‘Silent Light’s’ Slowness Will Put Off Most Audiences

What I realized after watching “Silent Light” is that audiences need to understand that an appreciation for film needs to go beyond just plot, characters or even entertainment value. “Silent Light” might test the patience of its viewers, but it’s a wonderfully shot film that depicts the unique life of menonites — sort of similar to the Amish — who have settled in Mexico.

Clocking in at more than two hours, the film is about Johan, a menonite man with a wife, Esther, and two children. Johan is sleeping with another woman named Esther, and the film is about his struggle between his religious convictions and his temptation and weakness for Marianne, who he can’t stop seeing. Emotions are extremely repressed in this family. Everything is out in the open about Johan’s infidelities, and yet the husband and wife rarely talk about it or address it. My description of the plot doesn’t really do it much justice, so I’d recommend reading Variety magazine’s take on it.

The ending has a crazy twist, for those willing to sit patiently through two hours of nothing really happening. Johan — who can’t stop seeing Marianne — and Esther finally confront his infidelities head-on, and Esther ends up dying of a a heart attack brought about by immense stress. At the viewing of Esther’s funeral, Johan finally is repentant and wishes things could go back to the way they were. At this moment, Marianne shows up and wishes to see Esther’s body. When she does, she kisses Esther’s face, and suddenly Esther wakes up. (Highlight to read)

That is crazy ending, if I do say so myself, and it’s open to interpretation. Were they playing a trick on Johan? Is Esther really alive? Or is the scene in someone’s head or even outside of the film’s reality? It was totally unexpected, and it make the film much more interesting. I guess lately, sitting through these long films do have some payoff. Unfortunately, no one else would likely appreciate it, and because of that, I don’t recommend it for those without patience. I saw several people walk out of the film, and its length and slowness makes me understand why.

1.5 stars
***
Wayne’s star system
1 star –> avoid at all costs
2 stars –> watch on TV when nothing else is on
3 stars –> rent it eventually
4 stars –> must see before you die

“Silent Light” (IMDB)
“Silent Light” review (Variety)

‘Munyurangabo’s’ End Slightly Makes Up For Its Lull

If “Hotel Rwanda” educated the masses about the Rwanda genocide, Korean American Lee Isaac Chung’s “Munyurangabo” will show audiences the aftermath of how Rwanda’s citizens coped with their loss. In the film, two young boys, Munyurangabo and Sangwa, leave the capital of Kigali with a machete and aim to kill the man who killed Munyurangabo’s father during the 1994 genocide.

Munyurangabo is filled with hate, and when the two boys visit Sangwa’s home on the way to their ultimate destination, they end up staying for several days rather than several hours. Sangwa’s parents disapprove of Munyurangabo and soon learn of their plot. Sangwa and Munyurangabo’s friendship is tested at this time.

Although the film starts out promising, it grinds to halt during the boys’ stay in Sangwa’s village. The scenes linger a bit too long and take up too much of the middle of the film. However, it slightly redeems itself in the end, when Munyurangabo reaches his father’s killer, only to discover that the man is dying of AIDS. In the final scene, the man, lying in his shack, asks for water — and after some deliberation, Munyurangabo finally goes to the river to fill up some jugs. (highlight to read).

The film appears to depict Rwanda life accurately, and it has some interesting moments — such as near the end, when a poet beats about the genocide on screen. I can’t quite recommend the film because of the painfully flow middle portion, which will test an audience’s patience, but if you’re interested in Rwanda or Africa as a whole, it might be enough to keep you in your seat.

2 stars
***
Wayne’s star system
1 star –> avoid at all costs
2 stars –> watch on TV when nothing else is on
3 stars –> rent it eventually
4 stars –> must see before you die

“Munyurangabo” (IMDB)
“Munyarangabo” Official Web site (Almond Tree Films)

‘We Own the Night’s’ Actors Deliver Solid Performances

Although most of the films in competition this year are typically non-Hollywood, James Gray’s “We Own the Night” comes closest to the traditional crime-genre film that most audiences are familiar with. With an all-star cast that includes Joaquin Phoenix, Mark Wahlberg, Eva Mendes and Robert Duvall, you would think that audiences might have appreciated it. But after its initial press screening, there were quite a few boos.

In the film, director James Gray weaves together a strong character-driven tale of revenge and redemption in 1980s Brooklyn. Bobby Green (Phoenix) is a night-club owner who is soon caught in between his loyalty toward family and his Polish employer, whose mafia nephew Vadim is running drugs out of the club. Unknown to Vadim, Bobby Green is actually Bobby Grusinky — the son of Burt Grusinky (Duvall) and brother of Joseph Grusinky (Walhberg) — two police officers in the New York Police Department. But unlike them, Bobby has rejected his law-enforcement roots and chooses to live a lifestyle of drugs, partying and drinking with his girlfriend Amada (Mendes). Although Bobby’s brother and father dislike the choices that he makes, they have no choice but to accept them.

Tragically, Bobby is forced to take sides when the Polish mafia targets one of his family members. Vadim eventually learns of Bobby’s connection to his law-enforcement family, and the rest of the movie deals with Bobby and his slow transformation from a selfish night-club owner to a full-fledged police officer in the NYPD.

Although I don’t want to give away the plot details, there is a thrilling car chase in the middle of the film that makes the movie worth watching, and the actors all are on their game throughout the film. Phoenix’s performance as Bobby is terrific, although his transformation into a cop is a bit too quick and unbelievable. Walhberg delivers a solid performance, fresh off his “Departed” buzz, but the top honors go to Duvall, who once again shows why he is a great actor.

“We Own the Night” got booed likely because it was too Hollywood and formulaic for international critics. However, the film is griping, entertaining and is a character study of Phoenix’s Bobby. It didn’t have a nice, neat and predictable ending, and I respected that. Although the film probably won’t win the Palm d’Or, but it has the potential to do well at the box office.

P.S. Watch the international trailer, linked here and below.

3.5 stars
***
Wayne’s star system
1 star –> avoid at all costs
2 stars –> watch on TV when nothing else is on
3 stars –> rent it eventually
4 stars –> must see before you die

“We Own the Night” (IMDB)
“We Own the Night” (Movie Trailer)

‘Ocean’s 13′ Not its Lucky Number

“Ocean’s 13″ probably was my most anticipated film at the Cannes Film Festival. Sure, it’s not in the main competition for obvious reasons (too Hollywood), but I had hoped it would be a refreshing change of pace from all the serious cinema I’ve been watching. Unfortunately, the film is disappointing and proves to be just more of the same. Steven Soderbergh is a good director and the cast is top-notch, but the plot twists and main caper are just too predictable. I’ll give some of the plot details below, which are explained in the first 20 minutes and in the film trailer anyway, but don’t read on if you want to go in fresh.

The plot of “Ocean’s 13″ once again returns to Las Vegas, where the crew gets together to help avenge Reuben (Elliot Gould), who has been swindled out of his property and casino deal by Willie Banks (Al Pacino). Reuben is depressed and suffers a heart attack when he learns of Banks’ double cross. The crew gets together and plans to take Banks down in true Ocean’s style. They plan to rig all the casino games to give massive payouts to players. With any luck, Banks will lose millions and be forced to close the casino.

The crew hits several snags along the way, which complicate things and create some tension. However, they usually find some way around these obstacles without much difficulty, and the audience feels a bit cheated. Nothing ever really goes wrong in an Ocean heist, and this makes things quite boring.

Although Soderbergh likes to write dialogue for the Ocean gang, their gathering around Reuben’s bed at the beginning of the film feels a bit contrived and cheesy. Sometimes the banter works, other times, it’s very self-aware. Meanwhile, the caper isn’t terribly interesting compared with the first two films, and even the twists and turns are predictable.

The best part of the movie are the conversations between Pitt and Clooney about relationships and old Las Vegas, and the Malloy brothers (Casey Affleck and Scott Caan) finally get to do some interesting things this time posing as Mexican factory workers at a dice manufacturing plant. Andy Garcia also shows up in some funny scenes, especially at the end.

The first film was good. The second film was mildly entertaining — except for the horrid scenes were Julia Roberts pretends to play Julia Roberts the movie star (what Soderbergh was thinking with that plot device, I have no idea). The third film is well made, but it’s really no loss if left unwatched.

2.5 stars
***
Wayne’s star system
1 star –> avoid at all costs
2 stars –> watch on TV when nothing else is on
3 stars –> rent it eventually
4 stars –> must see before you die

“Ocean’s 13″ (IMDB)

‘Pleasure Factory’ Struggles to Stay Together

A common theme in several of the films I’ve seen at the Cannes Film Festival deal with prostitution or abortion. Both are depressing issues that need to be addressed, but whether they are discussed well in the films is another thing. “Pleasure Factory,” filmed in documentary style, tells the story of several clients and prostitutes over the course of one evening in Singapore’s red-light district. There are scenes that are funny and scenes that are tragic and disturbing. Unfortunately, the film fails to bring these themes together into a coherent storyline, and I can’t quite recommend it.

There isn’t much dialogue in the film, and you never really know the names or situations of its key players. Several plot threads include a mother and daughter who are prostituting themselves to a revolting man in a hotel room, an American or Canadian (you never know who) who follows the daughter around, perhaps to save her or because he was a former client of hers (you never know which) and a young Army officer who is going to be with a prostitute for the first time thanks to help from his buddy, who deals with his own issues of homosexuality. Another storyline involves a jaded prostitute who invites a guitar street performer into her apartment.

The best scene in the film is between the Army officer and the prostitute. You can tell the young officer is nervous because it’s his first time, and in one amusing scene, he unpackages about 10 different condoms onto the bed, each with specific attributes. This one vibrates, he says to her. This one is lubricated. This one glows in the dark. The woman at the register recommended them to me, he tells her. She just laughs.

But later, after they have had sex, the boy asks why she does this sort of thing for a living, and she tells him that it’s because her father passed away and she wanted to help her family. The young officer starts crying.

It’s a touching scene, but not enough to overshadow a lot of the deficiencies of the film. Overall, the film has interesting elements, but it needs to bring it all together into a coherent narrative.

2 stars
***
Wayne’s star system
1 star –> avoid at all costs
2 stars –> watch on TV when nothing else is on
3 stars –> rent it eventually
4 stars –> must see before you die

“Pleasure Factory” (IMDB)
Photos from “Pleasure Factory”
S’pore sex industry film focuses on pleasure

‘Paranoid’ Evokes Strong Emotions

As a child, I remember feeling confused, paranoid and often scared during certain traumatic events in my life. Incidents or images are especially haunting to someone who isn’t old enough to have coping mechanisms in place. The mind of a teenager is a dangerous thing, and left unchecked can wreak havoc on one’s emotions.

Similar to his film “Elephant,” which won Cannes’ top prize, the Palm d’Or, in 2003, Gus Van Sant’s “Paranoid Park” explores these themes once again through the lens of a high-school teenager in Portland. Alex (Gabe Nevins) is a skateboarder who longs to skate with the much cooler, older kids at the East Side Park, better known as Paranoid Park to its patrons. One night, he decides to go to Paranoid Park by himself, and in the process accidentally kills a security guard.

Up until then, Alex’s life is pretty much that of any other teen. He has a superficial girlfriend who simply wants to “do it” with him because of the novelty of having a boyfriend, and his parents are in the middle of getting a divorce. Alex is plagued by guilt and paranoia over what he’s done, and when the police find his skateboard in the river and start asking questions at his school, suddenly, the world seems to be closing in.

The story is told mostly in flashbacks and out of chronological order, which many critics have responded to positively. It’s a good technique and Van Sant uses it well to confuse and mystify the viewer until that “ah ha!” moment when the viewer finally realizes why those actions occurred and why in that order. The film’s style, meanwhile, which intercuts video camera work with film, is a bit distracting, but well done. Probably the biggest complaint is that the film, like “Elephant,” is shot in a 4:3 ratio. Whether this is to confine the viewer to the frame or to make the viewer feel just as suffocated as the main character is beyond me. However, used to the standard 16:9 ratios, I found it a bit limiting and not terribly effective.

Overall, the film is well-made and well-acted by a cast of mostly new faces. Van Sant cast unknown high-school skateboarders in the starring roles to make the acting more authentic and believable. This works pretty well.

I thought “Paranoid” had a good story and was able to invoke a lot of authentic emotions from its audience. It never was boring, and although the movie doesn’t resolve itself well, it is effective as a story and as a feeling.

3 stars
***
Wayne’s star system
1 star –> avoid at all costs
2 stars –> watch on TV when nothing else is on
3 stars –> rent it eventually
4 stars –> must see before you die

“Elephant” (IMDB)
“Paranoid Park” (IMDB)

‘Butterfly’s’ Beauty Comes Through

What if you were completely paralyzed from head to toe, but retained the ability to blink your left eye? How would you maintain the strength and will to live? In “The Diving Bell and the Butterfly” — based on a true story — Jean-Dominique Bauby (”Munich’s” Mathieu Almaric) shows how even in the most dire circumstances, one still can eke out a life, no matter how hopeless the situation becomes.

The film’s title is a metaphor for how Bauby feels each day. He feels as if he’s in a diving bell deep in the ocean, closed off from the world and unable to leave his suit. He longs to leave his cocoon like a butterfly and fly away, free and clear.

Although Bauby’s life is difficult and filled with emotional challenges, he manages to communicate with his left eye by blinking out letters recited to him in high-frequency order. In the film, Bauby wakes up in a hospital after suffering a stroke at age 43 and develops a rare medical condition known as “locked-in syndrome.” His mind is untouched, but he has lost all his motor skills, including the ability to communicate normally with others.

The movie, which uses a rare point-of-view camera technique, documents Bauby’s life with this condition. Mostly narrated by him from within, the film follows how Bauby — once editor-in-chief of France’ s Elle magazine — writes a book about his experiences. The movie also shows his encounters with friends and family, and the women he loves and the children he adores.

“Butterfly” is well-paced, well-acted and the fact that it’s based on a true story is all the more remarkable. The film is one of the best I’ve seen so far at Cannes, and I’d highly recommend it to French-speaking readers. With any luck, it will be released in the U.S. with English subtitles for all to enjoy and appreciate.

“The Diving Bell and the Butterfly” movie trailer (French without English subtitles)

3.5 stars
***
Wayne’s star system
1 star –> avoid at all costs
2 stars –> watch on TV when nothing else is on
3 stars –> rent it eventually
4 stars –> must see before you die

“The Diving Bell and the Butterfly” (IMDB)
“The Diving Bell and the Butterfly” trailer (YouTube)
“The Diving Bell and the Butterfly” book (Amazon.com)

‘Persepolis’ is an Animated Keeper

“Persopolis” is an entertaining and wonderfully drawn film, even if it doesn’t quite explore its subject matter deep enough. Animated in mostly black and white, the French film tells the story of a young girl growing up in Tehran during the Iranian revolution.

Based on a popular and autobiographical graphic novel of the same name, the film mostly is told in flashbacks by the main character, Marjane (Chiara Mastroianni), a once-idealistic child who eventually becomes disillusioned by a repressive Iranian government and her own encounters with love and loss.

As a small child in Tehran, Marjane learns about Iranian revolution and proudly shouts out Che Guevera’s name around her family’s apartment. She attentively listens to stories of resistance from her uncle and is filled with lots of hope.

As she gets older, however, her parents eventually send her out of the country in an effort to give her a better life. Marjane lives and goes to school in Europe and makes lots of friends, but not before getting her heart broken by men and becoming depressed with the world around her. Eventually, after 10 years, she returns to Tehran as a young woman and tries to establish a normal life within the constricts of Iran’s regime. Unfortunately, constantly faced with repression and failing at love, she decides to move to Paris.

The film explores some of Iran’s repressiveness in humorous and sad ways. However, it never explores them fully and sometimes, the film doesn’t know what it wants to be. Is it a coming-of-age tale of a young Iranian woman living in Europe? Is it a political film about the problems with Iran? Although I would have liked the film to have explored these issues further, I still think its worth a screening.

Marjane as a child wants revolution! (French, with no subtitles)

Marjane as a teen meets new friends in Europe. (French, with no subtitles)

Marjane as a young woman goes to her grandmother with a problem. (French, with no subtitles)

3.5 stars
***
Wayne’s star system
1 star –> avoid at all costs
2 stars –> watch on TV when nothing else is on
3 stars –> rent it eventually
4 stars –> must see before you die

“Persopolis” (IMDB)
“Persopolis” graphic novel (Wikipedia)
“Persopolis” movie extract 1
“Persopolis” movie extract 2
“Persopolis” movie extract 3

Cannes: A Grueling Experience

Usually, around the midpoint of the festival, I start to get a bit tired of the day-to-day screenings and routine. The Cannes Film Festival is an exciting and glamorous event. However, everything only is good in small doses. Twelve days, in my opinion, is just too long. Last year, I left on the 11th day, and everything by then pretty much was dead. In fact, by then, I felt as if I had been there for a month.

In the past seven days, I’ve attended about three screenings on average per day, and I’ve written up reviews of the films that were notable. I’ve seen some pretty lame stuff, which I haven’t included in this blog, because it’s just not worth writing about. However, I have seen a lot of strong, powerful films, and my tastes for foreign cinema have broadened quite considerably.

Growing up in the United States, I’ve been used to the typical Hollywood fare: films with quick pacing, plot, story arch and payoff. Foreign films traditionally are different. They are slow. They lack music. Sometimes, they even lack plot. And more often than not, they lack resolution. It’s a hard style to get into, especially when you’re cultured to enjoy a certain structure of film.

But I’m slowly getting there. I’m developing an appreciation for foreign cinema, and I can see why its appealing to some but not appealing to others. Rarely are these films made for entertainment value. They are made to make you think and to make you feel a certain way when you’re in the theatre — whether its grief, uncomfort or just seriousness.

The film festival is a great experience and its very international. The United States definitely has a presence here, but it’s mixed in evenly with other cultures and countries. The U.S. doesn’t dominate like it does at foreign box offices, and the majority of the films screened here aren’t U.S. films by any means.

I kind of like this. It makes me realize that the the world is a much bigger place with different tastes and different types of people. I remember my first trip abroad and feeling like I was on an entirely different planet. The festival sometimes makes me feel this same way.

***
Monday morning, I woke up pretty ill. My entire body ached from head to toe, and I had a splitting headache. I thought that if I just got out of the apartment, it would go away, but instead it just got worse. I sat through “A Mighty Heart” and by the end, I just wanted to pass out from the aching pain. Instead, I forced myself to stand for another hour outside the press conference area to take notes about the movie. Bad idea.

I survived just barely and went back to my apartment afterward — but not before stopping at a nearby pharmacy to pick up some ibuprofen. I stayed in bed most of the afternoon, but fortunately, by the evening, felt strong enough to see Quentin Tarantino’s “Death Proof.”

Since then, I’ve gotten remarkably better. I still have a a headache sometimes, but I don’t have a fever and I’ve kept my strength up. The festival life isn’t for everyone. Screenings at 8:30 a.m., being out until past midnight, etc. It definitely can take its toll on your body and on your sleep patterns.

I’m glad I’m at this year’s festival, but unless a media outlet hires me to cover it and expenses everything for it in the future, I doubt I’ll return. Cannes is a grueling experience, and I’ve definitely gotten my fill.

“Death Proof” (IMDB)
“A Mighty Heart” (IMDB)
Cannes Film Festival (Official Web site)

‘Death Proof’s’ Women Fight Back in Style

Although grindhouse films were before my time, Quentin Tarantino’s “Death Proof” brings to life the era of exploitation and cheap thrills that were characteristic of those types of movies. Bad editing, grainy footage and missing frames are littered throughout the film but fortunately never distract. In the end, “Death Proof” turns the tables on its antagonist and becomes a movie about feminist power — a refreshing change from your typical slash-and-grab films.

“Death Proof” originally was part of a two-part feature (which included Robert Rodriguez’s “Planet Terror”) that was released April 6 in the U.S. The film did poorly, even though it received many positive reviews. Some blame it on the running time, which was more than three hours and also on the gimmick of a two-part feature, which confused many theater-goers.

To prevent a repeat of its poor performance overseas, the films were to be lengthened and split into two separate films for international distribution, according to the Weinstein Company. The “Death Proof” entry at the Cannes Film Festival is a result of this process and contains extra and missing footage from the original U.S. release.

The film tells the story of two groups of female friends played by a variety of familiar actresses — too many to name here. However, the standouts are Zoe Bell, a New Zealand stunt woman who amusingly plays herself, “Cold Case’s” Tracie Thorns and Rosario Dawson.

The movie is broken into two chapters. The first chapter takes place in Austin, where a group of three women go out for a night on the town and end up drinking, dancing and smoking a lot of weed at various Texas bars. Little do they know that psychopath Stuntman Mike (Kurt Russell) is following them and waiting to kill them with his “death proof” stunt car — a 1969 Dodge Challenger. I won’t say what happens to the women, but the scene is grisly.

The second part takes place in Lebanon, Tenn., where four female friends are taking a day off from a film shoot to check out a white 1970 Dodge Challenger. Bell and Thorns later have plans for test driving the Challenger, and Dawson is just along the for the ride. Eventually, the women get on Stuntman Mike’s radar, and a car chase begins.

Again, I won’t spoil the film, but things turn out quite differently than expected. In fact, it’s a pleasant surprise to see what happens to the women and Stuntman Mike, which ends suddenly in B-Movie style.

“Death Proof” seemed well-received by the international press, which, as my Cannes roommate commented, is fascinating because its likely their first exposure to a grindhouse film. I did hear one journalist boo the screen afterward, but it could have been a joke.

I’ve always enjoyed Tarantino’s films, with my favorite being “Pulp Fiction,” which won the Palme d’Or at Cannes in 1994. “Death Proof” has great dialogue and interesting style — if you appreciate that most of the film is just witty banter between feminists, with some thrilling car scenes thrown in for good measure.

3.5 stars
***
Wayne’s star system
1 star –> avoid at all costs
2 stars –> watch on TV when nothing else is on
3 stars –> rent it eventually
4 stars –> must see before you die

“Death Proof” (IMDB)
“Pulp Fiction” (IMDB)