Monika’s Pensieve

{FILM DIARY}

The Wolfman (UK/USA, 2010)

Seen: Monday, 15th March 2010 (cinema)
Runtime: 103′
Director: Joe Johnston
Cast: Emily Blunt, Benicio Del Toro, Anthony Hopkins, Hugo Weaving
Production House: Universal Pictures, Relativity Media, Stuber Productions
Plot: (from imdb)

Upon his return to his ancestral homeland, an American man is bitten, and subsequently cursed by, a werewolf.

Scene From the Film

Rating: +0 (Liked It)

Impressions In Short
It’s sort of like a return to the old horror monster movies of the 1930s, only it’s in colour and has more gore. But its essence is pretty much the same as what Hollywood made then.

More About the Film
Benicio Del Toro was kind of fun because he played it very earnestly. He really is a broken man after he realizes he’s a werewolf and I’m a sucker for that kind of melodrama. Emily Blunt was nice in the leading female role. But Anthony Hopkins is just not earnest enough *sigh* I think that especially when you’re doing melodrama you have to be quite earnest to make it work. Otherwise it feels fake and silly.
The film itself is an interesting experiment. It is intentionally very dated, but it sort of works. It’s quite weird to be watching a monster movie of that ilk made in this day and age. The whole way it’s shot, designed and scored is very old fashioned.

Recommended?
Yes, if you feel like it. Not a must-see though.

I’ve been experimenting with my film rating system for a short while now and I’ve received some feedback (both on and off the blog) about it. So far the feedback is positive. It seems that most people are finding it relatively easy to “get” and apply the marks themselves, which is great :)
However, I’m finding that I do need to tweak the system a little bit. So far when I’ve tried to rate films, I’ve come across two problems…

The 0 category problem
Something you will have probably noticed on the blog already - the “0″ mark isn’t quite working for me. It just doesn’t quite express everything I need it to. The majority of films fall in somewhere around the 0 mark and it gets very difficult to differentiate between films I enjoyed, but just not enough to want to revisit them and films I enjoyed on some level, but that left me feeling a bit underwhelmed. Moving one of the groups to -1 or +1 doesn’t quite work for me and yet I’d like to differentiate between them because my level of enjoyment is clearly different. I’m finding that using a +0 and a -0 instead of just the 0 mark makes rating a lot easier.
Does the system become more difficult to grasp when it has two zeros?

The +3 category problem
Something that hasn’t surfaced outside of my drafts yet is the problems I have with the +3 category. +3 is meant as the “I’m completely and utterly nuts about the film” category. I think every film buff has films that are just truly special to them.
The problem I’ve started facing is that there are a lot of films which have things that are very special and personal to me, but those same films have aspects or sections that don’t do much for me or even put me off.
I suppose I’m just going to have to accept that some of my +3 rated film will have small chunks that I might not like that much. If those chunks don’t stop me from being nuts about the film then I guess it doesn’t matter. Besides, when I watch a film over and over again, I invariably end up seeing lots of flaws in it, so if I don’t assume a slightly more lenient approach then I’ll end up not using the +3 category at all ;)
But for films where the off-putting points aren’t quite so minor, it gets a bit more problematic. At current I’ve got reviews of two such films in my drafts.
One is Desert Flower, which touched me in an extremely personal way - I haven’t seen a film like that in ages. I cried so much that it was ridiculous ;) But on the other hand, the film as a whole doesn’t excite me that much. I actually feel that stylistically it’s boring.
The other film is My Name is Khan. There are things I absolutely love to bits about it - from the way it’s shot and edited to the kind of issues it touches. Unlike Desert Flower it does excite me, but it also has a very major put off - most of the second half of the film ;-P
The easiest thing to do is just to word the definition of +2 slightly differently. The actual enjoyment factor of these films is similar to the films that would have been qualified there by the old definition, so I think broadening it makes sense.

So anyway, here’s the revised system:

Finally, I’ve been asked to give some examples of films for each rating… I’m not sure if this is going to help that much with actually grasping the rating, but why not :) Mostly these will be films I saw in the last 3 months or so (many of which I haven’t reviewed yet).

+3
Naked, Twilight, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

+2
A Single Man, My Name is Khan, Chak De! India, Remember Me, Desert Flower, Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna

+1
Ghost Writer, Y tu mamá también, Billu, Tan Lines, Sugar Rush, A mi madre le gustan las mujeres

+0
Avatar, An Education, It’s Complicated, The Disappeared, The Shock Doctrine, The Wolfman, Double Take, Zamana Deewana, Shelter, Dulha Mil Gaya

-0
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, Up in the Air, Alice in Wonderland, The Hurt Locker, Singh is King, Lebanon

-1
Sherlock Holmes, Presque Rien, Dakan, Heaven on Earth, The Twilight Saga: New Moon

-2
Hunger, Saathiya

I’m having a bit of a Due South phase. Paul Gross is one of those few actors that I got into while in my teens, but I’m still totally into him if I’m in the right mood (like now for example *grin*). I’m shocked to find he is now in his 50s though, it makes me feel old :]

Anyway, wanted to share some of my youtube findings. They’re all from British TV, where Due South was really popular apparently.
This is a very short clip of him talking about meeting the Queen - it’s certainly an interesting angle on her ;) There’s another funny and longer interview here, which he does with one of his Due South co-stars - Callum Keith Rennie (Kowalski from season 3). Finally, there’s the sketch he did for BBC1.

Another… er… interesting find is the imdb trivia about him, which says:

Admits to ‘including hints of homoeroticism’ in the final series of “Due South” (1994). He is quoted as saying that his new co-star Callum Keith Rennie was incredibly sexy and that the new series would be very homoerotic.

I never saw much of the last season of Due South, so I’m not sure what actually goes on there and how seriously he meant it ;) So I was sort of trying to establish in what context he said that. As it’s something he must have said in the late 90s, I wasn’t able to find the original interview on-line, but I have found stuff, which may help in explaining the context a little *grin*
So… I never read the Due South slash fan fiction, but I did come across some of it in its day (AFAIK Fraser-Vecchio was the main pairing). It would appear that Paul Gross was very much aware of it:

He also said in a Globe & Mail newspaper article (1998) that he has seen the the ’slash’ (homoerotic) fan fiction. This may have been during the Elm Street interview in which the reviewer brought out some stories to show him.

So I imagine that the comment about his new co-star may have been a joke related to that. But there is even more *grin* This is a scene from the blooper reel and it completely killed me lol

Edited To Add: He wasn’t kidding with that homoerotic comment ;) Obviously unlike in the bloopers they were rather subtle about it ;-P But check this out.

{FILM DIARY}

The Disappeared (UK, 2008)

Seen: Sunday, 7th March 2010 (DVD)
Runtime: 96′
Director: Johnny Kevorkian
Cast: Harry Treadaway, Greg Wise, Tom Felton
Production House: Lost Tribe Productions, Minds Eye Films
Plot: (from imdb)

Following the disappearance of his younger brother Tom, Matthew Ryan tries to put his life and sanity back together. However the past keeps coming back to haunt him.

Trailer

Rating: 0 (Ok)
If I’m marking on the -0 and +0 scale then it’s +0 :)

Impressions In Short
It’s a very stylish and rather unusual horror movie. There’s no gore and a lot of the tension is just the result of how Matthew (whose sanity is very questionable) interacts with other people and how he perceives the world. In the end there’s relatively little of the supernatural going on. It’s part horror, part crime, part social drama.

More About the Film
I naturally watched this film because of Tom Felton (duh!) and he is very good in it. He plays Matthew’s best friend, Simon. It’s interesting to see him in something which is so realistic rather than the stuff he’s done before which is very bigger than life. Simon is just a normal working class guy living on a London housing estate. Even though the part is small, it has a relatively broad emotional scape. At the beginning Simon is a little nasty. The scene on the trailer where he tells Matthew that there’s a phenomenon where dead people’s voices get recorded on tapes - he’s making that up. He’s just saying it because it amuses him that Matthew is taking this so seriously. But eventually he goes through his own loss (there’s quite an intense scene after Simon’s little sister goes missing) and he also shows some genuine concern for Matthew.
The cast is generally very stellar. Even the bit parts are cast very well and everyone gives good performances. Harry Treadaway does really well with portraying Matthew’s state of mind - he’s never fake. Greg Wise is great as Matthew’s father - very intense.
Visually the film has style as well - it’s a very grim and gritty kind of film. Considering what a low budget piece of filmmaking it is, it’s very impressive actually.

Recommended?
For fans of any of the cast - definitely. And I suppose that if you feel that a small independent and gritty horror movie might be your thing then this is definitely worth a look.

{FILM DIARY}

Alice in Wonderland (USA, 2010)

Seen: Friday, 5th March 2010 (cinema)
Runtime: 108′
Director: Tim Burton
Cast: Mia Wasikowska, Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, Anne Hathaway, Crispin Glover
Production House: Walt Disney Pictures, Roth Films, Zanuck Company, The, Team Todd
Plot: (from imdb)

19-year-old Alice returns to the magical world from her childhood adventure, where she reunites with her old friends and learns of her true destiny: to end the Red Queen’s reign of terror.

Trailer

Rating: 0 (Ok)
I definitely should have +0 and -0 ;-P (It’s Complicated would have been +0 if anyone’s interested ;-P). While I didn’t consider -1 for this one (as I did with Up in the Air), this *is* a -0. What I mean to say is that I did enjoy it, but it left me somehow underwhelmed.

Impressions In Short
I rather hoped it would be funnier *sigh* I mean I enjoyed it anyway, but it just didn’t quite live up to my expectations.

More About the Film
I think I expected the film to be a comedy, when really it’s this rather dark story about a country under tyranny. There’s the hero who has to save the country of course (or rather I should say heroine, but the way the character is written, she could just as well be a boy - they even dress Alice up in armour at one point), there’s lots of strange creatures and colourful lands and there are some comedic moments. But despite that, I felt it was a very dark story really.
Depp’s mad hatter is a very sad, mentally ill character. He does have some funny moments, but overall I felt he was more sad than funny. His sudden personality changes were quite weird - the Scottish accent in particular (I mean Depp is very good with accents and he pulled off the Scottish accent no problem, but it was just so weird to hear him change into it all of a sudden).
Overall though, I wasn’t too keen on the performances in this… Both Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham-Carter were doing stuff I’ve already seen them do - same mannerisms etc. I was even disappointed with Alan Rickman (who has a sort of cameo - it’s mainly his voice). He was just being used for his voice and sarcasm, so it was also the same old thing really. Anne Hathaway surprised me though - she did a very interesting performance as the white queen. It could have very easily been an extremely boring character, but she made it into something more. Crispin Glover and Mia Wasikowska were ok… There was a particular scene between them that I really loved where he hits on her. The line is I love largeness or something like that I think ;)
Aesthetically, the film was very beautiful of course. And there is something about the film that intrigues me - it’s weird ;) Overall, however, I walked out of the cinema feeling a bit underwhelmed and as if it was too much about the aesthetics, animation and all of that. Maybe that’s why I had problems getting into it, I just didn’t feel the human element enough.

Recommended?
For people who are aesthetically-orientated - definitely :) For others… I’m not so sure. It’s an ok film certainly. Anne Hathaway fans should probably take a look - it’s a very interesting performance :)

I’m shocked to find that I still have not spotted this. There’s like two trailers and a scene released already ;)
And while I’m writing about Twilight - I’m both excited and annoyed that Bill Condon is going to direct Breaking Dawn (the 4th book, the 4th & 5th film). Excited cause he’s an interesting choice and annoyed because I was previously hoping not to get excited for Breaking Dawn at all cause I detest the book ;-P

{FILM SPOTTING}

The Twilight Saga: Eclipse (USA, 2010)

Release Date (Poland): 1st July 2010
Release Date (worldwide): 30th June 2010
Director: David Slade
Cast: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Billy Burke, Ashley Greene, Jackson Rathbone, Nikki Reed, Kellan Lutz, Elizabeth Reaser, Peter Facinelli, Dakota Fanning, Anna Kendrick, Michael Welch
Production House: Summit Entertainment, Temple Hill Entertainment, Maverick Films, Imprint Entertainment, Sunswept Entertainment
Plot: (from imdb)

As a string of mysterious killings grips Seattle, Bella, whose high school graduation is fast approaching, is forced to choose between her love for vampire Edward and her friendship with werewolf Jacob.

Trailers and clips
Twilight tradition dictates that the trailers should be bad and they are…. but (and I’m not sure whether this should worry me or whether I should be happy about it), I think they look better than usual…
The theatrical trailer has been out for a while now:

I snorted at the “As long as we get to kill some vampires” line - love the sarcasm and the delivery. Also, the action sequences are looking unusually good. And I really like Pattinson in the snowy bits (and the snowy bits themselves look nice too ;)).
The teaser trailer which has been out for ages:

The actual content on this one looks disgustingly soppy and cheesy ;-P However, the field of blue flowers looks gorgeous and some of the lines (particularly Lautner’s) sound great (as in the delivery of them ;-P the lines themselves are a bit too far on the soppy side of things ;-P).
But what has me very hopeful is the Edward & Bella scene that has been released:

The sceptical part of me thinks that…
If this turns out to be as soppy, sentimental and generally awful as New Moon then I would have seriously considered not seeing Breaking Dawn. The problem is that now that Bill Condon is attached I probably will want to see it even if Eclipse turns out to be awful (which I still consider to be a very real possibility :]).

The excited part of me thinks that…
There is hope that this will not be as dreadful as New Moon. I say this because:
1) The Bella & Edward scene has a very different style of editing to what we saw in New Moon. It’s common practice to shorten or make a scene a bit more dynamic when releasing it for promotional purposes, so I’m not sure if that’s how the scene actually appears in the film. But the kind of changes that are usually made would mean the scene should look worse in its promotional version to me, so I have a lot of hope regardless ;)
One of my biggest bugs with New Moon was how dynamic the editing was. You just can’t do that kind of editing when you’re relying on awkward humour and when you have Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart as your leads :] The two of them have a beautifully restrained style of acting and their silences say as much as their actual lines do.
The released scene has relatively long shots and awkward silences, yay! *grin* And Pattinson and Stewart both look much better in that scene than how I remember them in New Moon *sigh of relief*
2) While the scene looks very soppy indeed, it’s a different sort of sentimentalism than what we saw in New Moon. If that’s the direction they’re going in with the soppy stuff then it may well work for me.
3) I think that of the four books, Eclipse is the one that translates to the screen most naturally. There’s a lot in it that should look really good on screen. I’m particularly keen to see how the whole Edward-Bella-Jacob dynamic plays out. There should be a lot of hilarious scenes. Both guys get extremely possessive of Bella, which should be fun to see. And then there’s Bella getting annoyed with both of them (she even runs off with Jacob while Edward can’t do anything about it *grin* and then there’s the sleeping bag scene! *grin*). I can really imagine Pattinson, Stewart and Lautner pulling off some great moments.
4) Another problem in New Moon was the Hollywood mentality of “OMG, we have to put in some action sequences or only girls will want to watch this”. New Moon as a story does not lend itself naturally to action. So they started inventing things and changing stuff to put in the action, making a total mess of the story in the process. Eclipse has some very good and natural moments for action, so hopefully they will not have to destroy the story to put in the action they so crave :]

A lot of interesting films coming in this month :) And there’s the Planete Doc Review festival (7th-16th May) on top of that!

{FILM SPOTTING}

Bad Boys Cela 425 (Poland/France, 2009)

Release Date (Poland): 7th May 2010
Release Date (worldwide): 22nd May 2009
Runtime: 120′
Director: Janusz Mrozowski
Production House: Filmogène
Plot: (from imdb)

Seven repeat offenders are serving sentences of 9, 12, 18 and 25 years in a 160 square foot cell. They have accepted the filmmaker and his camera in their daily life. The penitentiary administration has granted him 10 days.

Trailer

The sceptical part of me thinks that…
Er… well it’s a documentary and it’s Planete Doc Review month, so that’s a lot of documentaries in one month and it’s not a genre I like to watch in large quantities really.

The excited part of me thinks that…
It’s had good reviews, I tend to like prison films (although I haven’t actually watched a documentary one yet) and I rather like the look of it :)

The Men Who Stare at Goats (USA/UK, 2009)

Release Date (Poland): 7th May 2010
Release Date (worldwide): 8th September 2009
The release date was moved the second time. Originally spotted in April (didn’t spot it in February cause there were too many other films to see then ;-P).

A Single Man (USA, 2009)

Release Date (Poland): 14th May 2010
Release Date (worldwide): 11th September 2009
Originally spotted on this blog in September 2009 *grin* And if you’re not aware of how excited I am for this film then you clearly don’t read my blog often ;)

Bright Star (UK/Australia/France, 2009)

Release Date (Poland): 14th May 2010
Release Date (worldwide): 15th May 2009
Runtime: 119′
Director: Jane Campion
Cast: Abbie Cornish, Ben Whishaw, Kerry Fox, Thomas Sangster
Production House: Pathé, Screen Australia, BBC Films, UK Film Council, New South Wales Film & Television Office, Hopscotch Productions, Jan Chapman Pictures
Plot: (from imdb)

The drama based on the three-year romance between 19th century poet John Keats and Fanny Brawne, which was cut short by Keats’ untimely death at age 25.

Trailer

The sceptical part of me thinks that…
It may turn out to be just another costume drama with nothing that makes it stand out.

The excited part of me thinks that…
It stars Ben Whishaw and is directed by Jane Campion, which makes me curious :)

I Love You Phillip Morris (USA, 2009)

Release Date (Poland): 21st May 2010
Release Date (worldwide): 18th January 2009
And this one was originally spotted in April 2009 *grin*

Un proph?te (2009, France/Italy)

Release Date (Poland): 21st May 2010
Release Date (worldwide): 16th May 2009
Originally spotted in January (release date was moved).

Nanny McPhee and the Big Bang (UK/France/USA, 2010)

Release Date (Poland): 28th May 2010
Release Date (worldwide): 24th March 2010
Runtime: 109′
Director: Susanna White
Cast: Ralph Fiennes, Ewan McGregor (cameo), Maggie Gyllenhaal, Emma Thompson, Maggie Smith, Rhys Ifans
Production House: Universal Pictures, Studio Canal, Relativity Media, Working Title Films, Three Strange Angels
Plot: (from imdb)

Nanny McPhee arrives to help a harried young mother who is trying to run the family farm while her husband is away at war, though she uses her magic to teach the woman’s children and their two spoiled cousins five new lessons.

Trailer

The sceptical part of me thinks that…
I’ll probably only watch this if I feel like something a bit mindless and it’ll depend on what releases in June (this comes out on the 28th of May, so I’m more likely to see it in June really). It basically looks like a funny, but predictable family film.

The excited part of me thinks that…
It has a nice cast and I quite liked the first one (which was set in a totally different time period and had a very different cast - although ironically Colin Firth and Thomas Sangster who were in the first one both have other intriguing film releases this month *grin*). But basically, if I’m in the mood then why not :)

Cherrybomb publicity is still going strong. And while Rupert Grint remains relatively quiet in interviews, he definitely seems to be handling them better :) (either that, or my taste in interviews has changed ;-P)

So here’s one where he’s challenged to a game of darts. The Phelps twins weren’t kidding when they said Rupert has a very er… interesting way of doing maths when he’s playing games ;)

He had me snorting with laughter in this one - a nice idea indeed ;)

Finally, I particularly loved the young hollywood interview. One rarely gets an idea of what an eccentric character he actually is. There’s something wonderfully liberating about his interests and tastes lol

{FILM DIARY}

Up in the Air (USA, 2009)

Seen: Wednesday, 3rd March 2010 (cinema)
Runtime: 108′
Director: Jason Reitman
Cast: George Clooney, Vera Farmiga, Anna Kendrick
Production House: Paramount Pictures, Cold Spring Pictures, DW Studios, Montecito Picture Company, The, Rickshaw Productions, Right of Way Films
Plot: (from imdb)

With a job that has him traveling around the country firing people, Ryan Bingham leads an empty life out of a suitcase, until his company does the unexpected: ground him.

Trailer

Rating: 0 (Ok)
I almost gave this one a -1, but in the end felt that would have been too harsh. It didn’t bore me or annoy me and I did enjoy watching it on some level. But I also found it sort of depressing and it’s generally not my type of movie. I’m starting to feel I should have had two zero marks instead of one - a -0 and a +0 ;-P A film very rarely is an exact 0…

Impressions In Short
It’s one of those clever American indie films with very witty dialogue.

More About the Film
I found it depressing - the moral of the story (in my eyes anyway) was that if you lead a very aggressively independent sort of life then you’re going to be unhappy and if you lead a very steady, family-orientated life you’ll be unhappy as well. Basically, you’re screwed either way :]
It definitely was amusing and it did have something to say about how people live and relate to each other nowadays. So from that angle I enjoyed it, but overall it just wasn’t my kind of movie. It’s one of those little films, which watches well because of its cleverness and wittiness rather than because you fall in love with the characters. And I’m one of those people that like to fall in love with characters :]

Recommended?
Er…. yes… I think a lot of people will like this. Certainly, if you like indie American films with witty dialogues and clever stories then you’re likely to enjoy this. If you’re like me and prefer the more character-driven kind of plots you’re probably not going to be into it that much.

{FILM DIARY}

It's Complicated (USA, 2009)

Seen: Tuesday, 2nd March 2010 (cinema)
Runtime: 120′
Director: Nancy Meyers
Cast: Meryl Streep, Steve Martin, Alec Baldwin
Production House: Universal Pictures, Relativity Media, Waverly Films, Scott Rudin Productions
Plot: (from imdb)

When attending their son’s college graduation, a couple reignite the spark in their relationship…but the complicated fact is they’re divorced and he’s remarried.

Trailer

Rating: 0 (Ok)

Impressions In Short
A lot of laughs :) The three of them have great chemistry together and it’s so refreshing to watch a romantic comedy about characters in their 50s and 60s.

More About the Film
Basically, it was fun and we had a lot of laughs. The first half was a bit on the stiff side and I wasn’t sure I’d like it, but it really warmed up in the second half. There were a couple of truly hilarious scenes (particularly the whole pot smoking sequence, as well as the Alec Baldwin gets naked by the computer screen bit).
I loved how unabashed Alec Baldwin is about his body (he had quite a few shirtless scenes and he is very clearly overweight, but he’s actually sort of sexy anyway ;)). Although I’m very disappointed to hear he had a body double for his nude scene ;-P And I felt that scene called for a full frontal shot (it would have been funnier that way). It’s a shame they chickened out :]

Recommended?
Yes, it’s fine for a good laugh. I’d also recommend it to fans of any of the cast, as well as fans of romantic comedy in general.