Reviews

I watched the Criterion Collection two-disc set of The Irishman. The second disc, with lots of commentaries and detailed analysis, gave valuable insight into the world of Scorsese.

The movie revisits some of Scorsese's old favourite themes of loyalty, friendship and betrayal but compared to his previous Italian mafia films, it has a more quiet contemplative pace, especially main character Frank Sheeran (played by Robert Deniro) who revisits his gangster life with the hindsight of old age and its losses and regrets, leaving him alone and resigned in a nursing home.

The film brought together giants like Deniro, Al Pacino, Joe Pesci and Harvey Keitel who are all -- except Pacino -- longtime collaborators with Scorsese. The "de-aging" technique used to allow same actors playing their own role over a few decades was not very convincing but the story felt more coherent in this way.

This movie is based on the real kidnapping of a young boy by the Mafia after his father becomes an informant of the police. It mainly follows the character of Giuseppe, who has been kidnapped, and his friend and lover Luna. The first half of the film felt very slow-based and you cannot be sure what direction the movie is taking. But the filmmakers tied the story really well in the second half.

I really liked how they used natural elements, light and darkness, and animals as well as dreams and nightmares to show the ordeal and sufferings of the two young main characters, Luna and Giuseppe, in a world of ignorance and indifference of the adults.

The movie is not an ordinary ghost story type, as the title might suggest, but uses a real Mafia-related event as its basis which is told in a unique way through the eyes of its young characters against the haunting yet beautiful Sicilian landscape.

"Rhapsody in August" (1991) is Akira Kurosawa's next to last film. It belongs to Kurosawa's final period of film-making when he moved away from themes such as samurai stories and historic eras of Japan and focused on issues such as the Second World War and its effect on the lives of ordinary people in Japan. The title of this film is a reference to August 9, 1945, when the atomic bomb fell on Nagasaki.

"Rhapsody in August" tells the story of four young girls and boys who visit their grandmother in a village near Nagasaki for their summer vacation. She is one of the survivors of the atomic bomb fell on Nagasaki during the war but she lost her husband in the atomic bomb attack. It is through her that her grandchildren learn about the atomic bomb attack and how it killed their grandfather. The children's parents have gone to Hawaii to visit the grandmother's elder brother, who had married an American woman and lived there since then.

The film shows how the children's indifference and disrespect for their grandmother gradually turns into understanding and respect for the sufferings she has gone through. We are allowed to explore the Nagasaki catastrophe through the grandmother's point of view and its aftermath through the children's view, who come to show much more understanding for the catastrophic event than their parents, who only seem to care about not raising the issue of the atomic bomb on fear that it might upset their American relatives and deprive them from their enterprise.

Although the film, in several occasions, makes direct criticism against the US over the Nagasaki atomic bomb attack, it is mostly through the grandmother's powerful and vivid recollections of the war, and the children's understanding of the events, that the depth of people's sufferings and the cruelty of the act -- the atomic bomb attack -- are seen. One great example is when the grandmother compares the mushroom cloud of the atomic bomb to a great eye watching over the city.

The grandmother is the living soul of all the pains caused by the atomic bomb and Kurosawa, all through the film and particularly in its iconic ending, well reminds us that time might not heal all wounds.

"The Hunt" is about how the life a man, Lucas, is changed forever when a young girl of nine, Clara, accuses him of molesting her. A little lie, told out of a childish jealousy, spreads in the whole small town, turning Marcus's friends and neighbors into his enemies.

While Marcus's life become more and more of a nightmare, Clara, ironically, becomes the center of the attention of her parents, who often quarreled with each and ignored her.

One of the film's main themes is how much man is free in determining his own fate. In the case of Marcus, he seems to be utterly without a choice about his fate. A respectable man with a good reputation become the villain in a matter of days, all because of the childish lie told by Clara. Even when we think he has recovered from the evils that have happened to him, we find out we are wrong. No matter how he tries, he is haunted for the rest of his life.

I think "The Hunt" has a high chance of winning the Academy Award this year.

"Dead Man's Shoes" tells the story of Richard, a former soldier, who seeks revenge on a group of thugs who molested and brutalized his mentally handicapped brother, Anthony.

The first question that came to my mind while watching the film was that Richard's revenge was really for the sake of his brother or for his own sake. All we know about Richard is that he was a soldier but we can understand from his behavior that his years as a soldier have been tough ones and have affected his later actions towards the thugs who brutalized his brother.

"God will forgive them. He'll forgive them and allow them into Heaven. I can't live with that," Richard says at the beginning of the film. The revenge seems to be as much about himself as his brother.

Another thing we know about Richard is that he did not actually have much affection for his brother before he left for the army. He even mentions at one point in the film that his brother was a shame to him. Through his revenge, Robert also seems to be seeking to find the love he never showed to his brother.

"Dead Man's Shoes" is undoubtedly a worth-watching film. It's an independent film which does not show off but only wants the viewer to keep their eyes and ears open to what they see and hear.

I haven't read the Hunger Games book so I can't say if the adaptation has been a success.

The film had a very attractive beginning for me. A totalitarian state which still punishes its people for a rebellion committed many years ago. It reminded me of the world of George Orwell's "1984". The people of the districts will have to pay for their rebellion and live a deprived life while the people of the Capitol, Panem, live a life of plenty and extravagance.

Which reminds of another Orwellian element in the story: the ignorance in which people of the Capitol live. The whole frenzy of the people of the Capitol about the Hunger Games -- the deaths, the violence, the bets -- is out of their ignorance, and quite frightening.

The whole setting of the film and the story quite fascinated me and promised a very good film. But as it went on, it became more and more a teenager film with big flaws in the story and the characters.

As a whole, the film is entertaining and doesn't make you bored even at about two and a half hours. There are some good performances by Woody Harrelson, Donald Sutherland and Wes Bentley, not to mention the lead role played by Jennifer Lawrence.

Set in 1981, "Hunger" depicts the real story of the IRA Hunger Strike in the Maze Prison, led by Bobby Sands. The British government's refusal to grant political status to the IRA prisoners leads to "blanket" and "no wash" protests by inmates, which face the brutal reaction of the prison authorities. The film focuses on the events which lead Sands to start a hunger strike.

The film does not take a one-sided stance on the events of the 1981 Hunger Strike. Even Sands' determination to begin his hunger strike is questioned and criticized through the convincing arguments of Father Dominic Moran. A positive point of the film is that it does not try to attract sentiment towards Sands. However, we become quite sympathetic towards him, for his arguments, his resolution and, most important of all, director Steve McQueen's minute attention to details, which enable us to really feel the pain and suffering Sands goes through during his hunger strike, both physically and mentally, as the limits of his body and mind are put to the test.

Another positive point of the film is that it, though briefly, takes us to the lives of another character in the film. Raymond Lohan is a prison guard who severely beats prisoners, but we see the other side of his life as well -- a melancholy man who is not content with his job and sometimes we even feel he asks himself whether he is doing the right thing.

McQueen's first film is definitely a worthy experience. Michael Fassbender gives a brilliant performance as Bobby Sands and Liam Cunningham is also great as Father Dom. Sands and Father Dom's conversation is one of the most memorable parts of the film.

"House of Cards" is a re-make of a British mini-series with the same name produced by BBC in the early 1990's. I liked the UK version better, but I would not lose this American version in any way.

It's political drama at its height. The events mostly take place from the viewpoint of lead role Francis Underwood, which is a good point of the series as it shows the thin boundary between good and evil. Most of the characters are grey, neither black nor white, which is a key element of political drama. The series leaves the judgment to you and you can decide for yourself whether you agree with the justification the characters give for their actions.

The American series, on its own, is a really brilliant series, but I think it's going to be much longer than its British peer. It is an American tradition to re-make British series and extend it as far as it gets. While the UK series finished its first season with a shocking climax at only four episodes, the American version is far from that climax after the end of the first season at 13 episodes.

But after all, the American House of Cards is definitely a well-made series and you should not miss it, even if it is only because of Kevin Spacey, who gives a great performance as Francis Underwood, the lead role. The series is directed by handful of great directors such as David Fincher, Joel Schumacher and James Foley.

Girl with a Pearl Earring shows a small, but important, part of Dutch painter Johannes Vermeer's life, which led to the creation of one of his most famous paintings. Vermeer's life is seen through the perspective of a young maid working at his house, Griet, who becomes his inspiration for the famous painting, Girl with a Pearl Earring.

The film has a slow rhythm and is marked with minimalism, both in dialogue and the show of emotions by the characters. A great achievement of the film is that it doesn't become a melodrama of a love affair between the master and the maid. Much is said through implications -- untold feelings, suppressed emotions and unrealized love.

The sad, enigmatic look of Griet, as shown in the painting at the end of the film, has much to say after we come to know what the characters of the film have gone through.

I'm a big fan of Tolkien and I am really glad to see the Hobbit on the screen; nonetheless, I have to say turning the Hobbit into a trilogy is not a flawless idea. I believe two films would have been much better. Jackson made the right decision to connect the Hobbit story to the long war of Dwarfs and Orcs and the background Middle-earth story of the White Council and the appearance of Necromancer/Sauron in Dol Goldur. Even with this rich background story,two films would have done justice. And for big fans, like me, the fine, excellent bits could find their way in the extended editions. You finish the Unexpected Journey and you find that you haven't reached the 100th page in the Hobbit book. No line has been missed.

SPOILERS FROM HERE

Though boring to some, telling all the details had its interests for many, including me. The prologue about Smaug's attack on Dale, the White Council in Rivendell, Radagast's visit to Dol Goldur and Bilbo's game of riddles with Gollum, which I think was the shining spot of the film. Martin Freeman and Andy Serkis stand out in the whole film. The acting was great, but except for Thorin and Balin, the rest of the Dwarfs lacked any depth in character. The music and the scenery were great too, as expected.

SPOILERS ENDED

In short, I think all the Tolkien fans and all those who enjoyed the Lord of the Rings films would like the Hobbit: an Unexpected Journey, though they should not expect an epic as grand as LOtR.

The characters are tough both in appearance and thought, but that's not the way to decide about who they really are. Boxing has made them so. The simple rule: always protect yourself. Boxing is life and life is boxing. You hit somebody or somebody may hit you. You may run from your past or you may have nothing to lose. You may even lose your eye, but you are still in the world of boxing, exactly as you are still alive.

The film is delicate in its own unique ways. It is about courage, heart, hope, and fear. Fear from the past and from the future.

You have to go to the end to find out you are somebody's or many people's darling and blood.