News
Still stuffed?
- Posted by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- News date
- Friday, November 30, 2007
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
Review
Hasta el viento tiene miedo
- Director
- Gustavo Moheno
- Year
- 2007
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- Gon C Curiel a.k.a. Groucho
- Review date
- Thursday, November 29, 2007
The story is amplified by setting it in an asylum for girls with mental issues instead of an ordinary boarding school as the original. This messes everything up incredibly. First of all it alienates us from the story since it’s far from what we live or could live in our lives and it’s not even presented credibly. Second, it makes some elements completely illogical, like the girls’ uniform, for instance. And third, it doesn’t even help the story in any way since mental illness never quite becomes an important element, but instead gets in the way more often than not.
Claudia (Mexican superstar Martha Higareda) is taken to the institute in question after a suicide attempt that comes from her depression mixed with anorexia and a bunch of stuff. She’s gorgeous though, as every other girl in school, all of whom suffer from such issues. The institute’s director is Bernarda (Verónica Langer), a stout figure every girl fears and respects. She and Claudia clash immediately, but another teacher, Lucía (Mónica Dionne), softens the mood. Claudia finds little solace in her companions, but a couple of girls are friendly enough, namely Jessica (María Fernanda Malo) and Josefina (Danny Perea). The first is a typical rebel and the second is frankly deranged, talking of a dead girl called Andrea who supposedly still haunts the institute’s grounds.
Claudia starts having visions of Andrea and soon we find out she was once a patient there too, dead in a fishy accident that involves a hanging. It would’ve been simple to follow the original storyline but no: here we get an accident that could or could not have been as it seems, a storyline about jealous lesbians, and flashbacks of Andrea that completely negate what Josefina said about her. There’s also an obsession with menstruation that turns the experience into something plain gross.
The classic striptease scene has been included albeit in a much more graphic way. If it was a tad out of place in the original, here it’s completely unjustified and illogical. Not even worth a look except for María Fernanda Malo’s showcase. Her performance is probably the best among a group of girls that do good jobs even if their movie is quite messy; Higadera is the least showy. Other performers include Magali Boysselle, Valeria Ciangherotti and Elizabeth Valdez.
Nothing to write home about… unless you want to make someone laugh.
Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
Review
Basic Instinct
- Director
- Paul Verhoeven
- Year
- 1992
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- Review date
- Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Catherine Tramell (Sharon Stone) is a seductive woman who becomes the prime suspect in a murder that Detective Nick Curran (Michael Douglas) is investigating. Even tough he’s having an affair with co-worker Beth (Jeanne Tripplehorn) he is instantly captivated by Catherine… and thus a dangerous game begins.
Director Paul Verhoeven and writer Joe Eszterhas are no strangers to sexually charged thrillers. Basic Instinct may not be the best movie of the sort, but it has such a high level of energy and sexual tension that it succeeds in being totally captivating. There’s plenty of sex and nudity thrown in there for good measure, but Verhoeven gets the tone right and the story is strong enough to sustain itself.
At the center there’s the relationship between Nick and Catherine, one in which we’re never certain what’s going to happen or how it’s going to end. It’s also fascinating because they’re in a cat-and-mouse type of situation but they’re also passionately attracted to each other, something that makes it more interesting to follow. There’s also the mystery aspect, in which we’re always trying to outguess the characters but the plot keeps surprising every step of the way. There are plot holes galore, but here it’s the ride that matters. I mean, even the ending does not make sense, but it sure is memorable.
And speaking of memorable moments, there’s also that infamous interrogation scene in which Catherine shows, um, a lot. But even without that shot the scene would’ve been terrific; it’s well-handled and tension-filled.
Jerry Goldsmith’s score certainly helps the proceedings, and Jan de Bont’s cinematography is also a plus.
Sharon Stone became a superstar with this role, one that would become her trademark. She nails the modern femme fatale whose mysteriousness and beauty are enough to fool just about everyone… even the audience! Michael Douglas is also excellent as the man who knows he’s getting into dangerous territory but simply can’t avoid it. Jeanne Tripplehorn, George Dzundza, Denis Arndt, Leilani Sarelle and the whole supporting cast are solid.
“Killing isn’t like smoking. You can stop.”
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Groucho wrote at 9/19/2002 12:33:32 PM:
Saw it in my puberty as well. Gotta check it out, I remember it was pretty thrilling.Leave a comment
Review
Hasta el viento tiene miedo
- Director
- Carlos Enrique Taboada
- Year
- 1968
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- Gon C Curiel a.k.a. Groucho
- Review date
- Tuesday, November 27, 2007
The story is a classic: a ghost haunts a big, creepy place. In this case, it’s an all-girls boarding school, and the ghost might only be in the imagination of a girl who sees it in her dreams. This girl is Claudia (Alicia Bonet), a smart girl and friend to many. As the ghost summons Claudia in her dreams, it appears as a horrific figure: a girl (Pamela Susan Hall) hung in an empty tower. Everyone believes Claudia to be ill, but she’s so sure of what she saw that she guides her friends to the actual forbidden tower that’s in the school ground, and things just start to get ugly.
The girls are surprised to see that Claudia wasn’t lying, but two teachers aren’t: Bernarda (Marga López), the strict school principal, and Lucía (Maricruz Olivier), the caretaker who’s kind and gentle to the girls. They know what the ghost is all about and hide a dirty secret. Each takes it a very different way though.
This is a very peculiar movie. It’s highly erotic, but not in an unnecessary way. There’s sexual tension in the air, which somehow heightens the overall suspense even if it’s mostly Sapphic. Even though the film never quite descends to the crudeness of specifying any actual sexuality between two characters, the feeling is there and, as related to the horror, quite unbearable.
The young characters are hip, tough and funny. The most notable is Kitty (Norma Lazareno), the fiery young girl who can’t be kept prisoner even inside four walls; her controversial striptease scene remains particularly memorable and was a cause of censorship for the film during years. Other fine work comes from Renata Seydel, Elizabeth Dupeyrón, Rita Sabre Marroquín and Irma Castillón.
As for the elder women, their work is mesmerizing. Marga López’s in particular, proving that age only made her better, as she’s one of Mexico’s most prominent actresses, and her work here is as robust and towering as the fear felt throughout. In fact, she holds much of the film’s weight on her shoulders, and carries it effortlessly.
Two Preludes by Frédéric Chopin (Op. 28 No. 4 and Op. 28 No. 7) constitute the film’s music and couldn’t be used in a creepier way; it’s beautiful. The photography by Agustín Jiménez is another asset, adding to the fear at all times, and expertly changing the visual tone from one scene to the next like it’s nothing.
All in all, a swell horror film that should be given a look.
“Tonight, even the wind is scared.”
Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
Review
3:10 to Yuma
- Director
- James Mangold
- Year
- 2007
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- Review date
- Monday, November 26, 2007
A struggling rancher, Dan Evans (Christian Bale), offers himself as part of the entourage that needs to get criminal Ben Wade (Russell Crowe) to the 3:10 train to Yuma prison. Wade’s right-hand man, Charlie Prince (Ben Foster) is determined to help his boss escape, while Dan faces them off along with, among others, his son William (Logan Lerman), Sheriff Grayson Butterfield (Dallas Roberts) and old cowboy Bryon McElroy (Peter Fonda).
James Mangold directed from a screenplay by Halsted Welles, Michael Brandt and Derek Haas, based on a short story by Elmore Leonard. I have mixed feelings regarding the script because I think that on one side it’s gripping and involving, but on the other it calls too much attention to itself. The movie feels way too scripted; it’s as if the characters need to go from A to B only because a writer said so and not because it feels natural. Besides, there are quite a few plain stupid moments which don’t ring true.
For the most part the flick is highly entertaining, with the Old West brought to life with impeccable detail and two very interesting characters at its center. We identify and feel for Dan’s ordeal, and his arc is easily the best thing about the movie. Ben’s path is more one-dimensional until the last third brings a change, one that I respected and believed but which is played too broadly in the last few minutes. Having both characters interact is a hoot, mainly because we can see how Ben starts to slowly respect Dan, but also because Dan doesn’t see Ben as evil incarnated, but just as someone he needs to complete a job. This non-clichéd pairing makes the movie work.
Stumbles include a final, longish shoot-out that is not that exciting and an encounter with some men who have a grudge against Wade and want to kill him. The movie is better when it stays focused on relationships, whether it’s between Dan and Ben or Dan and William.
Phedon Papamichael’s cinematography is excellent, as is Marco Beltrami’s score. Every technical detail is top-notch as a matter of fact.
It’s hard to say who delivers the best performance between Christian Bale and Russell Crowe. They are both at the top of their games and deliver solid work. Bale goes understated and hurt, but you believe it when he goes courageous and faces the difficult challenges he’s put through. Crowe relies on the weight of his immense charisma and he’s magnetic; a memorable villain. Logan Lerman is a discovery as Dan’s son, an actor who can have a bright future if he handles it right. Ben Foster goes over-the-top and I wasn’t bothered, but his work felt too actor-ly. Peter Fonda is excellent and literally unrecognizable... I didn’t even know he was on the movie until the credits rolled! Luke Wilson has a small, distracting and unnecessary appearance. Gretchen Mol, Dallas Roberts and Vinessa Shaw lend strong support.
“I’ve always liked you Byron, but even bad men love their mommas.”
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
News
Box Office Results
- Posted by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- News date
- Sunday, November 25, 2007
On a very solid second place there was This Christmas, which surprised with it's potency and strong per-screen average.
Other releases such as Hitman, August Rush and The Mist did merely ok.
Expanding into nationwide release, the Coens' No Country for Old Men performed beautifully.
Here's the complete list:
- Enchanted
$35.3M, $50M total - This Christmas
$18.6M, $27.1M total - Beowulf
$16.2M, $56.3M total - Hitman
$13M, $21M total - Bee Movie
$12M, $112M total - Fred Claus
$10.7M, $53M total - August Rush
$9.4M, $13.3M total - American Gangster
$9.2M, $115.7M total - The Mist
$9M, $13M total - No Country for Old Men
$8.1M, $16.6M total
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Related: Enchanted (2007)
Comments
Leave a comment
News
Time to give thanks
- Posted by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- News date
- Friday, November 23, 2007
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
Review
Star Trek: The Motion Picture
- Director
- Robert Wise
- Year
- 1979
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- Gon C Curiel a.k.a. Groucho
- Review date
- Thursday, November 22, 2007
The story revives Gene Roddenberry’s characters not by negating their pasts and ages but by reuniting them like time has passed for them the same as for us. One by one, they get together when they hear that their starship, the Enterprise, is going on a mission to save the Earth from an unknown force of incalculable capacities that seems to have the sole purpose of destroying everything on its path. Since Earth is on its way, they have very little time to do something about it. They do this, but they don’t become heroes all of a sudden. Each of them have to fight their ghosts, revive their insecurities and deal with them. Captain Kirk (William Shatner), for instance, doesn’t have it easy when he faces the truth that he lacks the vitality that characterized him during his best years in charge. Mr. Spock (Leonard Nimoy), on the other hand, finds that dealing with this unknown force can bring him the richness of life that he’s been missing all through it.
Other crew members to come back are Bones (DeForest Kelley), Scotty (James Doohan), Sulu (George Takei), Nurse Chapel (Majel Barrett), Chekov (Walter Koenig) and Lt. Uhura (Nichelle Nichols). It’s good to have them back.
In addition, we’ve got the new Captain who antagonizes Kirk: Willard Decker (Stephen Collins), who’s relegated to a lower post once Kirk decides to come back. This young man provides much of the storyline’s interest, particularly thanks to a romantic subplot with Lt. Ilia (Persis Khambatta), which leads to unexpected and very interesting paths.
The ending, though said to reminisce an old episode, is quite intriguing and takes the story into a trademark “Star Trek” morale. Frankly, the path ain’t easy: it’s quite talky, has long and apparently useless sequences, and feels stagy after all, despite the awesome special effects. Admittedly, it wouldn’t be half as successful if we didn’t know these characters. But we do, and if you add to this one of Jerry Goldsmith’s greatest and most memorable music scores, you’ve got a winner.
“Well Mr. Spock... your ‘child’ is having a tantrum.”
Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
Review
My Girl
- Director
- Howard Zieff
- Year
- 1991
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- Review date
- Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Vada (Anna Chlumsky) is an 11-year-old girl who lost her mother at a young age and is now in love with one of her teachers, Mr. Bixler (Griffin Dunne). She lives with her father Harry (Dan Aykroyd), who runs a funeral parlor. Her life totally changes when she meets Thomas (Macaulay Culkin), a peculiar young boy with whom she forms a special friendship while her father starts dating a friendly woman, Shelly (Jamie Lee Curtis).
Howard Zieff directed from a beautiful screenplay by Laurice Elehwany. If there was one word to describe this movie it would be poignant. My Girl has a unique charm and atmosphere unlike anything I’d seen before or have seen since. It is a melancholic story about how sometimes life doesn’t give us what we want despite how hard we work for it. Vada, in true coming-of-age form, discovers this through her experiences and the relationships she forms with the different people who inhabit her world.
Because Vada lost her mother so soon she’s always been more mature than her age would indicate. She never ceases to say what she thinks, she has a sarcastic point of view about life despite being overly romantic and she’s obsessed with death. She is also a dreamer, but she slowly learns that real life is something else altogether and that she needs to move on. There’s particularly a third-act event that comes out of nowhere and which is shocking and unpredictable. From then on the movie is almost unbearable to watch, but Vada is such a wonderful girl that somehow there’s a sense of redemption to the procedures. I dare you not to shed a tear in that bedroom scene between her and her father.
Another wonderful scene has got Thomas and Vada sharing a very special moment in the place where they always meet. The scene is so effective that it definitely stands out from the rest; it certainly is the most magical moment in the movie.
Anna Chlumsky is so good it’s impressive to realize how young she was when she shot this; there’s not a glimpse of cutesy moments or a false move. She shows range and wisdom beyond her age, just as the character she’s playing. It is a truly magnetic performance. Macaulay Culkin is also extraordinary as the naive, innocent boy who has also had his share of trouble and whose sincerity ends up conquering Vada. The adult case, including Dan Aykroyd, Jamie Lee Curtis, Griffin Dunne and Ann Nelson are all solid.
Vada: “Dad, I don’t want to upset you, but my left breast is developing at a significantly faster rate than my right. It can only mean one thing. Cancer. I’m dying.”
Harry: “Okay, Sweetie, hand me the mayonnaise out of the fridge.”
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Groucho wrote at 7/2/2002 5:59:17 PM:
This movie made me so sad!! :'(I just can't forget how much I cried...
Groucho wrote at 7/2/2002 6:01:46 PM:
Great review, buddy! Morris wrote at 7/2/2002 7:11:14 PM:
It happened to me too...Leave a comment
Review
Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason
- Director
- Beeban Kidron
- Year
- 2004
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- Gon C Curiel a.k.a. Groucho
- Review date
- Tuesday, November 20, 2007
The sequel is rather obligatory, as is the book it’s based on, by Helen Fielding, creator of the original. It’s just an expansion of Bridget’s misadventures, more of the same one could say, but keeping up the spirit that made the first one so successful. I have always disliked films that negate the original’s happy ending, but when they manage to make it work without it looking like treason, it’s awesome. So this film makes Bridget and Mark break up after just a few weeks together, and Bridget coping with disappointment by, among other things, hooking up with arrogant Daniel Cleaver (Hugh Grant) again.
Bridget’s job takes her all around the world, but her antics take her, for instance, to a Thai prison, which caricaturize the proceedings to a very dangerous extent. Luckily, the characters never quite lose their essence, making the stretch of credibility possible. The three main actors do it again, not better or worse than the first time, but their characters aren’t quite as juicy or interesting as before. Cleaver’s in particular is nothing but a plot device, which made me angry. The one new notable character is lovely Rebecca (Jacinda Barrett), Mark’s co-worker who Bridget suspects is having an affair with him, and who keeps a very well-hidden secret.
Once again, the cinematic language makes it hard to transmit the feeling that what we’re watching is actually a diary, full of personal points of view and a particular commentary. Much of the literary source’s punch consisted on having us read directly what Bridget wrote, which is in no way as powerful here. But as a means of seeing Bridget’s brain at work, there are a few scenes that work like wonders and are the funniest, like the jellyfish count or Bridget’s interactions with her close friends.
This film is very easy to enjoy. It’s a crowd-pleaser in all the extent of the term, filled with corny songs, film references and just any possible excuse to make Bridget look ridiculous. Sometimes it goes too far, but you can’t stop laughing. How can one complain?
I hear this wasn’t half as successful as the first installment, but it’s not completely unnecessary either. Harmless would be a more accurate adjective. But it’s all in good fun.
“She’s got legs up to here! My legs only come up to here!”
Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
Review
Lions for Lambs
- Director
- Robert Redford
- Year
- 2007
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- Review date
- Monday, November 19, 2007
Senator Jasper Irving (Tom Cruise) arranges a meeting with reporter Janine Roth (Meryl Streep) to talk about a new strategy that the US is implementing in Afghanistan that could be the next step to win the war. Ernest Rodriguez (Michael Peña) and Arian Finch (Derek Luke) are part of that military mission that goes terribly wrong just as it gets started. They both were promising students of Professor Stephen Malley (Robert Redford), who uses them as an example to lecture troubled yet bright kid Todd Hayes (Andrew Garfield) about the importance of doing more with his life.
Robert Redford returned to the director’s chair using a screenplay by Matthew Michael Carnahan. I’ve read complaints about the movie not having anything new to say. Of course people who say such things are literate fellows who are well-aware of the political situation of their country, and there’s nothing wrong with that. But there are many others, and that includes a huge international audience, who may not be as informed. I consider myself a sharp guy who has more or less of an idea of what’s going, and still I didn’t want the movie to be over. I was enthralled and fascinated. It’s not just what the characters are saying, but the way they do it.
There are mainly two debates going on that form the meat of the story. I found both of them equally absorbing. The rat-a-tat between the senator and the reporter is filled with plenty of nuances and interesting statements that come from two very different, yet intelligent, points of view. There’s also the student-mentor relationship of a professor who is desperate to urge a young boy to do something, no matter what it is. At its core that’s what the movie is all about, a desperate cry for action.
A third storyline involving the soldiers is not as intriguing, bordering on the clichéd and usual places of most war movies. Exciting it’s not, and I hate when you can barely realize what’s going on. That said, it does provide a poignant statement at the end.
Yes, there’s a lot of talk. Yes, it’s theatrical. But the dialogue is top-notch, the ideas give you something to think about, and the whole package is well presented. I was hooked. I was immersed. I got angry.
The performances are exactly what you can expect from the accomplished cast. Meryl Streep might have the least showy role, but she is impeccable. It’s amazing how this woman can turn the simplest moment into a great piece of genuine acting; it’s a marvel to watch her and a breaking scene at the end takes her performance to another level. Tom Cruise, whom I’ve become somewhat tired of lately, is admittedly strong and believable. So is Robert Redford, although you could say the role is nothing of a stretch for him. Supporting performances by Michael Peña, Derek Luke, Peter Berg and Andrew Garfield are all spot-on.
“Never have I seen such lions led by such lambs.”
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
News
Box Office Results
- Posted by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- News date
- Sunday, November 18, 2007
New releases Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium and Love in the Time of Cholera failed to generate any excitement, although another Javier Bardem movie, No Country for Old Men had a sensational performance which catapulted it to the top 10 despite playing in less than 200 screens.
Here's the complete list:
- Beowulf
$28.1M, $28.1M total - Bee Movie
$14.3M, $93.8M total - American Gangster
$13.2M, $100.9M total - Fred Claus
$12M, $35.7M total - Mr. Magorium's Wonder Emporium
$10M, $10M total - Dan in Real Life
$3.5M, $37M total - No Country for Old Men
$3M, $49M total - Lions for Lambs
$2.9M, $11.5M total - Saw IV
$2.3M, $61.8M total - Love in the Time of Cholera
$1.8M, $1.8M total
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
News
Curses
- Posted by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- News date
- Friday, November 16, 2007
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
Review
Silent Light
- Director
- Carlos Reygadas
- Year
- 2007
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- Gon C Curiel a.k.a. Groucho
- Review date
- Thursday, November 15, 2007
Mexican writer/director Carlos Reygadas has created three films so far, the three of which have a trademark deliberate pace, a very personal and philosophical view of life, and rather dense storylines. Though demanding Stellet Licht doesn’t alienate, but instead absorbs the viewer into a fascinating world apart. It’s his best film to date, an exquisite look at life in a very peculiar culture, and the consequences of breaking the mold in what would seem an everyday slip everywhere else, but is shattering in here.
The two greatest achievements of the film are the way it transmits the tranquility of the Mennonite way and how it portrays their world as unique no matter where they are. The people in this story live at Chihuahua, Mexico, and there are a couple of scenes where Mexican culture interferes, the most notable being set to a song in Spanish, and it’s just amazing to realize that despite being surrounded by this culture, these people don’t let it get in the way of their lives. They speak the Plautdietsch dialect which derives from the German language, and there’s no plan of changing that, even if they speak Spanish after all.
Johan (Cornelio Wall) can’t do much about his desires, restrained as everything else inside their society. He loves another woman, Marianne (Maria Pankratz), much to the grief of his wife Esther (Miriam Toews), with whom he has a household and numerous children. Johan is essentially a Mennonite, and fights against his desires by repenting and torturing himself day by day, but he’s also a human being with weaknesses and concessions and seeing this struggle is fantastic.
The film is slow but powerful, with larger-than-life photography by Alexis Zabe that astounds particularly in the bookend scenes. The performances by real Mennonites are all totally realistic and so is the script, which has a denouement that will make you think and wonder for a while…
Not an easy film, but quite worth a look, I like it even more every time I revisit it in my mind.
Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
Review
Gosford Park
- Director
- Robert Altman
- Year
- 2001
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- Review date
- Wednesday, November 14, 2007
The story takes place in 1932 England. Sir William McCordle (Michael Gambon) has arranged a hunting weekend so his country house quickly fills up with high society guests. From Hollywood types (Bob Babalan, Jeremy Northam) to aristocracy members (Maggie Smith, Charles Dance, Claudie Blakly) to his own family (Kristin Scott Thomas, Camilla Rutherford). There are also countless servants, valets and butlers (Emily Watson, Alan Bates, Kelly Macdonald, Helen Mirren, Eileen Atkins, Ryan Phillipe) ready to help at any moment. And then a murder happens, so a clumsy police detective (Stephen Fry) comes to investigate what already is a house full of intrigues.
Altman directed from a masterful script by Julian Fellowes, based on an idea the former came up along with Bob Balaban. The basic structure of the movie could be said to be inspired by an Agatha Christie whodunit in which there’s a crime and several different types are suspects. I personally am a huge Christie follower so to have this movie resemble some of her best work is just one of its many pleasures. The mystery works from start to finish, with a denouement that doesn’t let down.
Then again, there’s a lot more to it than that. Altman uses this plot as an excuse to paint a portrait of the difference between social classes during the time. It is awfully interesting to watch everything from the point of view of the servants, people who seem to have much more humanity than anyone else... or at least are capable of showing it. There’s something that left me particularly impressed and that is the way in which the servants had such a strict hierarchic system between them despite how much they hated the difference between classes. Such a contradiction makes for exquisite drama.
Gosford Park has over 30 speaking roles and the work Altman does with the actors is impeccable. We do not get confused, we know at least the basic about all of them and we’re always aware of the goings-on. These are all, arguably without exception, fascinating characters and that’s why the movie works despite being inherently talky. Fellowes’s Oscar-winning screenplay is full of wit, satire, drama, comedy, suspense and social commentary. I also loved how every single scene ends with a great line.
Andrew Dunn’s cinematography, Patrick Doyle’s score, Stephen Altman’s production design, Sarah Hauldren’s art direction and Jenny Beavan’s costume design are all of the highest order.
As for the cast itself, there are not enough complimentary words to describe the exceptional work they do both as individuals and as part of an ensemble. Standouts include Maggie Smith as the sarcastic nosy old woman with a plan of her own, Kristin Scott Thomas as a deliciously flamboyant and unhappy host, Helen Mirren as the cold and perfectionist head of servants, Jeremy Northam as real-life Ivor Novello and Kelly Macdonald as the inexperienced girl through whom we see it all.
“I’m the perfect servant; I have no life.”
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Groucho wrote at 6/22/2002:
Loved your review: very complete yet not complicated, as the movie is. I'm glad you liked it that much. It certainly is a masterful piece.Leave a comment
Review
To Catch a Thief
- Director
- Alfred Hitchcock
- Year
- 1955
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- Gon C Curiel a.k.a. Groucho
- Review date
- Tuesday, November 13, 2007
The story is about a jewel thief, The Cat, who in the old day was caught and identified as John Robie (Cary Grant). A member of the French Resistance, Robie was pardoned of his crimes thanks to his war-time activities, the same as some other crooks who now run a catering business. These old colleagues and the police suspect The Cat is back on track when a new string of jewel heists occur, all of them with the old burglar’s signature, but Robie claims this not to be. The caterers suspect him too, as does the daughter of one, Danielle (Brigitte Auber), a bold teenage girl much infatuated with Robie and his alleged acts.
Afraid of the consequences, which would include losing the luxuries earned from years of criminal life, which now allow him to calmly tend for his French vineyards, The Cat offers his help in catching the impostor, but since no one will believe him, he associates with the other thief—the insurance company, represented by H.H. Hughson (John Williams), who gives him information of the next possible victims, which is a double jeopardy but well worth the risk. Already wanted by the Police, and soon to acquaint the potentially soon-to-be ex-owners of jewels, Robie befriends millionaires Jessie Stevens (Jessie Royce Landis) and her daughter Frances (Grace Kelly). Both are rather intriguing, but the younger packs a wallop.
That’s basically it, and it takes a while. The rest is formulaic and rather predictable, if fun, and almost candid in the way it deals with peril and gamble. It’s an important entry in the tradition of romantic thrillers, but its comedic tints are often too much and diminish its impact. If it wasn’t for the excellent direction, snappy dialogue and endearing performances, not much would be made of it.
Grant and Kelly are at their most charming, he mysterious and interesting, she the most dazzling gem in the movie, most enchanting all along, the princess she was to become. Auber and Landis lend excellent support, particularly the latter in the most humorous role. Talking about humor, the music score by Lyn Murray implies a bit more than there actually is, and lessens even more the film’s credibility. On the other hand, the cinematography by Robert Burks is outstanding, and Edith Head’s costumes are among her best. Oh, and that fireworks scene, tacky though it may seem nowadays, is quite important, as is the infamous chase scene, which was to be echoed in real life, featuring the same driver, with much worse consequences…
It’s not at all bad, just harmless, though there are many things (Grace Kelly, for one) that make it more than worthwhile.
“Are you sure you were talking about water skis? From where I sat it looked as though you were conjugating some irregular verbs.”
Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
Review
Thelma & Louise
- Director
- Ridley Scott
- Year
- 1991
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- Review date
- Monday, November 12, 2007
Thelma (Geena Davis) and Louise (Susan Sarandon) are two Southern belles who one day decide to leave their partners, husband Darryl (Christopher McDonald) and boyfriend Jimmy (Michael Madsen) respectively, in pursuit of a small trip of freedom. But an unexpected incident gets in the way and suddenly they’re both running from the law, chased by Investigator Hal Slocumb (Harvey Keitel), and with nowhere to go.
Ridley Scott directed from an Oscar-winning screenplay by Callie Khouri. There’s no denying the fact that Thelma & Louise is one of the most iconic feminist movies ever made, but what’s great is the way that it is not shocking or accusatory just for the sake of it. These are well-constructed characters immersed in a story like thousands that are going on out there and that is presented with the utmost sincerity.
There’s a relationship at its centre that is the glue that holds it together and what the movie is essentially about. It portrays the strong connection between two friends who are tired of their lives and eager to do something different. It is when things go wrong that they find a force they didn’t know they had in them and together they have to face their reality in all its crudeness. It’s a story that has a lot to say about choices and consequences, about the bonds of a real friendship, about letting our inner-selves go, and about discovering who we really are. It’s outrageous but it’s also more profound than meets the eye.
Scott perfectly captures the simplicity that surrounds the characters and their surroundings; from the dusty scenarios to the Southern attitude. Hans Zimmer’s score, Adrian Biddle’s cinematography and Thom Noble’s editing help to make it all work and it pays off.
And speaking of pay-offs… what an ending! You have to experience the look in the girls’ faces at the end to truly understand what it was all about. It is an emotionally disturbing sequence to say the least; the whole movie is.
I can’t rave enough about Geena Davis’s and Susan Sarandon’s performances. They are that good, arguably amongst the best work by any actress of that decade. They both capture the essence of their characters so truthfully that it’s hard to not think of them as Thelma and Louise. Harvey Keitel and Michael Madsen deliver strong support. Brad Pitt appears briefly in a memorable bit.
“I don't ever remember feeling this awake.”
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Jacinda wrote at 6/22/2002:
I'm always happy when a review reminds me of a great movie I've seen quite a while ago. Yours definitely inspired me to see 'Thelma and Louise' again. Thanks Morris!
Did you know that there was an alternate ending for the movie - a happy ending?! Test screenings were aweful so producers (or Mr. Scott) decided to change it to the memorable ending that it got famous for. I just loved it.
Besides I think Brad Pitt's character is quite sympathetic.. well probably not truely sympathetic but he has other great qualities in the movie ;)
Morris wrote at 6/22/2002:
Well, your welcome Jacinda! I'm glad you liked the review... and the ending!I didn't know about that alternate ending thing. It is really interesting the way people didn't like a happy ending for such a memorable movie. The ending which with they stuck is simply awesome. One of the most poignant endings ever!
Oh, and I also think Brad Pitt's character was sympathetic in more ways than one. Not only him, but Harvey Keitel's character is really down-to-earth and likable. There's a lot going on here...
Leave a comment
News
Box Office Results
- Posted by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- News date
- Sunday, November 11, 2007
New release Fred Claus failed to generate much excitement as it opened strongly but not quite enough.
Tom Cruise generated the worst opening of his career as a leading man in more than a decade with Lions for Lambs, although I don't see how anyone would think this was supposed to deliver blockbuster numbers. That said, the reception was indeed cold.
Here's the complete list:
- Bee Movie
$26M, $72.2M total - American Gangster
$24.3M, $80.6M total - Fred Claus
$19.2M, $19.2M total - Lions for Lambs
$6.7M, $6.7M total - Dan in Real Life
$5.8M, $30.6M total - Saw IV
$5M, $58M total - The Game Plan
$2.4M, $85.4M total - P2
$2.2M, $2.2M total - 30 Days of Night
$2.1M, $37.3M total - Martian Child
$1.7M, $6M total
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
News
Christmas comes early
- Posted by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- News date
- Friday, November 09, 2007
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
Review
Zoolander
- Director
- Ben Stiller
- Year
- 2001
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- Gon C Curiel a.k.a. Groucho
- Review date
- Thursday, November 08, 2007
It’s just a darn stupid flick but a funny one, and that’s the key. One can’t imagine a more hilarious premise than Ben Stiller as a male supermodel. Well, they did it: they made Owen Wilson his arch-nemesis, an even hotter male supermodel. Just this makes up for a wacky universe where anything is possible. Zoolander is a character created by Stiller and Drake Sather years before, featured in a couple of hilarious VH1 shorts. Like often happens in modern culture, a one-joke premise is expanded to feature length, but it’s done in style: Zoolander doesn’t just mock the world of modeling and exploit its riotous lead character, it creates a plot of international intrigue in a most unlikely setting. It’s quite successful in not being one-note.
Nothing to write home about, to be honest, but when you let yourself go and surrender to the idiocy, it can work all right. Derek Zoolander (Stiller) is losing his touch. Even his famous looks, “Blue Steel”, “Le Tigre” and “Ferrari” can’t do much for him when it comes to competing with the younger and hotter Hansel (Wilson), the guy who’s taking over the runways and magazine covers nowadays. Seeing how Zoolander’s luck is less than favorable, evil fashion guru Mugatu (Will Ferrell) decides to use him for an evil plot that will prevent the abolition of child labor in Malaysia, an absolutely necessary resource of fashion. Only reporter Matilda Jeffries (Christine Taylor) can help Zoolander against the conspirators, but who can save him from his own stupidity?
Even though the story is much more complex than could be expected, it’s still downright silly, but there are several funny vignettes that save the day. Perhaps the funniest of all features a showdown between the two male models on the runway. There’s hilarity at every step, and dumb as they look it must have been quite hard to get in shape and behave as models. Another highlight is an orgy, and yet another is a conspiracy theory sequence featuring David Duchovny, with a flashback that’s unforgettable.
Tons of cameos fill the screen at all times, some as themselves, many of whom are related to the fashion industry. Jerry Stiller, Jon Voight and Milla Jovovich appear in prominent roles.
Not worth much more than a passing look maybe, but potentially a very good time. Me? I can joke about it at lunch with my pals from work now. It’s top-belly laughs all over again.
“Hansel… He’s so hot right now.”
Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
Review
1408
- Director
- Mikael Hafstrom
- Year
- 2007
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- Review date
- Wednesday, November 07, 2007
Mike Enslin (John Cusack) has been writing over-the-top books about haunted hotels for some time now, and for his latest assignment he travels to New York to stay in room 1408 at the Dolphin Hotel. The place has a history of deaths unlike anything he has encountered before, and despite the warnings from the hotel manager, Gerald Olin (Samuel L. Jackson), he opts to stay. Needless to say, the strangest things start happening to him a few minutes after he sets foot in there.
Mikael Hafstrom directed from a screenplay by Matt Greenberg, Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski, based on a short Stephen King story. This is Hafstrom’s second Hollywood outing after the failed Derailed (2005) and even though I haven’t seen his previous, critically-acclaimed work, I think he should go back to his roots and come up with something more human and intimate. I don’t necessarily think he’s as bad a director as he is at choosing his material, because he does seem capable and talented.
1408 is essentially a movie about a cynic facing up the most ridiculous and clichéd events one could come up with when constraining a character in a hotel room and wanting him to suffer; from chocolates mysteriously appearing on his pillow to ghosts wandering around, windows unexpectedly shutting down, hanging ropes appearing in the middle of the living room or the weather going through extreme changes. Did I mention this was supposed to be a scary movie? Apart from some boo moments that you can see coming from miles away there’s barely anything remotely scary; I was sitting there bored to death and wondering when the thing would be over.
Then again, there were some teenage girls and even some adults in my theatre who were shouting and going with the flow so maybe it’s just me.
Props should be given for not letting the movie end with a cheap cop-out finale in the third half that seems to put a tidy end to what we’ve just seen. Instead we get yet another twist and a final scene that is indeed interesting. Attempts at making us care for Mike by showing us his sad backdrop are only moderately effective. And don’t even try convincing me this is more of a psychological character study because I won’t take it.
John Cusack is good, although I had a problem with his supposedly experienced character getting too scared too soon. That said, Cusack makes us empathize with him despite the arrogance and he does it well. Samuel L. Jackson has a cameo-level appearance although the scene at his office is one of the best the movie has to offer. Mary McCormack, Tony Shalhoub and Jasmine Jessica Anthony also appear briefly.
“It’s an evil fucking room.”
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Other reviews of 1408 (2007): Groucho
Comments
Leave a comment
Review
1408
- Director
- Mikael Hafstrom
- Year
- 2007
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- Gon C Curiel a.k.a. Groucho
- Review date
- Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Based on King’s short story, 1408 is a simple premise stretched to feature length that benefits from the character of Mike Enslin and the performance of John Cusack. This is basically the story of one man, a stubborn non-fiction writer who documents supposedly haunted sites but has never actually experienced anything paranormal and seriously doubts that such thing exists. When he stumbles upon the New York Dolphin Hotel and its infamous room 1408, where 56 people have died of several causes in the last 100 years, he can’t resist, and insists on staying there against the best wishes of hotel manager Gerald Olin (Samuel L. Jackson).
It must be funny bumping with implausibilities every two seconds when adapting a story like this to the screen. Writers Matt Greenberg, Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski clearly struggled to insert such necessary justifications as a legal artifice Enslin could use to stay in the hotel room against the administration’s will, an explanation as to why the room is clean, and so on… But when all is said and done, it’s time to let go and just enjoy the ride. Like a haunted house in a theme park, it induces horror through scares more often than not, and it’s perfectly functional. The whole isn’t even close to coherent, but as long as they keep us scared, no big complaints.
Enslin goes through a lot… Like some fine Stephen King characters he has more ghosts haunting him than the spooks the story is about, in this case his father (Len Cariou), his ex wife (Mary McCormack) and his dead daughter (Jasmine Jessica Anthony). We don’t know exactly what the story is, but we know it’s already a nightmare, and when that’s a tool the room uses against him, it gets much worse than the typical chills and thrills of a movie like this.
Enslin has a horrific time in the room and the best part is he’s not sure it’s real. His mind becomes blurry and he suspects he’s been poisoned. Paranoia takes over and it’s delicious. Then the nightmare seems to be over and it starts again. In the end, you’re not sure what happened and what didn’t. You do wonder why they wasted Samuel L. Jackson so dramatically… I read there was an original ending that gave him more screen time, but audiences reacted badly to it. Tony Shalhoub is another actor who suffers from misuse. I hope he was well paid, because the few moments he’s onscreen he’s perfect.
I can’t say I’m overly satisfied or dissatisfied by 1408. While it scared me a couple of times to the point of screaming loudly, and entertained me through, I can’t forget how foolish it is and how many contrivances it has (i.e. a live Internet chat when things are at their wickedest). I’m a bigger John Cusack fan now but I spent my time wishing to see him in a drama or a comedy soon instead. And then they use a well-loved Carpenters song for horrific effects… But it’s not quite a dispensable movie. It should be seen.
“Stay scared.”
Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Other reviews of 1408 (2007): Morris
Comments
Leave a comment
Review
Ghost
- Director
- Jerry Zucker
- Year
- 1990
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- Review date
- Monday, November 05, 2007
Sam (Patrick Swayze) and Molly (Demi Moore) are a happy couple who see their life crumble when Sam is murdered. After the tragic incident his soul stays on Earth, where he puts his energy in protecting Molly from the not-so-good intentions of their friend Carl (Tony Goldwin). Problem is, the only person who can hear him is Oda Mae Brown (Whoopi Goldberg), a supposed psychic who is not that willing to help.
Jerry Zucker directed from an original screenplay by Bruce Joel Rubin. Ghost went on to become a huge hit and also became the quintessential romantic comedy of the time, even though one could argue that there’s also plenty of suspense and drama, yet everything remains pretty light.
Actually I think therein lies its success, it mixes genres flawlessly and never seems contrived or loses its tone. Molly’s character is sad almost throughout the entire movie; after all she just lost her soul mate. Then there’s everything surrounding Carl, which makes up for suspenseful and mysterious scenes. There is of course the romantic aspect, which gives way to the most famous (and literally messy) scene of the movie. And then there’s Oda Mae, who brings hilarity to the proceedings and elevates the movie whenever she’s on-screen.
So yes, Ghost is campy; but then again, so is love. And it serves as a great date movie. It has a bittersweet feeling to it that is greatly compensated by the comedic bits. And truth be told, the movie can get very funny.
Kudos to Maurice Jarre’s score and the use of Alex North’s “Unchained Melody.”
The movie belongs to Whoopi Goldberg, who gives a perfectly orchestrated performance. I’m so glad she got an Oscar for her work here, because comedic performances rarely get the recognition they deserve. She is fantastic, reacting to Patrick Swayze’s “invisible” presence with great timing, and also being hysterically over-the-top without crossing the line. Swayze, Demi Moore and Tony Goldwin are all there to play it straight and they are good in their respective roles.
“Ditto.”
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
News
Box Office Results
- Posted by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- News date
- Sunday, November 04, 2007
Jerry Seinfeld's Bee Movie opened strongly in second place and was a good option for kids and families. Critics didn't like it and we'll have to wait and see how much legs it has in its future.
The weekend's other new release, Martian Child, failed to make an impression.
Here's the complete list:
- American Gangster
$46.3M, $46.3M total - Bee Movie
$39.1M, $39.1M total - Saw IV
$11M, $51M total - Dan in Real Life
$8.1M, $22.9M total - 30 Days of Night
$4M, $34.2M total - The Game Plan
$3.8M, $81.9M total - Martian Child
$2.9M, $33.1M total - Michael Clayton
$2.9M, $33.1M total - Why Did I Get Married?
$2.7M, $51.1M total - Gone Baby Gone
$2.4M, $14.9M total
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
News
David vs Goliath
- Posted by
- José Ruiloba a.k.a. Morris
- News date
- Friday, November 02, 2007
CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Leave a comment
Review
Howards End
- Director
- James Ivory
- Year
- 1992
- Rating
- Reviewed by
- Gon C Curiel a.k.a. Groucho
- Review date
- Thursday, November 01, 2007
The story is rather immortal: in 1910 England, the impulsive engagement of the younger Schlegel sister, Helen (Helena Bonham Carter), to young Paul Wilcox (Joseph Bennett) leads to disaster when it turns out to have been a foolery that offends both families. Fate later decides that the power-hungry Wilcoxes and the intellectual Schlegels become neighbors in London, which leads to Mrs. Wilcox (Vanessa Redgrave) and the older Schlegel sister, Meg (Emma Thompson), to become friends. Mr. Wilcox (Anthony Hopkins) seems to be incapable of human emotions, but Meg discovers in Mrs. Wilcox a set of hidden sensibilities and their relationship flourishes into the older lady’s most important friendship probably in her whole life. She makes a decision that scandalizes the Wilcoxes. This decision involves her countryside house called Howards End.
In the meantime, Helen, still impulsive and rather fiery, befriends a young and poor clerk, Leonard Bast (Samuel West), who’s been rejected by his family due to his stubbornness in eloping with Jacky (Nicola Duffett), a woman they did not desire for him. In the same way that Meg helped Mrs. Wilcox unravel in such a positive way, Helen discovers that Mr. Bast is sensitive and brilliant, and makes him her personal cause. After an advice of Mr. Wilcox for Mr. Bast’s career leads to the younger man’s ruin, Helen’s fury becomes disaster for the three families.
The story is outstanding per se but the way it’s told is staggering and beautiful. Furthermore, the casting work is perfection as everyone disappears in their roles, the standouts easily being Thompson and Redgrave, followed closely by Hopkins, Bonham Carter and West. I also quite enjoy smaller performances by James Wilby as Charles Wilcox, Prunella Scales as Aunt Juley and Jemma Redgrave as Evie Wilcox.
Other standouts: Tony Pierce-Roberts’ cinematography and Richard Robbins’ music score. Both are some of the most gorgeous put on screen. The flawless editing by Andrew Marcus dances with music and photography in amazing ways, creating the perfect moment out of every scene. This is a perfectly executed film, and one of exquisite taste too. It’s also one of my favorites, and a must-see.
“The poor are the poor, and one’s sorry for them - but there it is.”
Gon C Curiel en Twitter | CriticSociety en Twitter | CriticSociety en Facebook
Share on Facebook | Share on Twitter
Comments
Morris wrote at 10/28/2002 10:19:39 PM:
I just love the way this movie is written and executed. By that I especifically mean that I've always been impressed by the way it moves from scene to scene with flawless precision while doing a very difficult thing to pull off: most of the time each new scene happens years after the previous one. It's amazing and it works to perfection. The cast is also outstanding... and the music, the sets, the cinematography. A delight!
Groucho wrote at 6/9/2003 5:42:00 PM:
Saw this one again this weekend. Sure is one of my favorites!Leave a comment
Morris wrote at 11/29/2007 1:22:51 PM:
...you didn't like it.It truly sucks!!!!!