Quentintarantado Reviews

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

One word review.

[3/10 · 8 July 2018]

Martha! Well, that's my entire review except IMDB.com has a word limit. I'm glad I didn't watch it in theaters. I DID watch it (at a friend's house, in cable) so I could claim I have the right to complain about the movie.

Darling in the Franxx (2018)

I found the story was a pale imitation of Gurren Lagann

[3/10 · 7 July 2018]

There were many similarities to Gurren Lagann, and unfortunately, this one paled in comparison. I will not deny the animation here is top-notch but in my opinion, character and story trumps over animation and special effects (off the top of my head, South Park). Kokoro and MItsuru's arc seems like a long digression to me. Everyone else would seem to suddenly butt in the story just to remind you they're there (like Zorome, who feels like a waste of time and a walking cliche). The two main characters, Zero Two and Hiro, have a twisted, convoluted, and inconsistent backstory that suspiciously seems written solely to be twisted and convoluted. Zero Two is unpredictable and interesting (or maybe delusional for liking Hiro), Hiro in comparison is weak. I mean, there are weak characters who are compelling, like Shinji in Evangelion, but Shinji was fascinating even as he was indecisive and weak (his indecision made him actually monstrous sometimes). Is Hiro supposed to turn into a Klaxxosaur or not? In the end, it didn't seem to matter and I got irritated they had to bring the matter up and tease the audience with it. The Klaxxosaur princess butts into their romance, dies, and I thought, "who cares?" I mean, there are so many "Who cares?" I wish I didn't bother with the series the first place. What really irritated me was how it seems like it's so similar to Gurren Lagann, and how Lagann did it so much better. It doesn't help that Trigger made this series (which was started by former Gainax employees, who did Lagann). There are the robots, of course. There is the "cross vast reaches of space to fight the enemy". There's the "put the hero in a spell to weaken him". There's the free-spirit who comes out of nowhere to fall in love with the hero", and there's the aliens. Oh boy, the aliens. I was already thinking of Darling as a weak Lagann from episode 1, then in Episode 20 (kind of late, isn't it?) the series brings in the aliens and it was like a bike being blindsided by a truck at an intersection. Klaxxosaurs are suddenly friends and allies (who are they? Again, who cares?) and the two (or three? Who cares?) "Papas" from APE are actually VIRM alien villains. Again, (if you aren't sick of my mentioning it) Gurren Lagann has some very stupid moments. Incredibly stupid. Face-palmingly stupid. What I think is the huge, colossal difference is Lagann uses humor to undercut the stupidity and make it work for the story. So Kamina is a braggard. He transforms two mecha into one by jamming the smaller one on top of his head (like a hat, or actually, a hand drill). It's goofy (even the witnesses say it's dumb!) until it actually works. The escalation is more measured, the stupid elements are thrown in, and made to marry with all the other elements by making it a joke. Can you buy the ending of the entire series, even if you're not a physicist? Yes you can! Because (and they established this from the start!) "That's the way we roll!" (Actual quote!) And THAT is what Darling isn't doing. Darling takes everything, even the romance, too seriously. Which reminds me of another comparison. Batman vs. Superman, and its sequel, Justice League, they're too serious. Can you seriously tell me they were joking during that "Martha" moment? Yeah. Darling is precisely like that.

Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)

Overall, nice, but I think Ultron went about it the wrong way.

[8/10 · 5 May 2015]

Spoilers: Personally, I like the movie myself. However, this is a minor thought, and I could be wrong, but raising a city that high then flinging it down, even with rockets, does not seem to be enough to create an Extinction Level Event. I think an asteroid, a mere 1.5 kilometers in width, brought down from space at 45,000 kph will have enough kinetic energy to lay waste to mankind. Not as spectacular nor as cinematic as Ultron's "raising a city", and there's no chance for the Avengers to waste their time saving civilians, but it's a sure thing. In Gurren Lagann, (one of my favorite anime now) the Anti-Spirals planned to send the moon down to earth. That's a 3,500 km in diameter sphere from a distance of 365,000 km away. And this will spiral in, remember, not just bump the earth like in billiards, so the tidal effects will lay waste to the earth's surface before it enters our atmosphere. I like the numbers in that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gurren_Lagann

From Up on Poppy Hill (2011)

Wonderful film, very simple, sweet and moving.

[10/10 · 11 September 2012]

I marvel at how simple this movie is. It's a romance, but there's no villain, there's no kissing, there's no skin shown. Yet I was at the edge of my seat over whether the hero and the heroine would get together. The incidents have no fantasy, no action chase scenes, no amazing settings, just everyday life at a seaside town, a boarding house and a school. It reminds me of Ocean Waves, another Ghibli movie that I absolutely adore. In comparison, the average Hollywood romantic movie seems so loud and garish. The actors and actresses in typical Hollywood rom-coms are the cartoons, not these animated people I've grown to care about in the span of an hour and a half. What are comparable movies? In the Mood for Love, from Hong Kong, and Scorsese's The Age of Innocence. I'm in love again.

9½ Weeks (1986)

I'm one of the naysayers

[2/10 · 9 October 2011]

It took me 25 years to watch this film. I think in that time the movie has not aged well. Some of the stylish scenes seem embarrassing now. As for 'risky' acts, these seem tame compared to what European filmmakers (I believe Lyne is British) were doing in the sixties and seventies. There are attempts to make the story profound, but Lyne can't make a compelling narrative even with all his fast cutting and moody lighting (he's the granddaddy of all the ADD directors on MTV, like Michael Bay, etc). Tarkovsky can do it. He can make a compelling narrative with a minutes-long shot of one guy looking down a corridor full of rubbish. Lyne, unfortunately, can't.

Drag Me to Hell (2009)

May we have more please!

[8/10 · 4 June 2009]

He's back! And the PG-13 doesn't stop him! Funny, enjoyable from a dumb turn-off-your-mind level, yet totally mesmerizing as a visual storyteller from start to finish, Sam Raimi plays with your heartstrings like Itzhak Perlman on LSD! Uplifting music it ain't, but you're being toyed by a maestro! The story isn't original, but then neither was Martin Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ. What matters is the way Scorsese and Raimi (hey, that rhymes!) shoots and cuts, showing these dick-less sissies what it's like to be a brass balls director! (Kathryn Bigelow, you have a pair, and I mean that in a nice way!) Please, is there some kind of petition we can sign, DON'T bother with Spiderman 4, More! More! More! P.S. Lame box office even though the same public went in droves to see that emasculated THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT. It's a sure sign the end of the world is nigh! Am I making any sense? Never mind!

The Dark Knight (2008)

Quite good Batman movie

[9/10 · 27 July 2008]

This is a very good Batman movie. Now, there are things I liked about the older Batman movies with Tim Burton directing and Michael Keaton acting, especially the offbeat humor (emphasized during the second film since Daniel Waters, who I really love, wrote the script). I won't bother mention the next two except that they made me disinterested with the franchise, but Batman Begins under director Nolan and Christian Bale rekindled my interest in Batman. This sequel to Batman Begins has many good things about it, most prominent is the writing, the acting, the cinematography and the visual effects. Many other comments have gushed over these things so I will try not to repeat them here. Now, while the excitement is still fresh (I'm writing this in July, a few days after watching), everyone seems to think how towering the movie is over other movies (presently 9.5 in IMDb's ratings, replacing Shawshank at no. 1, which I don't think deserves that rating anyway, and the Godfather, which I think does.) I gave this movie a sober 8, which is pretty high for me (I'm not like other people who rate who would give this movie a 1 or 2 to "balance" the rating, I honestly think it deserves an 8.) Some problems I have with the film: while the themes are grand and some of the lines truly wonderful, I do wish they would show rather than say some of these lines. It seems to have the same problem as Brad Pitt's Jesse James (with the long title) movie, a tendency to say rather than show. Next, Nolan has the same problem as Burton. They are both bad action directors. I thought in Batman Begins the first time Batman drops among Falcone's thugs it was a blur of action and confusion, a good decision, to show how unprepared the criminals are against Batman. But apparently, that is how all of Batman's action scenes are shot. I remember reading that Nolan saw Michael Mann's Heat and was inspired by it. I think Nolan should take more notes on how Mann directs, because his Heat, his Last of the Mohicans, even his Miami Vice, had breathtaking action sequences that were crystal clear. Lastly, and this is a minor, minor point, I still can't get over how bad Bale looks in a Batman costume. I try to figure it out, but this combination of the actor's face and the Batsuit is truly awful. I sometimes wish we're back to Adam West (no, not that bad, I guess.) I think it's because when Bale speaks his upper lip twists a little and it gives the impression that the cowl is lopsided when it really isn't. And his cheeks look like Alvin Chipmunk with the Batsuit on (yet without it he has an incredibly lean face). In the end, I did like this film and its ambitions. I'm sorry I put up my reservations (which is why I gave it a mere 8) but all the praises have been more completely and imaginatively said everywhere else.

Kung Fu Panda (2008)

Quite good, up there with the first Shrek

[8/10 · 7 June 2008]

Warning: I believe the movie is a bit scary for the very young, I think this movie should be rated PG or even PG 13. Shrek is a wonderful movie because it upends a lot of conventions, in fairy tales and in animated movies. The next few Shreks become weaker echoes of the first by doing the same movie over and over, and by existing to parody other movies without bothering to put in a meaty story to string the jokes. Kung Fu Panda is another movie that upends a lot of recent animated movie conventions that have become cliché. Firstly, it isn't anymore a joke a minute. Some care was used in telling the story. In a way, it breaks current convention by becoming a more old-fashioned movie, by taking its time with the story. And yet, there are many touches that are clear tributes to previous great Kung Fu movies, especially Jacky Chan movies. The movie is going to be rewarding even to adults, so they aren't going to mind bringing their kids to this movie. It helps that Jack Black and Dustin Hoffman strike such witty rapport with each other. If anything becomes pretty conventional or dull, I can depend on either actor to give it a nice reading. Not necessarily a funny reading, but at least a reading that's consistent with the character. Definitely worth getting on Blu-ray!

The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian (2008)

Decent adaptation of the book

[7/10 · 7 June 2008]

I read the books, all seven, roughly once a year since I first read them in the 90's, and I love the series. The first film was okay, at least it isn't as irredeemably bad as when Uwe Boll gets his hands on a video game franchise. It was decent, like the first Potter was decent. This one is much improved. The book has been changed, yes, and some purists in the reviews below and above me are complaining. Still, I believe that the most turgid movies are those slavishly insisting they remain faithful to the book, as if the movie is trying to be what it isn't--a book. The movies that deviate most from the book I usually find better especially if they try to tell the same story but in a way more suited to the demands of a visual (as opposed to the printed) medium. So here, the changes brings the action closer to the beginning. Well and good! Adamson is now more confident in making his action scenes, excellent! The young actors are growing more confident in portraying their roles, wonderful! I can't be unanimously ecstatic about the movie yet, Adamson (or whoever takes over) needs to dazzle me with some fancy storytelling (try Tarsem's The Fall, if you'd like to know what I'd find impressive). However, it deserved more success than it has achieved. It certainly is much better than the first movie.

Speed Racer (2008)

Pretty good

[7/10 · 12 May 2008]

To be fair I was quite tired when I saw this, so around the middle part I was dropping off a little. For a kid's flick it sure has a complicated plot (but maybe I can attribute that to my exhaustion). I didn't get a lot of things, like why Speed joined forces with Taejo & Racer X and the government guy. However, the pluses are it sure is a fantastic-looking film, all the races were exciting and the ending was especially gripping. I like the recurring theme about family and being true to your roots. Why did it fail? I can fault myself for watching when tired, but I think the movie might be too long (you equate length with weighty epics). Precisely why should it be two hours plus? Nevertheless, I do hope that history would validate the Wachowski's big-risk gamble a few years from now. One day, who knows? It didn't succeed now, but I see quite a lot of love letters among the user comments. Add my review to those, it's just that it isn't an unqualified rave.

Iron Man (2008)

Exemplary work

[8/10 · 12 May 2008]

I'm probably getting old, but Speed Racer tired me and somewhere in the middle of Iron Man I found it a bit slow. Either that or I experience burnout from wallowing in the pre-release internet publicity of both movies. Some people are saying that this Iron Man is better than Batman Begins. Yes, in one aspect, I think Robert Downey is a better actor than Bale. They are both quite good, but I give more points to Downey for being self-deprecating and funnier, plus, his personal history outside the movie adds to the baggage (actual positive baggage!) he brings to this role. Very inspired acting, aside from the fact he's quite qualified to do the role anyway. I do prefer the basic story of Batman over Iron Man. A Batman story relies on atmospherics (hence the use of a bat, and the generally dark tone of most of movies and comics). He also uses a bit of deductive reasoning in combating crime. Tony Stark is an inventor, and his suit is a wonderful toy, but Iron Man's antagonists aren't that inspired (except maybe the Mandarin). The comic's best story arc are Stark battling his personal demons. I like the way Favreau makes his fanboy homages so integrated to the movie. Not being aware of them won't detract a whit from a newcomer's experience, but knowing about them will send a fanboy to nirvana. In any case, exemplary work. My rating of an 8 may seem too low for a positive review, but I'm a bit of a contrarian. To me, the best comic book movie was The Incredibles, and I'm in the minority holding that opinion.

Il Mare (2000)

I like it. Original and Derivative at the same time.

[8/10 · 30 April 2008]

In a nutshell, A girl falls in love with a guy who is two years in her past. Romance and Time Travel has been around for a long time. Back to the Future is a romance. So is Chris Marker's Le Jetee (and as a consequence, 12 Monkeys) and Somewhere in Time. There are many plot devices to separate lovers and one of the most cruel (hence most romantic) is using implacable Time. So the time travel device is no longer a De Lorean or playing mental tricks on oneself but rather it's now a mailbox. I think more interesting are some directing effects (when the camera swings around the mailbox and the lovers seem like they are in the same space), some good shots of the skies and the deliberate, anti-MTV pacing of the movie. Lake House, the remake, is actually decent. It's fairly restrained and the house in the remake is prettier. It is not, however, that revolutionary, and therefore suffers in comparison with this remake. Lake House works because of the story, which is virtually the same here. Also, putting in two big name stars is distracting from a simple, gossamer story. Therefore, I have fonder memories of this Korean original.

Sabrina (1954)

Captivated this child of the 80's

[10/10 · 19 April 2008]

I saw this again just last week on Cinemax. It's in black and white (that never scared me off).

Made 12 years before I was born, I saw it when I was in college (late 80's) and I've loved it since. I like the 1995 remake with Harrison Ford, and my favorite line from the remake (Sabrina to Linus): They say you're the world's only living heart donor. I love that line, but while there isn't an equivalent of that zinger in the Bogart/Hepburn version, I do think this is the superior product. This has Audrey Hepburn (Ormond can't compare), and it has the comedic/surrealistic touches of Billy Wilder (yes, Pollack can do comedy. I thought Tootsie was funny under Pollack's direction, and maybe Pollack should stick to original scripts like that).

More than that, Sabrina is a product of the times. Compare the 1995 and the 1954 versions. There are lines in the 1954 version that can't be said in the 1995 version without people laughing at the wrong times. Are these more cynical times? Are there things we can't believe people doing now (like Linus's noble attitude in the end), making the remake seem anachronistic? I think that's the real problem with the remake. This 1954 version exists, and it sparkles and zips along faster than Ford's version. Ford's version doesn't distinguish itself enough. It's likable, there's that one line I really love, the actors are pretty, but it might as well be a Tom Hanks/ Meg Ryan vehicle, or (if remade yet again in the new millennium) a Matthew McConaughey/ Kate Hudson yawner.

Remakes have a tough time usually, but it IS possible to improve an original. I thought The Fly with Jeff Goldblum took the story in directions I'd never imagine (focused on the romance!). Howard Hawk's His Girl Friday improved on The Front Page by turning the reporter from a guy to a girl. Or at least, strike out in a different direction. When Howard Hawk's The Thing from Outer Space was remade into John Carpenter's The Thing, Carpenter stuck closer to the original short story and added groundbreaking makeup effects. When Howard Hawk's Scarface was redone by Brian DePalma into Pacino's Scarface, he turned Scarface into a Cuban immigrant, and set the whole thing in Miami. Everything's changed, we're reminded of many things about the original, but the remakes are creatures of their own mind.

So, I think I'll stick to this original, with the irreplaceable Audrey Hepburn.

Watership Down (1978)

One of my favorite Western Animated film

[9/10 · 19 April 2008]

Watership Down is the story of a group of rabbits who leave their warren to avoid its impending destruction, in order to start a new home elsewhere (they go to the aforementioned Watership Down, which is a hill, by the way). It's epic, funny, a bit bloody, and it features plenty of bunny rabbits. The book is over 400 pages long! I devoured it when I was in grade 7 at my school library. The version I just finished was printed in 1978, but I bought it secondhand in the late 80's. That's the third copy I've owned (the others, I've loved to death or lost while lending it to a friend to read. No nobler ends a book can have.) I love anime, so it's hard for Disney and Pixar films to please me, but Watership Down is one of the few that I've loved over the years. I've read the book and I'm amazed they've managed to distill a good deal from the original tale. By necessity, they cut out those wonderful, funny stories of El-ahrairah, yet they managed to keep the epic feel and the mythology and culture of the rabbit society. Yes, it's a bit violent and gory, certainly not for the very young, but I would be excited to introduce this to my kids once they are of proper age (I used to have a copy in Betamax!) I've gone over the cast and I'm surprised by so many distinguished British stars lending their voices to the movie. I saw John Hurt, Ralph, Richardson, Nigel Hawthorne, Denholm Elliott, Joss Ackland and Zero Mostel (the last, of course, is American).

In Wikipedia, it says in more detail about the production of the TV adaptation that John Hurt, originally Hazel here, is now General Woundwort. Though it seems some fans complain the TV series tones down the dark nature of the book, I'm still interested in locating this TV series (as well as a DVD copy of the 1978 movie).

Hero (I) (1992)

Quite good, more subtle than it seems

[9/10 · 8 April 2008]

While the plot and the music sort of gives it an inspirational theme, Hero is actually more subversive than that. Over everything is the recurring theme that it's all playing in front of cameras. People acting as heroes in front of the camera, people lying in front of the camera, people avoiding the camera, people trying to have a confidential discussion in front of cameras and hundreds of people watching below. The camera makes everyone act weird because it scares them or it turns them on. I think what puts off most viewers is the syrupy music, heroic, uplifting, telling people how to feel and I can feel myself being manipulated. I personally think it's a very, very sly choice. It goes to show I can't believe anything I see in the news, and I can't believe this movie either, because it's manipulating me too by telling me not to believe. My son watched it, and I asked him, okay, who's the hero? The jerk who saves hundreds of people or the the liar who, when given the chance, goes forth to inspire and help people anyway? Both of them are undercut by their actions. I guess they both are. And I guess none of our heroes are really clean. They probably hide some sins in their pasts. Which makes the theme, if that were the theme, more realistic to me.

X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)

If you ignore the previous movies and the comics, it's disposable.

[4/10 · 5 April 2008]

Take the two other movies out of the equation. Take the comic book out of one's mind. Let the movie stand on its own. In its brief running time, at least two major characters die, Cyclops (and someone mentions briefly he died, as if as an afterthought they ought to say something about the fact before filming ended) and Prof. Xavier dies (here, at least they do dwell on the consequences and the emotional repercussions). A major war between mutants happen. Wouldn't at least one of these events be enough material for one movie? They are all so lightly treated like, say, one of the X-men lost a puppy. Then we have to move on because the director is contracted to bring it in under two hours. Then in the end it's hinted that a character who's dead isn't really dead. So, you tried to turn on our waterworks for nothing? For these reasons alone, I'd rate the movie a 5. For being mediocre. Okay, now bring in the earlier movies. Among the best comic book movies ever made. Stands pretty high too, even if they weren't comic books. Bring in the COMICS, how dare they reduce Dark Phoenix into a henchwoman? She's a glorified extra! The movie is demoted to a 1.

Alfred Hitchcock Presents: Pilot (1985) Season 1, Episode 0

Favorite Hitchcock episode

[8/10 · 3 April 2008]

I did a bit of research and found out Carlos was played by Jose Ferrer in the 1979 version and by Peter Lorre in the 1960 version (starring the unknown Steve McQueen!). I don't know how this version of Man from the South rates in comparison, but it's easily my favorite of the colored Hitchcock TV episodes. Also, John Huston is excellent (probably reprising his role as Noah Cross in Chinatown). It's interesting that this character, Carlos, has been played by three excellent actors. Maybe it's necessary in order to portray how monstrous Carlos is. Times have really fallen when the guy makes a bet for what looks like a TransAm. McQueen was going to get a Jaguar. The premise itself is inherently suspenseful and probably director-proof.

Amazing Stories: Hell Toupee (1986) Season 1, Episode 21

Guilty pleasure

[8/10 · 3 April 2008]

I loved this episode! Yes, it's moronic, and that's the pleasurable thing about it to me! I especially like how low tech (in a series with at-the-time cutting edge effects like in The Mission) the toupee is, crawling along on the ground. It's the same dumb humor as the homicidal bunny in Monty Python's Search for the Holy Grail. I also love the puns. Isaac Asimov once said puns are the noblest form of wordplay. The bigger the groan, the better, and that title is quite a groan.

Lastly, I like the nerd lawyer. Nerds were still up-and-coming at the time (Bill Gates was still on his way to becoming the richest man in the world) so for a nerd to save the day and get the girl, well, I like the idea!

The Twilight Zone: Her Pilgrim Soul/I of Newton (1985) Season 1, Episode 12

Her Pilgrim Soul is a pretty good romance

[8/10 · 3 April 2008]

I haven't seen Her Pilgrim Soul in years, I don't know how it will hold up. However, I do remember it was a wonderful story, very romantic, and surprisingly enough, it was directed by Wes Craven! Interesting choice for his oeuvre. I don't go much for romantic stories. Maybe it's the science fiction element that got to me. Anyway, it's this one and the "A Message for Charity" episode that I fondly remember. Maybe it had to do with hormones (it's my teenage years). Overall, the series doesn't seem to surpass the original Rod Serling black and white episodes. Series consultant here is Harlan Ellison and I wonder if that's the reason (I mean, I originally watched these episodes BECAUSE I saw his name. I hope the drop in quality isn't because of him).

The Twilight Zone: Examination Day/A Message from Charity (1985) Season 1, Episode 6

One of two of my favorites in the new Twilight Zone

[8/10 · 3 April 2008]

This one and "Her Pilgrim Soul" are two of my favorite episodes in this new version of Twilight Zone. As I mentioned in my comment on the new series, there's something lacking in this new series. Maybe they emphasize too much the lesson that has to be learned. It's a little bit more mawkish and sentimental than Serling's version. However, this episode can be considered as quite sentimental too. I think the appeal is that no matter what they do, the lovers can never unite. I remember I wasn't surprised by the Korean movie "Il Mare" (later remade into "The Lake House". I think it's because I saw this episode first so it ruined the impact of the later film.

Amazing Stories: Mirror, Mirror (1986) Season 1, Episode 19

Pretty good, low budget Scorsese

[8/10 · 3 April 2008]

My brother had this theory about Scorsese. When he has good writing, he makes technically excellent, but neat and slightly dull movies like Color of Money. But when the script is a mess, then he makes exciting and brilliant movies, partially to compensate for the mess in the script. Here, Scorsese goes back to his Roger Corman roots, making a cheap horror thriller that Corman would have been proud to be associated with. The story may not make much sense, but the technical bravura of the episode makes it stand out. This, as well as the Zemeckis "Go to the Head of the Class" and the guilty pleasure "Hell Toupee" are my favorite Amazing Stories episodes. It's a pity I missed Brad Bird's Family Dog.

Amazing Stories: Go to the Head of the Class (1986) Season 2, Episode 8

One of my favorite Amazing Stories episode

[8/10 · 3 April 2008]

This was right after I saw "Back to the Future" and I really loved that movie at the time. I wasn't disappointed with this one. Funniest joke in the movie is when Masterson gives Coffey her bag and he falls down from the weight. "What do you have in here? A sledgehammer?" and when they reach the mausoleum, yes she did have one! Men will do things because of the promise of sex. I never forgot that. From Used Cars to Back to the Future, Zemeckis always had wicked humor. I even enjoyed his flawed "Death Becomes Her". In this TV episode, we get to watch concentrated Zemeckis, and the lack of need to put in a happy ending is quite liberating (and more consistent with his brand of naughtiness).

Life of Brian (1979)

I'm a Roman Catholic!

[10/10 · 4 April 2007]

Utter hysteria! Oh yes, oh yes! I think it's incredibly funny they re-released the movie to celebrate its 25th anniversary AND to coincide with the Passion of the Christ (torture porn like Saw and Hostel...which is a good thing in another sense).

Yes, I'm a Roman Catholic and I'm utterly proud of their song in that other movie (The Meaning of Life) sending up my beliefs. No, seriously, I'm a practicing Roman Catholic, I believe in the Pope and in birth control and all that! And I honestly take the Python song "Every Sperm is Sacred" as a compliment! (they had a lot more to say about us Catholics in the Protestant portion afterward where the Protestant complains--and let me quote--

Harry Blackitt:'Because... every time they (Catholics) have sexual intercourse, they have to have a baby.'

Mrs. Blackitt: 'But it's the same with us, Harry.'

Harry Blackitt: 'What do you mean?'

Mrs. Blackitt: 'Well, I mean, we've got two children, and we've had sexual intercourse twice.')

I think this movie, "Life of Brian" has brilliant bits as well, and if I'm Roman Catholic (declaring it for a fourth time) and can't laugh at myself I might as well slit my wrists!

Breaking and Entering (2006)

Quite good. He should stick to modern day London

[9/10 · 4 April 2007]

I think the plot ties up too neatly, I think the characters get away too lightly but I like the movie because their decisions seem foolish yet real. That's quite a balancing act. I find myself in their place, "Yep, I did that." And feeling pretty foolish since it's up there on screen. Oh it's funny. It's fictional. There's a sort of happy ending, but there's a weird flavor that isn't Hollywood (thank God), isn't neat, seems quite authentic, and exciting. I also want to praise the two women here (Vera Farmiga is yummy, without a doubt), Robin Wright and Juliette Binoche for daring to look so un-glamorous. They are undoubtedly very beautiful but they certainly look their age. I never saw women who look so human rather than the mannequin perfection of most films. They are truly, truly sexier for it.

Exiled (2006)

That can of red bull...

[9/10 · 4 April 2007]

I've seen this three times and I love it more each time. I see the nods to spaghetti westerns, to Scorsese (who last year just gave a nod back to Hong Kong for adopting the tone and look of the gangster films he made in the seventies, eighties and nineties), to samurai flicks. It's full of testosterone, the macho code of honor, boyish hi-jinks and barely simmering, under the surface homo-erotic subtext (yeah, you can call it male bonding, I'm calling it the most uncomfortable tag there is). There's so much sexual tension in this movie. Guns as phallic substitutes, a doctor getting it off with a whore (there are two whores? or was she the same one in the hotel?), but the men, they smile in admiration of women, they protect them, they never hurt them, they are gallant to a fault. Yet they can't seem to waste their seed making love to a woman. Their true love is gun-play and their compadres at war. If John Woo has his pigeons, Johnny To has his meals between unlikely comrades. I saw Breaking News, he had a meal there and he has one here too. And the ending. A can of Red Bull goes up, the blazing climax (even in slow motion, surely that's three, four minutes?), the can goes down. Standing ovation!