Beasts of the southern wild [2012]

Beasts of the southern wild is a 2012 production which premiered at Sundance and gained immense success throughout the year, especially for first time director Behn Zeitlin. It tells the story of a young girl, Hushpuppy (Quvenzhané Wallis), who lives in an isolated part of the world with her father, Wink, and a handful of people who refuse to leave their homes, in spite of the incoming water rise that is threatening to destroy their houses and lives.

Beasts is a very good movie, with a touching story, interesting direction and fantastic performances, but still it failed to completely move me. I think it's because the script was not the strongest point of the film. It started out strong- I was taken aback by the wild, dirty and unexpected aspect of everyday life south of the Levee, but also containing something beautiful and natural that you are attracted to, no matter what. I loved the fact that the people were celebrating life even when they didn't have anything else but those houses, when all hope was lost, when they knew the storm is coming. The Bathtub (the town) was made of survivors, and Hushpuppy was the first and strongest of them, despite her age. Wink, her father, is tough on her, but mostly because he wants her to succeed, so he treats her bad enough to make her strong and resilient. But this where the story mostly lies in- survival- and it doesn't go much further than that, unfortunately, which is a pity. Also, a thing I didn't quite get or see the relevance in the end, is the monster deal, although the confrontation was interestingly made.

That being said, the rest of the aspects of the movie were pretty flawless. The direction was beautiful and suited the wild nature of the environment, especially with its shaky camera and, sometimes, not very focused camera shots, and the set design was very well made and incredibly realistic. I also loved the score of it, and I think it should be rewarded somehow. What we should really talk about is the casting, and especially the performances of the actors. Quvenzhané Wallis was flawless and, for such a young girl, she delivered much more than expected. Dwight Henry was also very good and played the part of the father with the right amount of love and toughness, and the rest of the supporting cast was great.

Beasts of the southern wild is a wonderful film from many points of view, but in the end, it fails to make a real difference or, better said, fails to impress and give a lasting impression over time. It is a well made film, beautifully shot, but just not....enough.

"I see that I am a little piece in a big, big universe, and that makes everything right!"

Children of Men [2006]

Children of Men is a 2006 dystopian film directed by Alfonso Cuaron and adapted for screen from a novel by P.D.James. It features Clive Owen in the part of a lost, sad man who is suddenly thrown in a world of conspiratorial events and death, but also hope and survival. It is definitely one of the best films of its genre and deserves all the praise and attention it has gotten.

The premises is simple, yet tragic and heartbreaking: in the year 2027, the world is facing chaos, death and violence, but especially infertility, something that has left the Earth population in a grey, unhappy and with no ounce of help state of mind. Theo is contacted by his ex wife and asked to help transport a refugee, Kee, who proves to be much more precious than expected. The end is both positive and negative, and leaves a bittersweet taste in your mouth. The script has a very interesting concept, with a great mix of drama, love, action and existential themes. That's actually one of the films' strongest points: its ability to create a dystopian world without overreacting or relying too much on sci-fi or science. Children of Men talks more about people, the evolution of mankind and relationships, and less about new technological developments or unseen gadgets, and that gives it more soul and ultimately, impacts you on a much deeper level.

Alfonso Cuaron is perfect for this type of movies. He has a very dynamic shooting style and that works here, especially in the running scenes. There are many details that I loved and appreciated: the blood on the camera, the close-ups, the shaky camera in some points. The dark cinematography complemented the direction very well, as did the sets.

The casting was probably one of my favorite things in Children of Men. Clive Owen in one of his career's best parts- he gave an amazing performance as the sad, miserable man who finally finds a reason to live and fight, 20 years after the death of his son and separation from his wife. He has always been a favorite of mine and I always wonder why doesn't he get more roles, or better ones, to say so, considering this performance and the one in Closer. Another standout was definitely Michael Caine as the wacky, adorable old Jasper, and of course, Julianne Moore also impresses in her short time on screen. One mention I have to give is to Oana Pellea, the woman playing Marichka, the gypsy  who is actually Romanian- when you were hearing her talking rubbish in a weird language, that was actually Romanian. It was quite cool for me to recognize that- she is a loved and appreciated actress here. 

In the end, Children of Men is definitely a must see for all film lovers and dystopian aficionados. Very well made, visually appealing, wonderfully acted and with existential themes like hope, survival, love and humankind, it is highly recommended. 

Frankenweenie [2012]

Frankenweenie is the newest Tim Burton production, inspired by a 1984 short film he made for Disney, but ended up being rejected. It tells the story of Victor,a young man passionate about science and his dog, Sparky, who also is his best friend. When it dies, the kid suffers, but after an inspiring and interesting lesson of mister Rzykruski, the science teacher, he decides to bring his dog back to life by using electricity. He keeps him a secret, but after a classmate finds out, more youngsters decide to do the same with their pets and things get out of control when some don't turn out to be as cool as Sparky.

* Before going into details, let me explain the conditions of my viewing. 9 am, got there late, I was very hungry, slightly sleepy, and the very cold room I was in made me feel very uncomfortable and again, sleepy, so I might not be the best or most objective reviewer, especially when it comes to my overall opinion.

Moving on to the actual film, Frankenweenie is Tim Burton's return to his golden age; he comes back to a more interesting, less flashy side of art, and creates a funny, yet dark story for people young at heart. Although the entire process of making the movie is long, complicated and intricate, the setting and direction seem to be quite simple and smooth. It doesn't try to be more than it is, visually speaking, because it puts the focus on the story and the characters, but doesn't stop in offering the viewer a visually beautiful film, in all its darkness and simplicity, and the black&white definitely helps put across the story better.

One of the strong points were definitely the characters- they are awkward, they are quirky, and they are dark, but somehow you feel for them and understand their actions, although it's not something you see day to day. My favourite has to be the Weird Girl and her furry white cat- they stole the show for me (can we have a spin-off, mister Burton?). The science teacher, Edgar and Elsa are also highlights, in great cast.

But here's my problem and overall observation. Is Frankenweenie a good film? Yes. Is it very well made, with good direction and script? Yes. Is it visually beautiful? Yes. Was I excited about it afterwards? No. Did it touch my heart or move me emotionally? No. Do I think ParaNorman is better? Yes. Why? Because ultimately, it's funnier and more appealing.

In the end, do I recommend Frankenweenie? Yes, but only because it's Burton at its finest and it will probably be one of the animations most people will see this year.

Anna Karenina [2012]

"There can only be misery or great happiness for us"

Recently I had the pleasure of seeing Anna Karenina and oh, what a treat that was, I loved it. As you might know, it tells the story of Anna, a married woman who starts a scandalous affair with a much younger man. Based on a book by Leo Tolstoi, with a screenplay by Tom Stoppard and directed by one of my favorites, Joe Wright, this wonderful Imperial Russian classic romance will enchant you, although not completely move you.

Anna, a faithful and loving woman to Alexei Karenin, a prominent figure in Russian politics, meets, in her trip to Moscow, Count Vronski, which is to be wed to Kitty, a close friend to Anna's brother, Oblonski (Matthew Macfadyen). After her departure, he realizes he can't let go and travels to Sankt Petersburg to see her again, and so things evolve into a scandalous affair that ruins, not only her married life and her reputation, but also her health. By the end, she goes crazy as she believes her love for Vronski is not enough anymore, and begins a paranoid, mood shifting phase of her life. Although their love is still strong and he does not give up on his mistress- he loves and understands her, despite all of her antics, things go south, and the end is dramatic.

As we would expect, Wright's vision and direction is what makes this movie shine- one of the most innovative, visually beautiful and interesting methods he used for Anna Karenina was the use of stages. How can I properly explain? The intermissions, the breaks from one scene to another where made as you were actually present in a theatre and you're seeing the decor move, but all done in a much more dynamic, fluid way. There is also a mix of slow and fast pace between some acts, with an almost musical-type feel to it, that made it even more charming. This combinations were all appropriately made to highlight either a character or a storyline. This definitely set the film apart in the beginning and made it more much more appealing. Unfortunately, that didn't continue throughout the whole film, and many observed and punished him for that. Still, it's a lovely method that I have rarely seem, so I was intrigued and entertained.

One other absolutely strong point is the art direction and all sets and costumes- the latter will definitely be a major contender for awards this season. Visually, few bad things can be said about it- I personally didn't find any flaws although I am sure some will. The cinematography is stunning, the use of close-ups and interesting shots makes the film much more magical and attractive and that gives the characters more life and passion. The score has the same details as Atonement, like, for example, the use of stamps as part of the orchestral piece. It works very well with the rest of the songs to create the atmosphere required for an Imperial Russian drama.

I do want to mention the dancing scenes- I particularly liked them because of how it was directed, but also because of the choreography and the lovely use of hands. It felt quite magical, like you were in a fairytale and everything floated gracefully; it all culminated with a much more frantic, angry moment of jealousy and passion, and that was beautifully scored, too.

The casting was quite on point, with few bad choices. Kera Knightley, as the main character, Anna Karenina, did an amazing job, but still, she didn't impress or stand out for me. Don't get me wrong, everything was very well acted, but I don't feel this is a memorable or awards worthy performance. As for Aaron Johnson, the Count Vronski, I started off thinking something's not right with him- it felt too gimmicky, not quite convinceable, but by the end I warmed up to him. He did a good job overall, especially in the second part. I think Jude Law had a challenging part, just because he had to stretch himself out of his comfort zone and it paid off- he gave a powerful, sincere performance. The standout for me was Matthew MacFayden- he shined in all of his scenes and gave a wonderful performance. I would push him for supporting actor awards, but I don't think he has any chances. The cast overall is very strong and all delivered: Kelly Macdonald, Olivia Williams, Emily Watson, Alicia Vikander, Domhnall Gleeson and so on.

As you can see, I was rather impressed by Anna Karenina- for me it worked in all levels: script, character development, performances, visual appeal, direction, entertainment, everything. But I am not saying it was perfect- one common opinion I have heard is that it isn't very consistent and that it lack some extreme emotion or passion in some parts, and I partly agree with that, but I was able to take that aside and enjoy it. I really do recommend it and I hope you like it (it will probably more entertaining for the female population than the male one, but men, please do see it).

Magic Mike [2012]

Magic mike, or as most people know it, "the male stripper movie", is a 2012 production, directed by Steven Soderberg and written by Rein Carolin, loosely based on Channing Tatum's early adventures as an exotic dancer. It tells the story of Michael, a wannabe entrepreneur/experienced stripper, who meets Adam, a young and confused guy, and decides to teach him how to party, pick up women, and make easy money.

I admit I had high expectations for this movie. Besides the obvious eye candy, the recent very positive reviews and the fact that Soderbergh was directing it, both made me think I was in for a great, surprising movie. Was it? Not exactly. I liked it overall, but left the cinema with a "Meh, it was OK" attitude. Let's dissect, shall we?

Starting with the good- the direction. His reputation says it all- Steven Soderbergh is a very good director and this movie didn't stray from his usual work. I loved the way he shot some of the scenes, especially when it had to do with close-ups or revealing character development. My absolute favourite has to be the one in which we see Mike getting bored, crashing on the couch and calling Joanna- the camera, the lighting, the setting, every thing was cool and I remember that I had to tell myself numerous time during the screening not to forget to mention it.

The story is entertaining, sometimes funny, awkwardly hilarious in some parts(stripping shows), and it is quite refreshing, especially if you compare it to the usual comedies. A lot of dancing, sexy scenes, drugs and witty dialogue, but I felt the ending was a little underwhelming, story-wise I mean. OK, he figures out he doesn't want to move to another city and goes back to...to...god, I forgot her name (a first sign that the female part was utterly boring and useless). The last lines between the two were actually cool and flirtatious, but the overall ending was just...unsatisfying. The same could be said about the romance in the movie- Cody Horn, although pretty, didn't actually bring anything new or interesting to the table. I was actually more pleasantly surprised by Olivia Munn- short performance, but more believable and appealing than the main girl character.

Speaking of acting, for me it was 80% bad, or let's just say, average- the two exceptions were Matthew McConaughey (as Dallas, the owner of the business) and Olivia Munn. Cody Horn, as the main girl, like I said, gave a stiff performance (or as my friend said: "she had the same pissed-off face the whole movie"). The guys were good to look at, especially Adam Rodriguez, but their dance skills were quite hilariously bad. Channing Tatum was the only with fantastic moves and you could easily see the man has experience. I didn't really care for Alex Pettyfer.

Another interesting thing about the film- I hope I can explain it right. I thought the soundtrack was great, it fitted the stripper scenes, but I did have a problem with the sound or the sound editing- I am not very sure- I noticed in a lot of scenes, especially at the beginning, that the scene was recorded badly, like it didn't have a clear and nice sound to it. I'm obviously not an expert and maybe it was just me, but it bugged me for half of the movie.

To wrap things up, I'll just say that Magic Mike is a good movie and you will be entertained, but don't expect too much from it.

Atonement [2007]

Based on the best selling novel by Ian McEwan, Atonement is a 2007 drama directed by Joe Wright (Pride&prejudice, upcoming Anna Karenina) from a screenplay by Christopher Hampton. It tells the story of a young couple who separate in tragic conditions, as a misunderstanding sends him to prison, but never give up on each other, as he desperately tries to go back to her, even if it costs him his life, since he is forced to join the army.

Keira Knightley plays Cecilia, the woman who shares a complex, yet passionate connection with Robbie(James McAvoy), the housekeeper's son. Their love and sexual gestures are misinterpreted by Briony (Saoirse Ronan), Cecilia's younger sister, who childishly believes the man is a sex maniac after she reads a private letter, and that assumption leads to her accusing Robbie of a terrible thing after an incident in the house. The second part of the movie concentrates on her miserable life, as she now understands the consequences of her actions and very much so regrets what she has done. The finale is bittersweet, but realistic and shows us two different endings, both happy and sad.

My personal highlight of the movie was the filmmaking quality of it. I knew from the first frame and scene that I am in for a treat, because it was masterfully shot, from the trail of miniatures figures leading to the little girl, to the revelation of miss Briony Tallis. Seamus McGarvey was in charge of the cinematography and did an absolute fantastic job- I loved everything about it: the colors, the close-ups, the speed and motion of the camera, everything. My two favorite scenes are worlds appart from each other, but both visually and emotionally perfect: first, when Cecilia and Robbie are getting ready for dinner (their anxiety, fear, love, the way the camera moves from one to another), and second, the portrayal of the ending of the war on the beach in France, the shots following the three men while they discover what has happening. I also liked the fact that some of the most important parts, story-wise or character-wise, were showed from two points of view: Briony's, and then the lover's one; it helped give more depth to the script and show different sides of the coin. Last, but not least, let me mention the sex scene in the library, which was surprisingly sensual and intense and very sexy.
                                  
The cinematography helped make the sets and costumes seem perfect and realistic, and I think it's safe to say that we can always expect beautiful visuals and art direction from Wright. The score was also a highlight for me, especially the innovative typewriting inspired instrumental, or the piano or the beating on the car.

As for the acting, considering the fact that it featured some of the best British actors in the industry, you can expect it to be brilliant. James McAvoy was just dreamy, with his impossible blue eyes and sweet charm, while Keira Knightley did a good job, although she was a little stiff for my own liking. Saoirse Ronan was a standout and you could see she was a star in the making, with her big eyes, remarkable face structure and composed attitude. Nice to see Theon there (Alfie Allen, an actor from Game of Thrones), and of course, the one, the only, mister Benedict Cumberbatch, who portrayed Paul Marshall in a creepy, het convincing way. 

Atonement is very good film that deserves your attention, even if just for the visual aspect of it. If you like drama, British actors or love stories, you are in for a treat. Check it out!

Frankenstein- National Theatre UK production

Frankestein is a 2011 National Theatre UK play directed by Danny Boyle, which not only was presented as a stage project, but also was broadcasted live in cinemas all around the country. It is a superb production, starring Benedict Cumberbatch and Jonny Miller as both The Creature and Frankenstein- they switched roles every night, and so the two men got to play both roles in alternative nights. As expected, the show was not significantly different, but the two fantastic actors portrayed the parts in totally different ways. For example, from what I've heard, Miller as the Creature is much more dynamic, but also human; Cumberbatch's movements, especially in the beginning, are slower and he chose to act the part in much more raw, evil way, compared to his partner.

As you might now, it tells the story of a young man named Frankenstein who created a man, but was so shocked to see his project come to life, that he left him, running away. We experience the show from the creature perspective- we see him breathe for the first time, and then starting to learning to move, speak, eat and so on. After being beaten and considered to be a monster, he ends up at the house of a kind, old, blind man, who, unaware of the Creature appearance, takes pity in him and proceeds in teaching him how to read, speak and yearn for more knowledge and love. It is now when one of my favorite scenes occurs, as they talk about life, its meaning, why people act the way they do and others. I'm sure that if you've read the book, you will know what I am talking about. Tragedy comes when the old man's son doesn't approve of the peculiar human being, and so, it moves on and takes upon him to find Frankenstein and convince him to make him a female creature. Frankenstein agrees, but suddenly changes his mind moments before creating her, in one of the beautiful, touching scenes I have seen, as the Creature explains to him what he thinks love is and how it feels. The script, the lines, the dialogue, their interaction, everything was perfect. I think that was the point where I decided that I definitely need to read the book, as well. Infuriated, the Creature goes after the professor and ruins his wedding day, starting a long journey to the north with the scientist behind him, as Frankenstein vows to kill him.

I had the pleasure to see a screening of the production last week with Jonny Lee Miller as the Creature- he completely surprised me and I was floored by his performance. To start with, I was impressed by his commitment to the part- playing such an iconic, but also extremely peculiar and unique part, is a hard task, especially in the first half of the play, when he basically has to show us how a man learns in 20 minutes what we learn in 20 years. It's strange, yet appealing, and he convinced us all that he was the Creature. There were so many little details, so many gestures, hand movements and so on, that helped create the character and make us understand him. Miller is a force of nature and deserves all the credit, alongside his co-star, of course.

Benedict Cumberbatch played the part of the professor and had a more supporting role, although the second part featured a lot of key scenes between the two men. The talented English man, as expected, was fantastic in the part and had great chemistry with Miller, and I have a feeling that him as the Creature would have been just as interesting to watch, although, like I said, Jonny Lee was superb.

As for the actual production, I have to say that Danny Boyle did wonders. Everything was visually beautiful, especially the lighting, the score was haunting and appropriate to the play and you could see the director had a cinematographic vision.

The play was very well received in the UK, earning many accolades, including Best Actor at the Laurence Olivier awards (the Tony's of UK theatre), split between Miller and Cumberbatch. I know it will be shown in cinemas this autumn in Europe, but I really hope the people from the US or Australia or India will get to see it, too, somehow. It is a fascinating play/movie and I highly recommend it!

Schindler's List [1993]

This 1993 multiple awards winning classic is rightfully considered a masterpiece. If the mention of 7 Oscars, including Best Picture, Screenplay and Cinematography, don't give you a clue that you are dealing with a fantastic movie, then maybe the cast or the story will. Set during the second world war, it speaks about the unfair and truly awful destiny the Jews had to face during Hitler's tyrannic era. 

It's a story about Oskar Schindler(Liam Neeson), a wealthy, smart man who decides to take advantage of the troubled times that the world was facing and make money out of it. He sets up a factory in Krakow, together with a quiet, smart Jew accountant(Ben Kingsley) by accepting and therefore helping the people living in the ghetto. Stern, the faithful right man, started the initiative, giving a hand to the ones in need, but after a while, Oskar sees his efforts and decides to continue his work, by rescuing as many men and women as he can, all ending into a touching, yet unbelievable situation where he has to buy more than 1100 people from Amon, the ruthless German commandant, in order to save them from Auschwitz and the terrible fate it waited for them. For that, he was always remembered as a hero and saviour, and the next generations of the people who he managed to get out the concentration camps are now more than the survivors of the remaining Jews in Poland after 44. 

The story, therefore the screenplay, written by Steven Zaillian, after a Thomas Keneally book, was memorable, intense at points, with fantastic scenes from time to time, but it did felt a little too much. I think it's probably the only thing I would have to comment about this film- 3 hours is a bit too much, although I perfectly understand why they did it. Other than that, Steven Zaillian managed to tell a heartbreaking, tragic story in a script worthy  of its accolades, although from what I've later heard, it wasn't entirely accurate. I set out with a clear opinion and feel of mister Schindler, but  a discussion with a friend changed my mind. He said he read the book and that in it, Oskar didn't actually care about the people- his only interest was having a good, cheap workforce. This little detail was clearly modified in the script, and it disturbed me and somehow downgraded, even if just for a tiny bit,the film. They didn't tell the story like it happened, but then again, it is a film and I guess Spielberg and Zaillian have the right to somehow make the situation a little sweater and more cinematic, right?

Continuing the praises for this feature, I must mention Steven Spielberg who did a stunning job. I loved  the direction and I felt it perfectly suited the atmosphere and the tone of it, not to mention that it helped portray the characters in the best way possible, even if they happened to be a ruthless killer or a silent housekeeper.  The sudden killing spree in the ghetto on March 13 was just amazing- the whole production and the way it was shot was  sensational, memorable and chilling. The red coat detail was well placed and added more drama to the already tragic situation. 

The cinematography was definitely a high point of the film, as Janusz Kaminski used Black and White in such a beautiful, artistic and visually attracting way. The sets and costumes perfectly coordinated with the image and tone of the story, and the score, mostly orchestral, but with melancholic American hits sprinkled between,highlighted the essentials and made everything feel real. 

As expected, the perfect cast delivered in a superb way, adding even more layers to already complex characters, and somehow fitting it into that era and its customs and way of being. I know everyone remembers and deeply appreciates Ralph Fiennes for his unbelievable rendition of Amon Goeth, and I do that,too, I cannot not notice the character or its delivery, but my personal favorites were Sir Ben Kingsley and Liam Neeson. They worked together seemingly effortless and maybe I liked them more because their parts were more approachable and real. While Neeson does his best to showcase the true side of Schindler, with charisma and intelligence, Kingsley, with his natural talent and poise, stands out for me, although his part is much more quiet and reserved. 

Maybe I am overreacting about Schindler's list, but honestly, for me at least, it's one of those movies that is almost flawless, it's the type of film that perfectly blends the story with the visual and audio, creating a different, almost real word inside a frame, a film that moves you, all while featuring wonderful performances that cannot be missed. 

Schindler's List is a must see feature for everyone. 

Moonrise Kingdom [2012]

Moorise Kingdom, directed by Wes Anderson and written by him and Roman Coppola, recently premiered in Cannes to good reviews. It tells the story of two young people from a small island in New England, who decide to run away together, causing the girl's family and the boy's scout troop to work together to try to find the two lovebirds.

The first scene perfectly captures the atmosphere of the film and sets up the tone in both direction and sets and costume designs. The colors are vibrant, the shots are quick and sometimes robotic, with a lot of close-up, but it somehow works perfectly into the story, making it even more appealing.

One of the things that makes Moonrise Kingdom stand out from most of the films I've seen in cinemas recently is the script: it's amusing, but it also moves you; the characters are very likable, but none of them are really happy; it's funny, but in an unassuming, awkward way. It's black and it's white and it's magical. This is probably my favorite thing about the film. Some of the lines are hilarious, the cameos are a breath of fresh air (Jason Schwartzman, Harvey Keitel, Tilda Swinton) and the actors are so well cast, that they deliver it in the most sweet, quirky, yet adorable way. I'm trying to find a way to explain to you the kind of humor you can expect from it, but I can't and maybe it's better this way, so at least you can judge it for yourself. It's not for everyone, but I am sure most will enjoy it.

Acting wise, everyone delivered. Frances McDormand and Bill Murray provided a few laughs and worked well together, although they don't seem to be a good match. Edward Norton was just adorable as the Scout Master Ward and I loved his interaction with the younger boys, and while Tilda Swinton wasn't given enough time to shine, she still did her job wonderfully. The three real stars of the movie which deserve the highest praise were Bruce Willis and the two kids who run away, Jared Gilman and Kaya Wayward. Willis really surprised me in the role of Captain Sharp, a slow minded, but kind man who decides to help them escape, whilst the two youngsters were just outstanding. Their interaction and their chemistry, but most especially, their individual characters and their performance of them were just adorable and a pleasure to watch. I don't want to give too much away, but you'll understand me when you'll see the beach scene when they dance and kiss, or the one between them and Jason Schwartzman, or the very last scene at the house. Without them, the movie would have been nothing.

From a filmmakers point of view, it was very interesting to watch and Wes' technique is not something you see every day- well, at least, I haven't. Like I mentioned before, the way Anderson chose to shoot it was very quick, going from wide to close-ups in a rather abrupt way. It's not very fluid, but then again, the story is made in such a way that it perfectly matches it, as the actions of the kids are awkward and not natural or sometimes realistic. Visually, it's beautiful and I love the colors and the costumes that they used. The score is a little bit out of place, but then again, so is the movie, so yet again, it fits. 

In some ways, I consider it to be this year's Midnight in Paris- I say that because it's a very well made film, quite simplistic in some aspects at the first glance, but with a fantastic script, wonderful star cast and very enjoyable. Maybe it's a bit of a stretch to compare the two, but in my mind, the connection seems right.

Bottom line, Moonrise Kingdom is a joy to watch and it will definitely light up your mood. The film is extremely well done; it's unusual in many ways, but somehow it all works. Wes Anderson just delivered one of this year's best films and I highly recommend you to see it!

Le Scaphandre et le Papillon [2007]

"Le Scaphandre et le Papillon" is 2007 movie directed by Julian Schnabel and based on a novel by Jean-Dominique Bauby, with a script penned by Ronald Harwood. It tells the remarkable true story of a famous editor-in-chief of Elle who one day suffers a cerebrovascular accident and becomes complete paralyzed, developing the extremely rare syndrome called "locked in".

The movie mostly follows his life after the accident, with few flashbacks into the past to explain some things. The interesting, yet sad and chilling aspect of it comes up when he has to communicate- the speech trainer implements a unique way of him to transmit his thoughts. Because he can only blink with one eye, the woman (or whoever wants to ask him something) has to read him the alphabet and he blinks for each letter in order to form a word. It might seem hard to do, so you will be surprised to see that, not only did he succeed in doing it, but he wrote a book about his life and his thoughts- like I recently read somewhere, he blinked out a book, which I am sure you will find it fascinating, as I did.

The moment he starts dictating to the girl sent by the publisher, my tears started falling and I couldn't stop. It is so moving and touching to see a man who only has his imagination and memory to live by, speak so eloquently and beautiful about life and what surrounds him, patiently dictating the long, beautiful words to the women- I was shaken by this man's will and power- he should be an example for anyone who's ever thought life is tough or boring or who believes they have nothing to live for- if this man can do it, you certainly can, too. There were many other touching moments, as well: the visit from Pierre, his friend who was held hostage for years, who says to him "Cling to your humanity and you will survive", or the Father's Day visit from his children. The beauty lies not only in the story, but in the emotions transmitted to the audience through a remarkable way of filmmaking.

Speaking of which, one of the key aspects of what made this film so special was the distinctive way of shooting, as Julian Schnabel desperately tried to show us the world through the paralyzed man's point of view- the image is blurry, it moves erratically, it's not focused and you mostly see legs and bodies. By that, it's 1000 times more powerful, as you experience and understand what the man is going through. The cinematography was wonderful and the direction was in par with the moving script and sublime performance of Mathieu Amalric, the main actor. The suppporting cast was lovely: Max von Sydow (the father), Emmanuelle Seigner (the mother of the children), Anne Consigny (the girl who helped him write the book) and my favorite, Marie-Josee Croze (the speech trainer)- she has one of the sweetest, eye-catching, kind faces I have seen and she reminds me so much of Naomi Watts, it's just crazy.

Le Scaphandre et le Papillon or The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, is a touching drama that you need to see whenever you think you're unlucky or your life sucks- yes, it is sad and tragic, but after all the crying, you will realize just how lucky you really are.

The Virgin Suicides [1999]

The Virgin Suicides is a 1999 film, written and directed by Sofia Coppola, which tells the story of the Lisbon sisters who are sheltered and isolated from the world by their strict, religious parents (James Woods and Kathleen Turner).

I must say that I have never been a fan of Sofia- yes, her movies are visually beautiful and she always casts great actors, but often I am bored by her movies; some are too dreamy, some overly pretentious, some try to showcase real emotion, but leave me indifferent. "The Virgin Suicides", her first directorial effort, was the complete opposite and I was pleasantly surprised. She did a fantastic job of adapting an overlooked literature classic and turning it into a mesmerizing, moving film that in the end left me with goosebumps.

As I said before, the script follows a group of men recalling the tragic events from over 25 years ago that rocked the Lisbon house, a family that lived close to their home and with whom their were obsessed with. Among the 5 sisters, Cecilia, the youngest, was the first to go- her dreamy personality and her inability to interact with people her own age made her take her life. Her 4 remaining sisters (Lux, Bonnie, Mary and Therese), try to hold on and make new friends, all whilst their extremely restrictive parents still control every moment of their existence. This ultimately leads to a drastic punishment, as Lux comes home the morning after the prom- Mr and Mrs Lisbon are so frighten of might have happened, that they isolate the girls in their room, leading them, ultimately, to take the hardest, most dramatic ending.

For a first effort, both in writing and directing, The Virgin Suicides was remarkable. The script was interesting, showcasing the sisters, but making us understand what they were like from the others points of view, therefore still keeping a touch of mystery over their situation. Visually, it was beautiful- the way it was shot, the cinematography, the editing, the random dreamy sequences, all fit together wonderfully. The score and the soundtrack are also standouts that help the movie move forward and create tension.

That last scene, when Lux looks over her shoulder to the young men waiting outside her door and the chilling discovery of the girls and retelling of facts about that last night was incredibly moving and it gave me goosebumps.

Casting wise, as always, Coppola gets it right (I am sure it doesn't hurt that her father is named Francis Ford, either, especially for a first feature film). Kirsten Dunst is amazing as Lux, portraying a not so perfect, but oh so sensual and crazy-mysterious girl who seems to be the most outspoken and relaxed of all the girls. Josh Hartnett, as the young man who falls in love with her, creates good chemistry with Dunst, having a very palpable, sensual, yet naive interaction with her. The other 4 girls, all blonde and with similar build, are easy to distinguish physically, but hard to understand on a personal level, as they don't get the same amount of attention from the script or the director. A little mention goes to AJ Cook, playing Mary, as I know her from Criminal Minds, a great TV show that I sometimes watch.

The Virgin Suicides is a fantastic movie, that will definitely go into my list of shocking, moving, chilling features, right up there with Hard Candy or We need to talk about Kevin. It was particularly sad and unnerving to see those girls take such a difficult way out of the situation they were in and I saw myself wondering, for a while after it finished, why did they do that? The first logical answer, for me at least, was the fault of the parents- their strict, isolated way of protecting the young women made them feel "choked" and in need of escaping, but I think it's more than that. I would like to think there is more than that because if there wasn't, than the idea of having kids is even more scary now. To think that Mrs Lisbon has to carry on her shoulder the deaths of all her 5 children is something I don't wish for anyone.

The Deep Blue Sea [2011]

The Deep Blue Sea is a character-driven movie, more or less. It doesn't focus on story development or action, it just takes us through the life of a couple and its complicated relationship, told mostly from the perspective of the woman, Hester Miller, the wife of a British judge, who starts an affair with Freddie Paige, a Royal Air Force pilot.

It begins with a 10 minute, orchestra music-fulled sequence, back and forth between the present day, where Hester, wonderfully played by Rachel Weisz, tries to comitt suicide, and the old days, when her relationship with Freddie was still fresh and lustful. From the beginning, the viewers can easily observe the beauty and darkness of the cinematography of Florian Hoffmeister, and the intricate, yet dreamy and classic direction of Terence Davies. I still remember a stunning scene which shows the lovers sharing a sweet moment in bed- the music, the way their arms and legs were intertwined, the movement of the camera-it all felt a little sureal and dramatic, and I loved it. I also liked the fact that the movie wasn't very predictable: I thought it was going somewhere, and then it completely changes, moving towards a different direction, and I am instantly intrigued (a good example is the subway scene).

She fails her attempt of taking her life, but still goes back from time to time to her past, her new, exciting, full of love past, that she now longs for. It all started with the need of a better life, one in which she wasn't bored or treated so insensitively, and Freddie just happened to be there to sweep her off her feet; it didn't hurt the fact that he was closer to her age than William, her husband, more than 20 years her senior.

But in the end, nothing in life comes easy and that is what the movie is about. She knew what she was getting into, she knew he couldn't offer what she really wanted, but Hester can't stay away, and chooses to be miserable for some time, in order to have at least a few moments of pure happiness and excitement with Freddie. She does have a chance at tranquility and love, not with Freddie, but with someone who will care for her, but she refuses, all just to hang on for a little while longer of the inexplicable connection and love to Freddie.There are clear differences between them and they both know their relationship is messed up and it probably won't last, but they still come back to each other. Case in point, after he finds her suicide letter, he leaves, but still agrees to come back to pick up his things, after she pleads to him numerous times.

The last morning spent together is awkward, but civilised; you can see and feel there is so much more to be said, but neither one takes the initiative- there is so much meaning behind their words.

The performances were good and higly comandable, but not extraordinary. Rachel Weisz and Tom Hiddleston are great individually, but I didn't buy their connection 100%- but still, the effort is there and the acting is good, especially for what the script requires. That, plus the music, editing, directing, cinematography, costumes, sets- everything fit the genre and the topic very well. It's clean!

I will be honest with you and say most will probably not like this- they will find it boring and useless. But for the few who like character-driven movies, romance, complicated relationships- this is a movie for you to see! I thought it was beautiful!

The Skin I Live In [2011]

Almovodar's latest movie, La piel que habito- "The Skin I live in", is quite remarcable. I think it is one of the best I have seen in the last year and it's curious not to see its name mentioned on top 10 lists or award nominations; but then  again, I don't think a lot of people saw this movie.

The story is about Robert Ledgard, a brilliant plastic surgeon, who creates a new type of skin that resists any kind of damage. His guinea pig happens to be Vera, a mysterious and volatile woman, who is part of his troubled past. As the plot thickens, we learn the shocking truth about her identity, one that will heavily influence the fate of both the doctor, and her life. No spoilers here (I learned my lesson), but trust me when I say it is very interesting.

The main thing that makes this film so good is the perfect combination of the filmmaking elements in all the right amounts. Fast-moving, intricate, shocking storyline, with complex characters, realistic dialogue, a touch of science fiction, mixed with a lot of mistery, told in Spanish, a sensual, dynamic language; appropriate music to every scene, highlighted by the fantastic orchestra, especially violin, in key moments, accompanied by beautiful cinematography- all wrapped up nicely by clean editing and visually interesting shooting style. You can't wait to see what happens next, you are fascinated by the story and where it's going and the end just leaves you breathless- hours pass, but you keep thinking about the movie you just saw. All of the above are signs of a very good feature.

As for the performances, I was pleasantly surprised by Antonio Banderas, who is fantastic as the surgeon, and offers us the correct amount of crazyness, genius, love, desperation and determination. Elena Anaya is, also, very good as Vera, his misterious patient, and steals every scene with her unearthly beauty and calm. Jan Cornet (Vicente) is another standout, although he is not featured too much, while Marisa Paredes delivers every time you see on screen- you can see she is an experienced actress.

All in all, "Skin I live in" is fantastic and I highly recommend it, whenever you will have the chance to see it!

I am not very familiar with Almovodar, as I have only seen 2 or 3 of his movies! What do you recommend I should see next?

Shame[2011/2012]

[SPOILER ALERT- I discuss most of the important scenes, but don't give out the ending]

Today I finally saw Shame- I have been anxiously waiting for it for over 6 months and now, that my wait is over, I can actually talk about it and say my opinion, I don't have to read about it anymore (so many articles and spoilers out there, I stopped reading after a while).

First of all, let me just say this is a very good movie- quality and beauty in every aspect of it: acting, music, directing, cinematography etc. Yet again, Steve McQueen takes this movie ten times over its potential and it's old news to me now the absolutely fantastic way he directs movies- Hunger was a perfect example and Shame is not only a great follow-up, but you can also see the improvement, the progress he has made. The scenes are much clearer, with more substance and visually more attractive (not that Hunger wasn't, it's just this one is better). I loved the fact that the talks between Brandon and Sissy are mostly shot from behind, the camera over their shoulders, it feels like an intrusion into their conversation, like you are watching a couple fighting in front of you in line. I like the sex scene at the end where he shoots the women and Brandon from completely unusual, different angles, or the way he shot the subway parts. On an end note to the technical, filmmaking aspect of it, I have to mention the use of music or lack of it- the soundtrack and sound editing were appropriate to every situation and gave it more power and sensibility in some cases (the beginning and end part, Brandon's song by Harry Escot, or the New York interpretation of Carey Mulligan's character).

There is so much depth and tragedy in this story and movie that I could talk about. Where should I start? Let's talk about his sex addiction- the thing that struck me is that, not for one moment, did I see pleasure or happiness in his eyes or expression; it felt like a burden, like a automatic thing he is used to do every day, a thing that he can not control and that he needs to do, like eating or drinking. I think one of the main problems of Sissy's appearance is the fact that he can't continue his usual, secret, yet very addictive way of life; that, plus his past relationship with his sister, cause him to derail, to go in such state of misery and desperation, that he gives into all of his fears, in one night of destructiveness that nearly kills him, physically and mentally.

It all started with a failed attempt of having sex with a woman at work he liked; the same one who, 30 minutes before, tried to have normal dinner and conversation with; but he couldn't, because he can't relate to someone, he can't get attached to a human being. Most would say it is because of his addiction, I say it all goes back to his childhood and his family problems. Funny how, after she leaves, the hooker can immediately take him to the edge. He can't get off a possible sentimental fling, but a complete stranger can- after all, he just craves for the act itself, not the person who is with him.

After that failed attempt, he decides to go out and that's when all of his world goes down and we witness one of the most dramatic and disturbing meltdowns in film- some where shocked by the way he blatantly touched a woman in public, others by the gay action in a underground club, but I was surprised by the three-way in the apartment. At first, I was a little disturbed not by the actual scene, but the length of it, I thought it was too much, but it all made sense when he saw Brandon's expression- that pure state of despair, of craziness and loss of control over his body and urges. It looks like it almost hurts, like it could kill him. That was, indeed, shocking and it wrapped up his whole character, finally showing us what he is going through.

The last minutes of the film, of the night, the passing back and forth between his apartment, the club, the subway ride, it was masterfully shot and edited, one of the best scenes I have seen. Kudos not only for McQueen and the cinematographer, but also for Michael.

Because, honestly, you can't say that Fassbender was anything short than fantastic, it was like nothing I have ever seen. At the beginning I was a little skeptical, but that was because of the ordinary, quite boring actions he was put through (the script allowed it), but the second part of the film is truly a work of art. I believe, understand and sympathize with everything he does, I worry for him, I feel his desperation, or his anxiety when he runs for Sissy, and I am 100% with him on the rainy day, near the water. Fassbender deserves a Golden Globe, a Bafta, an Oscar and more. Will he get it? Probably not, the Clooney and Pitts of Hollywood have more charisma and apparent value on the market, but he should be recognized, at least at one of them (probably Baftas).

Another surprise for me was Carey Mulligan- the part of Sissy is very different from what we normally see of her, but she nailed it and gave it so much substance and power. The lovely scene where she sings New York was revealing, at least from my perspective- I felt like her life, personality and story just translated through her eyes and that song, it has hauntingly beautiful. Brandon's relationship with Sissy is hard to define, you can't really tell if he actually loves her, or cares about her, or is afraid. There was definitely something going on between them, but the closest thing to really discovering the truth was the discussion they had on the couch, near the end, and that didn't reveal too much, either. There is tension, there are repressed feelings, and probably love, as well, but Brandon is uncapable of showing his real emotions. It's like he is almost imune to all that is happening in his environment, to his world.

There are so many other things worth mentioning that I probably forgot, little details that made this movie better in so many way- script-wise, performance-wise or something else entirely. I can't disect all of it, but I am sure you will find other blogs who have noticed different aspects of it. After you read this review, go check out the others.

In the end, Shame is the kind of movie you don't like or appreciate immediately after the credits start rolling. I didn't. But then, you start thinking about it, remember certain scenes and then it hits you- that movie was great.... Fassbender was perfect...the subject was interesting and dramatic....the situations were extreme and sometimes pornographic.....but then again it's about sex addiction.....which is almost like a disease, a terrible situation to be in.....wow, that was powerful! I know I wasn't the only one, my friends got out of the theater rather disappointed, but afterwards, we started talking about it and we all realized it is a great movie!

Shame is worth your 10 pounds or 10 dollars or whatever currency you have! Believe the hype! Go see it!

A look back at 2011

Although I always try, I can never do a top 5, or top 10; I mean, I can not put them in order, decide which one is better or worse. That's why, this year, for my tiny blog, I decided just to showcase my movies of 2011: the ones I loved, the ones that shocked me, my favorite stars, the best directors, the coolest soundtracks and my regret of not seeing some movies I know would definitely make the cut for this year!

So, without further ado, here are my picks (in no particular order):

Midnight in Paris- for the simple, yet endearing script, the best references used in a movie, for its hidden treasures, the direction and lovely sight of Paris that it is showcased throught the film

Warrior- for being my surprise of 2011, for the amazing performances delivered by Nick Nolte, Joel Edgerton and Tom Hardy, for making me bite my nails during the fighting scenes and for the emotional script

Melancholia- 1 of the 2 most controversial movies for me this year; it had its ups and downs, but I have to appreciate it for what it is and the performances delivered by Dunst and Gainsborough. Plus, for its grand ending

We need to talk about Kevin- for its darkness and the shocking finale

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows 2- for its beautiful end of series and all of its achievements

Fast and Furious 5- you might find it funny, but I am big FF fan and I love the reunion put together for this movie(especially Paul Walker and Vin Diesel)- the franchise is still delivering great action; plus the Don Omar song at the end was the running joke for me and my sister during the summer, so it will be forever stuck in my head

Jane Eyre- for re-inventing, yet at the same time, honouring, a classic; and for great performances by Michael Fassbender and Mia Wasikowsa

Hugo- one of the most flawless movies I have ever seen; beautifully captures the 1930s Paris and the birth of cinema

50/50- for a fantastic script and a enjoyable mix of drama and comedy

Restless- simply put, the movie that got the strongest and weirdest reaction from me this year. Check my review from October if interested

Drive- one of the best soundtracks ever, interesting first scene, memorable direction (Nicholas Refn), and two great performances (Albert Brooks and Ryan Gosling)

Tree Of Life- second of the 2 most controversial movies for me this year; like Melancholia, with a lot of ups and downs for me, but I have to appreciate Brad Pitt, Jessica Chastain and its cinematography

AND
Horrible Bosses, Crazy, stupid, love and Bridesmaids- for showing Hollywood that there are funny, sweet, great script out there for comedy; for good performances that make you laugh

Last minute add:

Great Expectations- it's perfect in so many ways- if you have the chance, please see it!

Special mentions: Take Shelter(for Michael Shannon's performance), Martha Marcy May Marlene (great director and great first part for Elizabeth Olsen), The Help (strong characters, strong women, strong performances), Senna (one of the best and most innovative documentaries I have seen), Michael Fassbender (for three amazing performances he delivered this year- Jane Eyre, X Men, Shame and especially for the breakout role in Hunger, which I only saw this year), My Week with Marilyn (all rise for the lovely Michelle Williams), Life in a day documentary (innovative idea and well-edited), Carnage (best use of space in 90 minutes plus 4 amazing actors put together)

2011 movies I haven't seen, but are probably great/would have loved them: Shame, Weekend, The Artist, Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, A separation, The skin I live in, Dangerous Method, Albert Nobbs, Into the Abyss, The Descendants, maybe War Horse

...and probably I have missed some things, but honestly, my whole film memory goes back to September, because that is when I started this blog, that's when I started to pay more attention to movies and its meaning and I analysed more. These last months have been fantastic and I am eager to continue my journey through the film experience in 2012 on this blog you helped grow and grow each day more and more. Thank you!

Hope you enjoyed it!

Have a great 2012! I love you all!
Diana

Hugo[2011]

Hugo is magical! Yes, that is the right word to describe it- magical! I was mesmerised by it and I hope to share with you what I've experienced during the viewing!

The film, based on a book, tells the story of a young orphan boy who lives in the walls of the central train station of Paris, fixing clocks and constantly trying to solve the mistery of the automaton left by his father. It's a wonderful story of hope, love, adventure, passion, choices, purpose and love for film.

I must say if I would have gone into the theater not knowing who directed it, I wouldn't have said Martin Scorsese afterwards; it's not his style, yet this movie is absolutely fantastic, especially direction-wise. The 3D aspect and the cinematography are outstanding- never has Paris looked so beautiful and breath-taking.

Asa Butterfield as Hugo perfectly portrays the young man desperate to fulfill his fathers' last wish and, most importantly, to find a purpose in life. That is his journey and the movie takes you into that fantastic adventure and then some. He is not overacting, he is not too dramatic or gimmicky, he's just acting like a boy, and he delivers big time.

Chloe Moretz, another lovely surprise, is Isabel, his companion and I just love her- she is sweet, smart, approachable and still has that child's naive sense, and I hope she keeps it a little longer. Her face when she says "Is it a secret?" is just adorable. Other mentionable performances, of course, include Ben Kingsley, Sasha Baron Cohen, Emily Mortimer and the stunning Helen McCrory.

I admired and loved the fact Scorsese and the scripwriters formed this movie as an ode to cinema, to early cinema, to the Meliers years and the beauty and joy that it should transmit. It was an original, visually stunning and interesting omage to it and it fitted perfectly into the film, alongside the other plot.

It is not a film only for children, it is a film for everyone, for every age, and I am sure it will be loved and admired by most of them! It's a simple, yet very approachable story, that you can relate to, but it also allows you to enter a magical world, a dream that can make you happy- Hugo does that to the T.

All in all, it is one of the best films I've seen this year- I cannot find something wrong with it! I left the cinema with such a pleasant feeling of happiness and joy, but most importantly, with the idea that I have just seen a masterpiece, something tryly beautiful; I just loved it! After a couple hours, the magic goes away, but the impression stays the same- Hugo is a very good movie!

Please go see it, especially now, around Christmas!

p.s. I do think it has big chances for this awards season, especially for director, cinematography, even best picture!

Passion of Christ[2004]

Where do I begin talking about this film? It is about religion, about the story of Jesus Christ and what he went through. It is directed by Mel Gibson and it stars James Caviezel, Monica Belluci, Maia Morgenstern and others. It is a very special film.

Mel Gibson decided to write, produce and direct a movie about a delicate subject! How can you properly explain this story in motion picture without being too Hollywood or exagerated in some parts? You can't, because you don't actually know what happened, you have only the Bible to guide you. It had its flaws, I am sure some hated it and at certain times the violence was too much, but you can't not be touched by it, by the way it was portrayed.

Religion is not something I talk about because I do not consider myself a religious person, but I can say about me that when something moves me, when I can relate or feel or understand the emotions it is trying to transmit, it can have a great impact over me. I cried during Passion of Christ two times: first, when Mary gets close to Jesus in his way to the crucification point, after John takes her there, and the second time, when he arrives and they pint him to the cross. It is one of the most disturbing, moving scenes I have ever seen. Sometimes I wonder: am I that easy to manipulate? am I weak? I hope I am not, because that scene should raise some emotions in everyone's heart.

I don't want to get into details and say Mel Gibson didn't follow the exact Testament or that he got something wrong, after all it is a movie. I found it interesting, but appropriate, that he used the original language for it- that must have been an extra point of pressure for the actors. If we should start discussing and disecting this movie, it would take ages and this is not a place for it- I don't think we have enough knowledge or wisdom to do it!

What we can do is enjoy a great movie and be impressed by its actors. James Caviezel is fantastic- I can't even begin to imagine the pressure of the role and how demanding it must have been to play that part. Just think about the emotional conection and the pain he had to portray for it; I respect him just for that, just for trying. Sure, it wasn't perfect, sometimes it looked overacted, by I understand him.

Another amazing performance is Mary, played by Maia Morgenstern. Now, I can proudly say that this wonderful woman is a known and loved Romanian actress and I had the chance to meet her at a local event. She is so elegant, kind and inspiring and has a special aura about her that attracts people. I thought she delivered a great performance.

Now it's time to see what IMDb has to say!The Oscars nominated it just for Make-up and Sound?Really?Why?I mean, why not acknowledge the passion and commitment of James Caviezel, if not Maia Morgenstern? Is it because of Mel Gibson?

Anyway, as you can see, I was touched by it and I loved it!

Did you see it?What did it do for you?

Persona

Having heard so much about Ingmar Bergman recently, I decided to watch one of his movies, just to see what the hype was all about. My first try was Persona and I must say I really liked it.

The beginning is creepy, yet interesting and strangely fascinating- it's artistic, yet it is different, in a good way; maybe it's the way it was shot, the language, maybe it's because it's black and white, I don't know, but it works.  Also, I liked the way he showed the credits, interwining them with pictures of the characters.

The story follows two women: Elisabet Volger, an actress who, after a meltdown, is committed to a hospital and giving into the care of Alma, a nurse. After the doctor sees that Elisabet still won't talk, she sends both her and Alma to her summer house on the coast. The movies follows the development of their relationship and the downfall of Alma, influenced by the constant silence of mrs Volger.

There were some amazing scenes that I have to mention. The one in which the doctor tells Elisabet what's wrong with her-clear and simple-"Your hiding place is not impenetrable. Life sweeps in through everywhere and you are obliged to react.", perfectly concluding her state of mind; she prefers to hide behind her silence then face the real world.The scenes in the house where Alma confides in her silent patient are wonderful, simple, and we get to know more about the nurse. As the movie progresses, Alma lets go of her fears and gives in, leading to a personal crisis that it's not so easy to explain. One of the scenes in particular was strangely appealing and exciting, and by that I mean the story of her day on the beach with Katarina- it was so interesting to see the way she describes it, her gestures, Elisabet's gestures and reactions.

Two other scenes stand out and are exceptionally done in all points of view (direction, camera movement, performance, music etc)- Alma running to say sorry on the beach and the discussion between  the two women about mrs Volger's son. The latter one was very special and innovative and I liked the fact that we can see both of the women reacting to the words and story. It is something that I have never seen before. The two leading ladies,Bibi Andersson and Liv Ullmann, are stunning and give beautiful, complex performances.

I must admit that I loved the film. Yes, it is artistic and it deals with existential themes (just like Tree of Life or Melancholia), but Bergman portrays it  in a very appealing manner, in a smart and interesting way and it captures your attention. I also have to admit that the last part, the actual meltdown of Alma, was not very clear to me, I didn't quite understand every nuance of it. Like someone said, maybe this was not the best Bergman film to start with. I will give it another try after a few more.

Persona might have just turned me into a Bergman fan. I will definitely try more of his films! Please do check it out if you have the chance!

12 angry men[1957]

12 angry men is a 1957 classic about a jury in deliberation of a murder case.

You have 12 men, no names, one room and 1h and 36 minutes to kill. What do you do?The best men to ask are Reginald Rose, who wrote the screenplay and Sidney Lumet, who directed it. They both did a wonderful job in capturing not only the essence of the story and the morality of it, but also the emotions and characters of the 12 men.

Juror number 1 is the president and tries his best to manage the chaos in the room. 2 is a simple, quiet, guy, who doesn't dare to speak, but believes in the greater good in mankind. 3 is a real pain in the ass and doesn't go down without a fight and 4 is a very hard man to convince who, surprisingly, doesn't sweat. 5 and 6 are pretty normal guys, but 7 is a piece of art- he just can't wait to go to this stupid baseball match. 8 is the real star, the man who questions everything and the kind of juror the defense autorney wants to have. 9 is a sweet old man who's happy to be there and help, but you just dislike number 10, he is so grumpy. 11 always fights for his point of view, but 12 doesn't pay attention that much, unless it has something to do with him- the advertising agency sindrom, it was quite common those days.

There were some great moments there: the close-ups of the jurors, the scene were each one stands up and gets away from the non-sense, angry juror 10, and every scene where they figure out that something is not right! Henry Fonda, as juror 8, is, of course, amazing and that applies to almost everyone in that room!

A true classic that you should see if you haven't already!

Fridays are the best: A streetcar named Desire

Today, you will read a very interesting review: it is the first one I wrote, the one that inspired this blog and my passion to discover and see as many movies I can! It is my first attempt, so bare with me!I hope you like it!

A streetcar named Desire, a clasic movie, a fantastic one that was rightly named one of the best in the history of cinematography. 

I can whole-heartly say that it changed me. It was the movie that made open my laptop and write about it....and then find other movies just like this one. I was blown away by everything: the story, the lighting (I now understand the importance of it- well, mostly), the setting, the way the camera moved, the music, and most definately, by the characters.  

How can I explain it? The film, the story pushed the characters forward, made you pay interest only to them, to their reactions, to their body language. It made you, well, actually, it made me realize and understand their story, their motivations.

Stanley, played by an amazingly good-looking and great actor- Marlon Brando, was the surprise. He has the whole package- tall, hot, sexy, smart, with an attitude- a real man that you can hardly find in Hollywood these days. As I said before, attitude is everything and he nailed the part of Stanley, Stella’s husband and the reason of Blanche’s breakdown; he eventually pushes her over the limit, by being honest, something she is not used to.

                                                               Bonus just for the ladies 

Blanche is a very complex character. At the beginning, she gives you the impression of a „whiny bitch” and I, for one, was quite irritated by her. She overreacted everything, although I know it is a common trade for that time. I guess she is hiding her sorrow behind that over dramatized class. Although the annoince continues through out the film, it becomes intriguing...what has she done, who is she?  After we do find out more about her background, we start to understand the way she acts, her story. I loved the scene with the young man collecting money, who reminds Blanche of her late husband, and especially the amazing acting, gestures, ease of interpreting and my favorite, the easiest transition at Mitch’s arrival! The second half of the movie, especially the last 15 minutes are fantastic, and Vivien Leigh doesn’t dissapoint at all; the two memorable scenes- first with Mitch („Yes, I have had many meetings with strangers”, showing, for the first time, her true self and her face), the second, with Stanley (in which Marlon Brando’s character demascs Blanche) are amazing and show the true art of acting from these fine artists.

I was impressed by Vivien Leigh’s acting, but I just read that she was suffering from bipolar disease in real life, so maybe that changes just a bit the situation.

Stella is the supporting character that holds together the whole film, but doesn’t stand out, for me anyway, most of the time. I do remember the end scene, where she runs up the stairs with the child, saying she won’t talk to Stanley again, but knowing she will, because she has no choice and because she loves him.

It is one the greatest movies I have ever seen and I really hope you will see it soon!

P.S. Interesting note: One particular thing i observed and it got me thinking was the smoking. First of all, smoking in the 50s is like texting  of our days(maybe it is a bad example, but you get my point). Everyone does it with such ease, that it looks so natural and pleasant.  Second of all, I now know why women were so succesfull back then: the line „ Do you have a light?”, followed by a quick, sultry gaze got a man on his knees....too bad it doesn’t work nowadays!