Change Your Image
thevisitor967-526-781026
Reviews
Fences (2016)
Great performances but that was about it.
Didn't care for Fences on the stage and didn't care for it on the screen. I found it too talky with very little action. I was told in writing classes to SHOW--not TELL. I didn't feel Wilson followed this rule. There seemed to be endless monologues of Troy pontificating about race relations, job security, extramarital sex, etc. Instead of him talking about these things--why weren't there scenes of him actually experiencing them? Wilson couldn't have flashbacks of when Troy was turned down as a baseball player, when Troy went to prison, when Troy met the woman who gave birth to his daughter, etc.? These scenes would've been a lot more interesting than Troy's endless monologues. And it would've improved the cinematography in the film too! The only thing I liked about this movie were Washington and Davis's performances.
Noah (2014)
I liked it.
I liked it--especially the cinematography, directing, acting and writing. It reminded me of a Shakespearean play. The scene where Noah is tested whether he will kill his grandchildren or not may not have been out of the scriptures of Noah, but it was definitely reminiscent of the scriptures of Abraham (and Isaac). And the stone ents that a lot of people are complaining about are supposed to be the lions and ferocious animals that protected the ark, which is straight out of the bible! And for your information, after the flood, Noah started a winery and was in fact found drunk and naked by Ham. I will admit that there was some artistic liberty taken in this film, but the overall message was worth it--that humanity is basically good and worth giving a second chance. What is wrong with that? It's not like this movie was advocating evil. And in terms of the special effects and all that--how else are you going to get young people to see a movie about a story that was written thousands of years ago?!
Pather Panchali (1955)
Overrated.
I love foreign films because they tell the truth of the human condition unlike Hollywood-studio movies that usually sugar-coat life. Foreign films like The 400 Blows, Summer, Ikiru, Wild Strawberries, Early Spring, Late Autumn--all had a profound effect on me. They were like the independent films of today.
I should like Pather Panchali, but I didn't. Yes, it told the truth of the human condition. Yes, it had beautiful cinematography. Yes, it had an effective soundtrack. But that was it. It didn't have anything else. Let me put it this way--it didn't emotionally move me like the above- mentioned films. Why? Probably because of a lack of character development. The father is hardly even in the film. The mother is a witch to her daughter. The aunt is a caricature of an old woman who means well. Same goes for the daughter. The son comes late in the film and basically copies whatever the daughter does. The neighbors are like the bad people in a chorus of a Greek tragedy. How can anyone be emotionally moved by characters like these?! They were all pretty much one-dimensional. And to top all that off--there was no plot! Well, I wasn't surprised to see that because how can you have a plot when you have only static characters. I do not recommend this film.
Shûbun (1950)
Shakespeare + Dostoyevsky = Kurosawa
This is one of my favorite Kurosawa films--right up there with IKIRU and RAN. Considering SCANDAL was made in 1949, I think it's interesting that Kurosawa was already showing how Shakespeare and Dostoyevsky influenced him. The corrupted lawyer's dilemma whether he should side with the prosecutors or defendants is something straight out of HAMLET. And like Hamlet, he doesn't make his decision until the very end. The painter who tried to find justice in a corrupt society reminded me of Raskolnikov in Dostoyevsky's CRIME AND PUNISHMENT. Although the painter didn't commit a crime, he was still being tried for one and treated like a criminal. You begin to see how his anger to a corrupt society is rooted to his psychological makeup of the "superman" complex--or the little man standing up to the big boys. After SCANDAL, Kurosawa made a number of films that show how he was influenced by Dostoyevsky and Shakespeare: THE IDIOT (Dostyovesky), IKIRU (Dostoyevsky), THRONE OF BLOOD (Shakespeare), RAN (Shakespeare), etc. I highly recommend SCANDAL.
The Spectacular Now (2013)
Nothing special.
There seems to be a lot of coming-of-age movies being released within the past year. IMO the best of the crop are THE PERKS OF BEING A WALLFLOWER and THE WAY WAY BACK. Unfortunately, I can't put THE SPECTACULAR NOW in the same league. There just was nothing special about it. I think the main problem I had with the film was that (1) I didn't connect with any of the main characters as I did with PERKS, and (2) I didn't find it funny or heartwarming like WAY WAY BACK. To me, NOW seemed more like a TV movie than anything else. I mean, what was so original about the boy being like the father he never saw? Or the geeky girl having a crush with the cool guy at school?
Tôkyô monogatari (1953)
Not that great.
I thought TOKYO STORY was OK but nothing to write home about. It was not that great. Besides lacking character development, I just felt this film needed a plot! It just didn't seem to go anywhere until the parents left Tokyo. And even then it didn't seem like much of a climax.
I really don't understand what is so great about TOKYO STORY. IMO Ozu made much better films. My personal favorite is THE ONLY SON with THERE WAS A FATHER a close second. Those films had two-dimensional characters. Those films had a plot. Those films had a theme. I mean, that scene in THE ONLY SON where the mother told her son that she had to sell her house to pay for his education was incredible. That whole scene was incredible with the son explaining to his mother how hard it was to find a decent job in Tokyo.
So, yes, Ozu made some great films but IMO TOKYO STORY is not one of them. IMO the greatest Japanese films are THE ONLY SON, IKIRU, RAN, TAMPOPO, THE EEL, THE TWILIGHT SAMURAI, STILL WALKING, NOBODY KNOWS.
Fruitvale Station (2013)
It was just OK. Nothing special.
I went to see FRUITVALE STATION because of its glowing reviews. A lot of critics gave it 4 stars and called it one of the best films of the year. Well, I wouldn't go that far. it was OK, but it wasn't anything special. IMO it's a VERY simple story--not complex at all. It's essentially about a black guy who tries to do good but winds up being a tragic victim. End of story. Something you'd probably see on 60 minutes or something. I really don't know why the press is making such a big deal about this movie. Maybe because of the Zimmerman trial. If it wasn't for that, would FRUITVALE STATION be getting all this attention?!
Before Midnight (2013)
Not as good as the first two movies.
*** SPOILER ALERT ***
IMO BEFORE MIDNIGHT seemed disjointed. It just seemed like it was trying to cover all the issues of a couple who had been married for a while. I think if it had just focused on one issue then it would've been a much stronger film. i found the beginning to be slow, unnecessary and frankly--boring. That conversation with the three couples around the dinner table I found particularly boring. I mean, I get what Linklater was trying to do. He wanted to show aspects of a relationship from three different age groups. But it just seemed so contrived and perfunctory. I really didn't start to get interested until the hotel room scene. But even that scene didn't seem focused enough. One minute they're making love and the next minute they're yelling at each other. Again, it just seemed so contrived. It just didn't seem to make sense why they decided to argue at that particular time of the day. And it wasn't just any ol' argument--it was a BIG argument!
I think BEFORE MIDNIGHT tried to be like an Eric Rohmer film but wasn't as successful. The main problem may have been there wasn't a main point. For example, in SUMMER, the main point was a young woman who tried to go on vacation by herself without feeling lonely. In BOYFRIENDS AND GIRLFRIENDS, the main point was the difficulties of starting a career and a relationship with the right person. But what was the main point of BEFORE MIDNIGHT? A married couple takes a trip to Greece to discuss whether they should move to Chicago or not? That doesn't sound very interesting to me. I think BEFORE MIDNIGHT could've been a whole lot better than it actually was.
On the Road (2012)
I don't get the hatred toward this film. I loved it.
To the guy who said that On The Road hardly took place on the road. I don't know what he was smoking while he saw the movie because I saw a lot of scenes that took place on the road! It went from NY to Denver to North or South Carolina to NY to Louisiana to San Francisco to Denver to NY to Mexico--you get the picture.
In case you didn't know, On The Road was about the Beatniks, such as Jack Kerouac, Allen Ginsberg, William Burroughs, et al. They were true bohemians of their day. Of course you're going to see a lot of sex and drugs in this movie. That was what the Beatniks were all about. They preceded the psychedelic 60s, Haight/Asbury, Woodstock, etc.
I loved this movie. I liked how it caught this conflict in our society after WW2. On the one hand, you had guys who were so messed up but tried to lead a "respectable" life by starting a family with someone like Camille and soon realized that it just wasn't in their blood (like Dean). Then you had guys who were straight A students and got into an Ivy League school like Columbia but were bored with their lives and wanted something exciting (like Sal). I really like how this film examined this "rebellion" undercurrent that was going on during the 50s that led to the Vietnam War protesters of the 60s. This country definitely changed after all that and it was good to see how it all got started. 10 out of 10.