet Julia in the episode of the time-machine-spiders. Breathtaking!
The "other dimension" where humans communicate with local species is well rendered and was really able to frighten me sometimes!
I would have chosen less caricatural creatures as grendlers & co., but as I said before, if Star Trek is going on...
I'm not promising a masterpiece (after all, a Tv series is NOT made to be one!), but far more than average entertainment, yes. Do you find it absurd, ridiculous? Man, it's sci-fi, not supposed to be like the world you see when you open the door in the morning! Give it a chance! And tell me if Devon will survive!!!
Il cuore altrove (2003)
a great simple film
"Il cuore altrove" is a great film.
Great because it shows everyday life from extraordinary points of view.
Great because it tells about how ordinary people can do wonderful things, and shy people can be brave, in the name of love.
Great because it proves that you can put together a talented comic-cabaret actor (Neri Marcorè) and a showgirl (Vanessa Incontrada) and here it is: an unusual, but wonderful couple of actors for a surely unusual, but wonderful love story.
Great because it is able to convince you that very talented and experimented actors like Giancarlo Giannini or Giulio Bosetti are even more talented than you thought.
Great because it provides a touching insight of a town that everybody should be allowed to visit once in a lifetime.
Great because it makes you laugh and cry at the same time and very few films are still able to do it nowadays.
Even if, out of Italy, you won't be able to understand its spirit fully, please try to see it. You won't regret.
Contact (1997)
What a wonderful journey...
Could you imagine to write a story on how to contact "little green men", to put it in Ellie Arroway's words, and then imagine a conclusion WITHOUT Independence-Day-like little green men? Well, "Contact"'s author Carl Sagan did...and this film doesn't betray at all his book's "soul". And how could it be different, when Robert Zemeckis is the director and the main role is in Jodie Foster's hands?
Everything starts with a little girl (she has no longer her mother and is very fond of her father, a radio amateur), who really wants to communicate with someone farther away than the other coast of America. Guided by her father, according to whom "if we were alone, it would be an awful waste of space", Ellie dreams... It will take her a lifetime and her colleagues'despise to realize her dream and perceive a rhythmic sound coming from deep space... from that moment on her life will never be the same again. Her project will bluntly come on the scene and will be put, more and more, on a political and military plan; her discovery will also bring new troubles in her relationship with a theologian, "reverend" Palmer Joss (Matthew McConaughey), which always has to bring to account the conflict between religion and science, faith and empirical evidence.
While the film was proceeding, I couldn't help thinking that I was having a lot of fun. Jodie Foster is in her best shape since the "Silence Of The Lambs" days; Matthew McConaughey (even if, for the role, someone older would have been more suitable) shows that he isn't just the handsome guy coming from Texas with a nice smile; great performances from the supporting actors, James Woods, Angela Bassett, Tom Skerritt. Zemeckis'direction is respectful of the novel, intelligent and refined. And my advice for you is to listen Alan Silvestri's soundtrack... it's able to take you to the frontiers of the universe just by closing your eyes!
My conclusions are: one of the best films of a great director and a wonderful actress. Please give it a place in your hearts and your VHS's shelf, I grant it won't be... an awful waste of space!
Mercury Rising (1998)
Hollywood, for how long yet?
I'm amazed that someone on earth can still have the idea of writing, producing and performing such a film. And, most of all, I'm amazed that people want to spend money to watch it at cinema in a number high enough to allow another producer thinking that such films can still be made, and so on...
Bruce Willis has recently (at the David Letterman show, for example)shown that he's a very skilful, witty and nice man... please Bruce, would you STOP destroying your image as an actor accepting roles like this? You deserve better from life (and show-biz)!
How about THIS movie? Think of the perfectly stereotyped formula of Hollywood action flicks, and that's exactly what you will find in these two hours. Want the honest and misappreciated cop who's going to become a hero? Here it is. Want the bad lad with a sardonic grin printed on his face 24 hours a day? Here it is. Want a script full of second-rate patriotism, "true moral choices", "millions of people in danger", cheap hypocrisy and Bush-like rhetoric? Here it is, ladies & gentlemen, and the worst is that you could easily say, after the first ten minutes, what is going to happen from this moment on, up to the end.
Maybe you've just had a long and stressing working day and you're desperately waiting for a battle between Good and Evil where the former OBVIOUSLY wins (unlike what has happened between you and your head-clerk this morning). If this is what you want, take place on your sofa and watch... but get ready to fall asleep! In any other situation, please switch off your TV and go out for a walk, even if it rains...
Captives (1994)
Sad, dark, tender story. Breathtaking.
This movie was in the middle of the night but, as I saw on the TV guide that it was starring Tim Roth and Julia Ormond, I decided a timer would be well-placed. I got more than I expected from this BBC production, which, I can say now, is one of my favourite films.
WARNING:MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS The story, set in a dark and rainy London, is about a dentist, Rachel Clifford (a Julia Ormond who's perfectly filling the role) who has just gone through a hard divorce from her husband and partner at work Simon, so she decides to accept a job as a prison dentist. That's the way she comes into touch with the prison's hard reality and she meets a person who will change her life: prisoner Philip Chaney (an always wonderful Tim Roth who would deserve to be better known in my country). Their feelings are evident to each other at first sight, and in some way, a relationship begins... and, with it, troubles for the two of them, both inside their relationship and with other captives. END SPOILERS
Everything, I mean EVERYTHING, works in this film: atmosphere (the "gothic" side of London), music (by the great Colin Towns), plot, directing, and mainly the two lead performances. Rachel is a very complex character, but her dominant feeling is a desperate need of love, a need to be the center of someone's life; through Ormond's performance this is perfectly rendered. And about Roth... well, I have no words for his acting here except, perhaps, "more living than life"! Look... just watch carefully the scene of Rachel's first visit and dialogue to Philip. They are not acting but living. And by the way who said that Tim isn't filling properly the role for his physical appearance? Should everybody look like Tom Cruise? This is not the ONLY thing a woman falls for. Just look at his eyes glancing at her to find reasons for her attraction...
Overall a story that's sad, rough, dark...and tender at the same time. It will capture your attention and your breath for a hour and a half. Be nice to yourself and see!