Nyagtha Reviews

Tideland (2005)

Never justify your work

[7/10 · 8 September 2006]

The film itself is fine (hence the 7). It is engrossing with some haunting moments and wonderful performances by the entire cast.

Whilst people are clearly thrilled that Gilliam has produced a film vastly superior to the abysmal Brothers Grimm there is one fundamental fault with Tideland: Gilliam's preamble in which he addresses the audience. In this, he reveals that as with those of us who have seen his last couple of films, Gilliam has lost all faith in his ability as a filmmaker. We are told that the film is intended to make you think, to laugh, that some of us will like it, that some of us will not. We are told to "abandon our preconceptions" and that it is from the perspective of an innocent young girl.

As far as I am concerned, these things should go without saying. Why does Gilliam feel he has to explain to us beforehand the whole point of going to see a film? If it is funny I will laugh, but not because the director has come on and asked me to laugh. If it is from the innocent perspective of a little girl, this should come across in the film. If it is worth thinking about, people will think, but not because someone has asked them to.

This is not a return to form. The Gilliam of Brazil would not have come on beforehand and warned us that some scenes will be shocking, that it isn't really what he imagines the future to be like, but an exaggeration and comment on the problems with present society, that it has some serious moments in, but also some funny ones, so please laugh. "Thankyou. Thankyou. Thankyou." Get a grip Gilliam.

Rainy Dog (1997)

Was it the Everly Brothers who were crying in the rain?

[9/10 · 2 June 2004]

Rainy Dog, part of Miike's Triad Society is a truly beautiful film. A lot of people are going to notice, and quite rightly, that it does not conform to the traditional Miike template. Instead it moves at a slow pace with long lingering shots of the rainy streets of Taipei. The action is restrained to only a few brief gun "battles" and a stabbing, but the film is not about violence. It is about the aftermath of violence. As one character says towards the end, it is about life, death and hate. There are no opportunities to glorify the violence and every murder carries with it intense and very real consequences.

The sound track flitters between Shinjuku Triad style electronic drum effects and keyboards and country style slide guitar which really hints at the films Western roots. Essentially it is a film about an outsider used to fending for himself who is forced to care about another person and in doing so realize the value of his own life. This is not a new format and is a storyline you can find in variation in many John Wayne movies, the difference here is that I bet you won't be expecting it in a film by the man who brought the world Fudoh or Ichi the Killer.

Before his turn in Dead or Alive, Sho Aikawa turns up here as ultra cool ex-Yakuza, Yuuji, who has retired to the back alleys of Taipei to earn money as a hit-man. Early on in the film a young child is left in his house by an unknown woman. At the heart of the film, and it is a genuine heart, is the relationship between Aikawa's character and his supposed son. Without wanting to give anything anyway, it is the developments between the two which make the final scene one of the most tense scenes I have seen in film for a long time. Rarely is an audience allowed to sympathies and care for characters in a film like Rainy Dog yet it is as if Miike deliberately wants to alter our expectations. It is through caring about the characters that you realize you want them to live happily ever after.

Tomorowo Taguchi, returning from his role as the psychotic Wang in Shinjuku Triad Society has a minor but important role in Rainy Dog. His obsessive pursuit of Sho Aikawa which we see has destroyed his life mirrors intelligently Aikawa's character who is also letting his obsessions drive him to ruin. Taguchi I consider to be one of the best Japanese actors in the last decade, he is certainly one of the most prolific, and here his meagre five or six scenes are infused with an energy which helps motivate the rest of the film. I am looking forward to the next film I see with him in.

I believe that Miike had to produce this film with a largely non-Japanese crew, it is a testament to his bravery as a film maker (I dare say few directors would risk such a venture) that Rainy Dog looks and feels as it does. There are a few moments when the sound does not quite match the action (check out Aikawa beating up Taguchi early in the film for some of the most bizarre punching sound effects) but the film as a whole does not suffer. I do not know whether it was a lack of Japanese crew and skills that led Miike to make a slower movie, if so, his ability to compensate is second-to none. Instead of trying to make viewers vomit (no sick bags dispensed at viewings of this film) Miike has done something that only Japanese directors seem willing to do (Takeshi Kitano or Takashi Ishii are prone to this) and that is to promote thought and feeling during a film that is essentially a "mobster" movie. There are few forgettable scenes and some are utterly heart wrenching (Aikawa sleeping indoors with a prostitute whilst his son sleeps under a blanket with a dog in the rain).

In honesty there is little I can say against Rainy Dog. It is a superb film, a moving film and one which will make you think long and hard. Above all else it will, like most Miike films, reinforce your sense of relief that somewhere there is someone with a brain making films with a brain. And a hell of a lot of style too.

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)

I wish I had a spotless mind.

[1/10 · 30 May 2004]

This is the filmic equivalent of being stuck in a room with someone who thinks they have the most emotionally upsetting life imaginable and is doing everything in their power to persuade you they are truly tortured and pitiable. By the end of both experiences you just want to go home and feel utterly relieved you aren't so arrogant. Or you wish you were able to erase your own memory. (Sorry, a cheap film tie-in metaphor already.)

The film itself, like Being John Malkovich and Adaptation suffers from a hole in the centre. Charlie Kauffman seems to think it is clever to take a totally unlikely scenario and then develop it into a "quirky" film that is supposed to make little sense. In each instance he fails to grasp that you can't just take a scenario so utterly implausible as to defy any audience to relate or respond to it. Eternal Sunshine is a slightly easier premise to connect with than Being John Malkovich, after all who hasn't wondered what it would be like to erase painful relationships. However Kauffman sems to mistake nonsense for emotional and intellectual depth.

Someone told me that you have to watch Eternal Sunshine more than once to 'get it' and I promise that this isn't true. There is nothing you get the second time that you won't have got the first time. It is a fairly straight forward film. The only problem you might have is if you are colour blind and can't work out the time scale of the film from Kate Winslett's hair because you cannot tell that it is changing colour. The director might as well have put subtitles across the bottom of the screen saying "Two years ago" "Present day" because Gondry's visual 'clues' were about as subtle or 'clue-like' as subtitles.

Performance wise, Kate Winslett was her usual self, and Jim Carrey was in Truman show mode. Carrey offers ocassional glimpses of acting talent before they are devoured by his all consuming gurning. Tom Wilkinson and Kirsten Dunst offer more respectable performances, however I felt cheated that their entire sub plot was clearly lying on the editing room floor, it felt rushed and unconvincing. Which is a shame because the rest of the film felt over long and over laboured and perhaps a better balance might have saved my cinema ticket which I spent the whole film folding into a variety of shapes.

I made a square (Not too difficult) a triangle. I tried to make a swan but it ended up looking like some sort of half eaten fish. After that I was running out of ideas and so i tore it into equal pieces. Then unequal ones. Bored yet? I was. The second time I saw it was even worse. Fortunately I had just seen 3-4x Jugatsu and so had something to concentrate on. Namely trying to understand a film which actually had some sort of emotional depth, some sort of conflicting plot and some semblance of lead performances.

I wish people wouldn't think that any film which doesn't have a discernable Beginning - middle - end structure automatically qualifies as intelligent or engaging. And that just because Jim Carrey isn't smacking himself in the face or making chimp noises he is acting. He isn't. He is just biding his time until he can start hitting himself in the face again.

The Princess Blade (2001)

Not convinced...

[6/10 · 30 May 2004]

I was really disappointed with this film. I am going to be brief: it felt like an extended Japanese episode of Xena Warrior Princess. It had the same sort of visuals and all the fighters seem to have been carrying around their own personal trampolines. The plot was barely worthy of the description "plot" and seemed as if it had been forced in to justify the action scenes. The film was certified 18 and yet I could not understand why this was the case. It felt like an old Kurosawa film with no real visual violence, just people being swatted at by a sword then turning to face the camera with a thin sliver of blood across their chest. During the middle part of the film nothing seems to happen and there is a wholly unecessary and unconvincing subplot involving some sort of terrorist with really bad hair.

My biggest problem with Battle Royale was that it was essentially a showcase for the director to have some young Japanese talent kill each other and there is little about this description which differs from Princess Blade. Like Battle Royale the director seems to think that the ocassional scene in which characters doubt whether killing is justified, or relate some story about a dead mother or dead lover are in some way supposed to give the film an emotional depth which absolves it from being termed merely a film about fighting.

Visually it feels like an MTV video and is probably less emotionally involving. I serioulsy recommend you watch another film, but if you feel the need to complete your Tartan Asia Extreme collection nothing is going to stop you stumbling across it. And then regretting doing so.

The Happiness of the Katakuris (2001)

Like a field of fluffy bunnies.

[9/10 · 30 May 2004]

There is little more to say about this film than to recommend it heartily to anyone with a sense of humour. I mean a proper sense of humour. If you have ever wet yourself sitting through Monty Python you are going to enjoy this. This isn't Will and Grace.

Most of the songs are great, the song based around a dead man with scissors in his neck is brilliant. They are cheesy, OTT and have some of the best dance moves since Ricky Martin tried dismally to samba his way into the charts. I am still humming along to some of the tunes (from the Katakuris, not Ricky Martin. Although I wish he'd been a guest at the Katakuri's guest house.) My greatest problem with the film comes from its advertising. It is labelled as a "Cannibal Musical" in some press releases. Ignore this. There is no cannibalism in this film. Not even a suggestion of it. Nobody even says in close up; "Oh I am hungry" and then is juxtaposed with a shot of a dead body. The only feasible description of this film which mentions cannibalism is: "Is not about cannibalism, unless if by cannibalism you mean songs".

You are going to have a great time watching this film and if you are familiar with Miike I think it is safe to say that this film is more shocking that even Ichi the Killer. Why? Because at the end of it you feel all warm and fluffy inside and I dare say nobody expects this from Takashi Miike. I certainly didn't.

Shinjuku Triad Society (1995)

Can you just say "A great film"?

[10/10 · 30 May 2004]

A lot has been said about Shinjuku Triad Society as the first true "Miike" film and I thought this sort of description might have been a cliché. But, like all clichés, it is based on the truth. All the Miike trademarks are here, the violence, the black humour, the homosexuality, the taboo testing and the difficult to like central character. Shinjuku is however, one of Miike's most perfectly formed films. He says in an interview that if he made it again it would be different, but not necessarily better. I think what he means is that the film possesses a truly captivating energy and raw edge which seems so fresh that although he might be able to capture a more visually or technically complex movie he could not replicate or better the purity of this film.

As you might expect, the violence is utterly visceral, gushing blood and gritty beatings are supplemented by a fantastic scene in which a woman has a chair smashed over her face. (Only a Miike film could let you get away with a sentence like that.) The film has a fantastic pace, unlike Dead or Alive which begins and ends strongly and dips in the middle. Dead or Alive also deals with similar issues, Miike is clearly concerned about the relations between the Japanese and Chinese in the postwar period and this emotive subject is handled well here, the central character really coming to life when you begin to understand his past.

I cannot sing Shinjuku's praises enough. I do not want to give away too much. This is Miike before he began to use CGI to animate his films and is almost reminiscent of something like Kitano's Sonatine. The central characters are superbly realized and the final twist guarantees that as soon as the film has finished you'll be popping it back on again to work it all out.

Jurassic Park III (2001)

For God's Sake Don't Come Back To Jurassic Park!

[11 December 2001]

Once again the entire film is based on big dinosaurs going "Boo!" and eating people. Only having seen it happen before, there is actually very little scary about this. Are we honestly supposed to quake as "Spinosaurus Egypticus" comes into shot heralded by a mobile phone ringtone? I am sorry, I find that about as scary as the kid who plays Laura Dern's son. Less perhaps because it made me laugh so much. Sam Neil, I hate to say it but this may be the biggest mistake of your career, after the first JP I honestly respected you and thought you were going to be huge . . . Event Horizon went someway to confirming you were every bit as good as you had promised. And then this. The script seems as deep and involving as a four frame cartoon in a kids magazine. It is unimaginative, awfully executed and an insult to anyone watching it. I had been told it was good so was looking forward to it.

My favourite bit was the way the dialogue seemed to have been written by primates and I am sorry but I cannto see where it was scary. The first one was - Raptor's throwing themselves against doors and making "bang!" noises is scary. But raptor's getting together and discussing the latest episode of their favourite prehistoric soap opera is farcical. "What are you saying?" asks Grant. If you have the innate ability to speak raptor - as Grant miraculously gains in the worst scene of all time - you would see one is inviting the other for some tea. "Yes Joshua, wait there presently will you, I would just like to take a bite out of this man's skull." "Oh Sebastian you are so vulgar, my scones are getting hard." The best part was hearing the classic film score signalling the end of the film. But by that point I was crying so hard that I didn't care.

If there are two types of kids - ones who want to be astronauts and ones who want to be astronomers, then there must be two types of film. Ones which are good, and ones which are not good. This film falls into the second category and, unlike the main cast who survive a plane crash with no more than a bruised forehead, this film grazes its bum very badly. I hope they dont' release JP4, or if they do, that they take the time to make it good. Or at least better. Please. Pretty please?

Spy Game (2001)

Will Smith and Gene Hackman - pah!

[9/10 · 5 December 2001]

I went to the cinema last night having no idea what to watch knowing with deafening certainty I was not going to wander into any of the Harry Potter screenings. After deciding against Zoolander I opted to go and see Spy Game. I certainly enjoyed Enemy of the State - even for a film with Will Smith in it. However as Spy Game opened I knew this was a different league altogether. For a start it is much darker - there are lots of interiors of prisons, dank German cafes and Bosnian Streets - the plot is a lot less fantasical and before I go any further - the soundtrack was stunning. It alternated between high octane guitars and electronic beats to quiet piano moments to huge orchestral expanses. This really helped the atmosphere of the film, especially in the Bosnian scenes. If you are looking for an alternative to Harry Potter before LOTR comes out I cannot reccomend this strongly enough. Robert Redford is very good as the CIA agent about to retire and equally Brad Pitt as the rebellious agent who works for Redford. If I have one criticism of the film and I think that it is important to have - it is that you cannot take your concentration off the action for one second. I dropped some popcorn, uttered, "Where has that gone?" and returned to my viewing to find I had to retrack to find out what was going on.

But it is this fast pace of events which ensure you don't realise it runs for over two hours. I know it is a false hope but this film deserves so much more attention that Harry Potter.

One Night at McCool's (2001)

What do people have against this film?

[10/10 · 5 December 2001]

I have to say I am surprised at the response of people on this website to this film. So much so I felt I should say something about it.

Ok, this film certainly isn't Ben-Hur or The Searchers, its not a profound and streaming epic, but for what it is I can think of none better.

It is a very funny and almost bizarre film. It is original, the cast act their hearts out and it is very rewarding to watch, the direction is unique, almost perky, there are no plot twists you can guess well in advance - there are no real plot twists. There are developments but they are not meant to catch you off guard. The behaviour of the main males is entirely beleivable and Liv Tyler's blatant sexuality is purposeful - if she didn't come across as a woman who a man would do anything for the plot would be null and void. As it is - even the most vocal Liv Tyler haters will be won over by her performance.

Each of the male unfortunates are so hilarious in their sheer devotion to Tyler, Goodman as the cop whose wife died years before and who sees in Tyler something he hasn't felt in years. Reiser as a hot shot lawyer who wants to have felt something before he dies is completely hilarious in his Tyler fetish. And Matt Dillon as the slightly dim initial boyfriend manages to acheive gormlessness perfectly. Whether these are all instances of excellent casting or not, who cares. I laughed throughout this film. Admittedly not every line has you bent over in stitches and some of th emore obvious jokes seem designed for fans of the Farrelly Brothers type, but there is an overall atmosphere of farce to the film that you can't help but feel glad you aren't involved.

To summarise what I am rambling on about - basically this film is not going to go down in history as one of the all time greats - but it does have cult potential. It is highly original, brilliantly acted and it is completely aware of what it is mocking - beautiful women getting what they want and the sad fact that men couldn't care what they are forced to do as long as there is a stunning female waiting for them at the end.

Personally I think anyone who feels strongly against this film can speak to me abou tit because I would be interested to find out why. Very very good. And I hope it does become a cult hit because it certainly deserves something after the way it has been slated.

Johnny Guitar (1954)

Deliciously Camp

[10/10 · 5 December 2001]

I have just sat through a seminar of people slating this film and am writing this to let out some of my own feelings. For a start it is brilliant. I don't want to mix words but it is the best Western I have ever seen. Forget Once Upon Time In The West, The Searchers, My Darling Clementine, Unforgiven. This is way better. For a start the good guy is a gal. For a second the good guys are the bad guys and the bad guys who claim to earn their money from a silver mine and not stagecoach robberies actually do earn their money from a silver mine and not stagecoach robberies. The dialogue is outstanding - the opening scene being about 40 minutes long which is entirely people talking and yet is entirely captivating - fun, moving, ridiculously o.t.t - I loved it. The colours are exciting - Joan Crawford not satisfied unless she is wearing bright yellow or red, and it was interesting to see Dr Strangelove's Jack D. Ripper as the pointlessley excellent gunslinger. Why pointless? Because he never uses them! The leader of the mob dresses up in what looks like a nuns habit straight from her brothers funeral, the marshall being totally dwarfed by the landowners. This film has ludicrous plot developments - a man gets shot and as he dies manages to shoot another, a horse just happens to break free and lead everyone to the final lair in the final showdown. I say too much - sorry. Watch this film with an open mind and you will enjoy it. Expect it to make sense or to fit any of your pathetic conventions and you will be moanng about it for weeks.

Barry Lyndon (1975)

The Perfect Film.

[10/10 · 18 October 2001]

I once upset a friends father regarding his love for Charlton Heston. However I found out he loved this film. As not only a genuine claim but also an attempt to breach peace I said with complete sobriety and beleif; "Barry Lyndon is the perfect film".

Without looking up from his newspaper and without a pause for thought, he responded with; "It is the perfect film." Aurally, visually, heart achingly, there is a beauty in not only the film's appearence, but even its dialogue will wipe you out; "Will I go to Heaven?" The characters will carry you with them through love, hate and THAT SOUNDTRACK!!! Kubrick is the master of perfection and he never quite beat this.

Coinciding with the relase of Jaws it didn't do as well as it should (understatement) and Kubrick was undeservingly destroyed. If a film ever deserved to be seen by everyone, this is it.