Reviews

Passion is brutally intense but it isn't macabre. Indeed, chances are that you wouldn't come across a film as violent as this but as you watch it, you would find it hard to escape the subliminal meaning it seeks to impress. This movie seems to have taken it upon itself to stir the collective Christian conscience and there can be no doubt that it does manage to do so. Ironically, it is this factor that immediately takes it away from the realms of entertainment, something that we've come to ‘expect' of the films we watch. You can rest assured that this isn't a movie you'd enjoy sitting through. Moreover, the focus of the movie is so singular that it makes a very dissimilar impact on non-christian audiences including myself. There have been many movies, which rely heavily upon cultural & religious aspects causing a polarity of opinion amongst those who cannot relate to them. In such a case we detach ourselves from those nuances and concentrate instead on factors, which are more universal in their appeal. I believe that the story of Christ has a universal appeal. If passion was invested with that element then I couldn't find it. I get the message, thank you very much, but the trouble it goes through to convey it makes me doubt my ability to do so. However, this is merely an observation that can cause endless debate serving no purpose whatsoever. What matters is that the movie did compel me to look beyond its theological foundation and be influenced by its underlying spirituality. After watching Passion I knew why I would've wanted to watch it and that, I guess, is enough.

Jim Caviezel portrays Jesus Christ in his final hours (notice the coincidence in the initials of the name – JC) . From a purely artistic perspective the film did not really demand versatility of expression, since he's to enact pain alone & besides his looks somehow complement the character. Still he manages to make his effort felt. The trick, I suppose, is to be convincing enough to blind us to the difference between the reality and the illusion of pain. Jim secures that to his credit. Technically speaking, the sets and the looks of the film do remind us of that time. The make up, in one word, is ground breaking. Wounds borne by Christ were meant to remind us of the burden of sin. Such astounding attention to gore has to be lauded because the intent extends to causing catharsis. The lack thereof would take away the point of making this giant of an effort.

There is something loud about Passion. It thrives on extremes that, I believe, haven't been portrayed in any movie about Christ. This makes Gibson's film special but not exactly transcendent. The idea of expression is concerned only with conveying a message that could be social, political or ideological. Take your pick. Sadly, there is nothing more to it. Partly because there can be nothing more to it. Yet these are the very peculiarities that make the movie worthwhile. This movie is what it means to be. It does what it means to do. There is precious little to be questioned about its blood soaked texture. This is not a movie that essentially wants to be violent, but rather needs to be violent. The message that Christ died for our sins carries a burden of meaning with it. Mel Gibson seems to understand that to say the least.

Set in Vienna in the late 18th century, Amadeus is an outstanding ode to the genius of a great musician. As a movie experience, it is entertaining and rewarding at the same time. Considering that Milos Forman was at the helm of its creation, one has a lot of expectations of the film and believe me they are well founded. He fills the movie with such grandeur and depth that you are easily overwhelmed. The length of the movie could scare the most avid movie buff, but frankly i didn't find it a drag. And in case you find yourself wondering if you'd like it despite the fact that you don't know the first thing about Mozart or his music, the answer is an emphatic no.

The movie traces the life of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, through the eyes of Antonio Salieri, the court composer of Emperor Joseph II. Salieri, eager to meet Mozart on his arrival to Vienna, is stunned to find that an extraordinary musical talent has been bestowed on an utterly despicable, vulgar and frivolous man. The irony is beyond Salieri's tolerance, filling him with rage and envy. Soon, he schemes to drive Mozart into his destruction and the movie inches closer to Mozart's death in the background of lilting music.

Amadeus combines music and drama effortlessly. It seems that Peter Shaffer's play has all the elements of human nature in generous doses to engage the audience and then of course there is the music. No part of the movie is less entertaining or watchable than the other. The performances are stellar and both Abraham and Hulce are impressive. There are very few modern day classics but Amadeus fits the bill perfectly. Watch it for the drama and the music and you wouldn't be disappointed. For this movie deserved every one of those 8 oscars which it got.

9/10

What can you say about faith and Cinema? Its not like the domain is new from the Cinema standpoint. The lilting ring of 'May the force be with you' might justifiably be considered as one of the reasons why Star Wars is STAR WARS. 'The Excorcist' wouldn't be half as good if, in the end, the devil won. Or what about superheroes? Gotham wouldn't have a peaceful night without Batman, because superheroes are but demigods. For decades now, cinema has fashioned its offerings in a way that has perpetually comforted our faith & beliefs & given them a polished second voice. But the question always is how good has the point been driven? If the patterns of a chunk of cinematic offerings are similar, then how exactly do you rate a film from another? That is where the story and the storyteller come into play. M. Night Shyamalan is a gem of a storyteller and Signs is one gem of a film. The genius of Shyamalan gives new identity to the thriller, as he steers clear of conventional generic perceptions. No matter what aspect of Signs you explore, you'd be convinced that Shyamalan belongs right up there with the likes of Spielberg, Kazan, Coppola & Hitchcock.

Signs is the story of Father Graham Hess (Mel Gibson) who loses his faith when his wife dies in a freak accident, leaving the task of bringing up their two children to Graham and his younger brother Merrill (Joaquin Phoenix). Six months later the household wakes up to find mysterious crop circles in their fields. As the family comes to terms with this incident, it gradually becomes apparent that these signs have been made by extra terrestrials and the world is on the brink of alien domination. Apart from battling for the safety of his family Graham experiences a deeper turmoil - Is faith really the solution to his fears?

All those who expect the film to be an 'aliens vs mankind' showdown, would be disappointed. Indeed, 'Signs' is not 'Independence Day' revisited in an albeit domestic and scaled down avatar. But that does not stop 'Signs' from being the riveting classic that it is. The film is fulfilling in every aspect of film-making. The performances are top-notch and strong. Mel Gibson, as the widower responsible for two children and a brother, delivers magnificently in a role that couldn't be less in league with his action-hero image. In fact he revels astonishingly in some of the poignant scenes of the film. Joaquin Phoenix follows up his turn in 'Gladiator' with another constrained performance and reveals a genuine comic talent. Once again, Shyamalan extracts remarkable performances from child actors. Rory Culkin is terrific as Morgan and looking at Abigail Breslin, you'd hardly believe that she's 'acting'. The musical score of James Newton Howard goes in perfect sync with the film's moods. Shyamalan's direction retains the edginess he's become famous for, and the pace of the film is unpredictable & never complacent. The camerawork is brilliant as every scene in the film assumes a consistent atmosphere of tension. And even though the anticipation never really kills you, you'd admit that you never really thought that the sound of a dog barking could be this disturbing!

All said and done, it is good to see a film that does not struggle under the burden of the topic it addresses. Seeing the story unfold, the concept of quelling fears with faith assumes new importance. The film dwells into everyday territory and offers the same perspective we have, but somehow, due to Shyamalan's direction perhaps, it evokes a new respect for miracles and coincidences as you walk out of the hall. Signs is science-fiction attempted with an approach that is individualistic and perhaps even spiritual. An engaging film that is arguably replete with all the elements of a modern classic.

In more ways than one, 'Girl Interrupted' is very similar to 'One flew over the cuckoo's nest'. To begin with both the films are set in mental institutions and chronicle life as it unfolds amidst those bland, white walls. Characters in both the film are acutely lifelike. But owing perhaps to it being a true story, 'Girl Interrupted' has characters that are much easier to identify with than McMurphy's brigade. Set in the 60's, the film is an account of the times spent in the Mental Institution by an eighteen year girl, Susanna Kaysen, a character portrayed with astonishing brilliance by the versatile Winona Ryder.

Susanna is a victim of neurosis, great expectations, confusion, an uncertain future and the sundry other problems an average teenager's life are pounded with. For all her brilliance, Susanna has the undeniable gift of the cynic and the pessimist, who still hasn't made up her mind about life's meaning and is upset about it. She has the nagging feeling that her character is incomplete and gets caught in the depressing vortex of tendencies that earn her the title of, what we're later told, a border line personality. An almost successful but unintentional suicide attempt lands her in the footsteps of Claymoore, a mental instituition. In the confined borders of the instituition, Susanna is surprised to discover how well she identifies with the pain and flaws of fellow inmates. Here, the atmosphere is sans any prejudice or cliches. Here, everyone is a victim one way or the other. Far from the deplorable world outside the instituition, susanna feels that she's finally home. And it is this atmosphere that slowly gives way to the realisation of her actual needs, her character and her purpose.

In the first half of the film, the director employs an interesting technique of fusing two different scenes and establishing a coherence that not only takes the story forward but at the same time tells us what is already past. Apart from Susanna and maybe Lisa, few characters are generously sketched. This, although, doesn't allow the loosening of the plot's grip on you. Furthermore, the institution is projected in a more agreeable light and the resultant sympathy for the characters ( unlike 'One flew over the cuckoo's nest') does not coincide with an abhorrence towards the angle of treatment. The movie does lead the viewer to understand the plight of the inmates, but not with the object of establishing the reasons that led to their condition. Rather it concentrates on the way these girls face their fate, day in and day out. It also highlights the way the girls identify with each others problems, hopes and desires in a fashion that alternates between being poignant and amusing.

Perhaps the most distinct factor about the movie is the exemplary performances put up by a cast that mostly comprises of females. I haven't seen a film that could hold its own without a single male lead, as good as this movie does. Winona Ryder is very convincing as Susanna. Angelina Jolie delivers so well that I am having a hard time getting over the fact that she agreed to Lara Croft. Whoopi Goldberg is good but her role is regrettably restricted. Constrained performances by all the actresses make this film worthy of being watched. It is funny, sad, mischievous and optimistic all at the same time.

Watch it if you can for it is very unlikely that you would get disappointed. Like I said it is quite likeable!

What exactly is madness? A state of mind that is anything but normal? An understated vice that resides in most of us? A consequence derived from adversity, pain or deprival? The victory of this film exists in stating that whatever madness might be, it does not justify the treatment meted out to people who are deemed mad, unfit and dangerous by the society. For, these people are perhaps as imperfect as the very rigid framework on which our society functions. Driving these heavy points home is perhaps one of the best films of our times.

Jack Nicholson essays the role of Randle McMurphy, a man whose utter lack of resentment (or whatever appeared of it)and liveliness, while he's held as a convict for the assault of a woman, is mistaken for madness by the law. He's consigned to a mental asylum for treatment. For no other reason apart from his being sent to the asylum, he's branded a lunatic just like every other patient, by the doctors and the warden alike. The asylum, with its lifeless atmosphere disappoints an unassuming Randle and with his endeavors, characteristic of a person who wants to make the most of life, he brings himself closer to the patients & injects enthusiasm into the otherwise moribund life they lead. As was expected his manners are not to the least appreciated by Nurse Mildred (Louise Fletcher)and Randle soon realises that the patients are victims of a prejudice that surpasses the actual gravity of their conditions. So much so that the dignity accorded to the people in the asylum is not of patients but that of criminals.

With his uninvited but justified rebellion, Randle helps the patients acquire some self-respect. His peers in the asylum slowly start coming out of the aftermath of the hopeless treatment that had them convinced that they are nothing but a burden on society. He makes them conscious of the individuality which they never thought they possesed.

The irony in the film is that where the doctors failed, Randle succeeds in repairing their souls to a great extent and perhaps in the process saving them from going deeper into the predicament society had created for them. In fact one of the memorable moments in the film is when Randle forces a fellow inmate, who had hitherto acted dumb, to talk. Even as Randle fails to escape from the asylum, something he had decided upon doing, the film still savours to the ideal of liberation by showing that due to Randle at least one inmate realises the futility of being in the asylum and finally escapes.

'One flew over the cuckoo's nest' is perhaps the best satire i've ever seen. Along with Jack Nicholson, Louise Fletcher, Danny DeVito and all the other actors acting as inmates dish out laudable performances. The narrative of the film is superb and its depressing portrayal of social stereotypes ends with an inexplicably ambiguous but definite message of hope. It is a must watch for all Jack Nicholson fans and for all those who have no qualms about witnessing the painful impact of society's prejudice.

9/10

They love. They marry. They have kids. Then there are differences, moral or immoral,leading inevitably to a divorce. Such is the fabric of modern American society where the 'happily ever after' theme is slowly but surely giving way to the grim world of courtrooms, settlements and the fight for custody of kids. This is what Mrs. Doubtfire is NOT about. It is also not so much about people as it is about their characters. For its slightly unrealistic but ultimately noble take on a father's love for his kids, Mrs. Doubtfire is justifiably an urban fairy tale. And an american one at that.

Daniel Hillard (Robin Williams) is a struggling artist who is yet to make it big. His mammoth ego, self-respect & a ubiquitous search for the perfect creative expression often renders him jobless. His wife Miranda(Sally Fields) is more ambitious and successful. But she's unable to deal with her frivolous and obstinate husband, and on a day that was bound to come, calls it quits & Daniel is forced to leave the house. But for all his shortcomings, Daniel simply adores his three kids and they simply cannot do without each other. Miranda soon advertises for a nanny to take care of the children. With his job out of hand & his kids away from his sight Daniel yields to desperation and decides that the only way to be with his kids is to act as a nanny and seize the job. With some Oscar winning help from his cousin Frank (Harvey Fierstein), Daniel Hillard becomes Mrs. Doubtfire, a robust English woman with a funny accent and a love for football. Mrs. Doubtfire becomes and instant hit with Miranda and the kids gradually start liking her. The kids soon discover who Mrs. Doubtfire actually is and to avoid Mama dearest's ire keep it to themselves. Soon 'her' opinion of everything, right from the choice of the T.V. show to the vehement reproach towards Stuart's (Pierce Brosnan) blooming affair with Miranda, is taken heed of. Meanwhile Daniel manages to walk right into a lucrative deal of hosting a sagging T.V. show produced by a hotshot, Jonathan Lundy (Robert Prosky). Just when everything seems to be going Daniel's way, Miranda comes to know of the truth following a hilarious restaurant act.

Robin Williams is indescribably good as the father who takes on the garb of an loveable nanny almost overnight. His performance as Mrs. Doubtfire fails words and in fact overshadows the character of the real Daniel Hillard. It would be unfair to ascribe the brilliance of the character to the lards of make-up for it genuinely has a restricted role. Watch 'Big Momma's House' and you'll realise what i mean. It is how Williams performs under the unusual garb that deserves accolades. Not only does he play the role with a convincing element of feminity (that in fact is more genuine than that of the real feminine characters in the film!) but at the same time keeps reminding us that it is Daniel beneath it all and not Robin Williams. His performance hovers on the verge of perfection and he manages to draw sympathy to a father's plight. Few films (and fewer actors) have been able to exhibit such sensitivity of character in a male protagonist. And when the credits roll you know that more than Robin Williams' victory or Daniel's victory it is a father's victory that makes the movie memorable.

All said and done Mrs. Doubtfire is a film that is likely to make you laugh and cry both. And if that is not true you simply have to admit that there are few actors (and fewer nannies) as good as Robin Williams.

Ten on Ten

Brimming with mesmerising action sequences, a taut narrative, neat performances and an ambitious plot, The Matrix is a film that has redefined the sci-fi/action genre. It is the kind of film that makes one think and appreciate the sheer genius employed to create it.

The film is the story of a hacker, Neo/Thomas Andersen (Keanu Reeves), who discovers that reality as he & everyone around him knows it is actually an elaborate illusion constructed to keep mankind oblivious of the truth of its existence. The truth is that the real world is controlled by machines. In order to reap the energy resources of the human body, mankind has been fooled into living in a dreamworld, a world which has them so absorbed that they can't wake up from it believing that it is real & in which they can never naturally evolve. Neo like everyone else would have been oblivious to this plan had he not nurtured a gut feeling that there was something wrong with the world & had not a team of rebels led by Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne)acquainted him with the truth. Along with them, Neo embarks on a mission to overthrow 'The Matrix', as the dreamworld is called, to free mankind and in the process challenge his own limitations & doubts with the sheer power of belief.

The Wachowski brothers' canvas of man against machine draws a subtle reference to the irony in the fact that man, the creator of machines, is so dependent on them. In a world that is at the brink of a revolution spawned by the advances made in the field of artificial intelligence, the film offers a harrowing but concrete possibility of men being slave to machines & functions as a plea to re-examine the relationship between men and machines. But the film's content is not restricted to projecting a world under mechanical control. Where the film actually excels is in dismissing the basis of our limitations, doubts and fears by offering a better notion of complete, limitless freedom. The film with the strength of its ingenious and often metaphorical plot tries to bridge the gap between the possible and the impossible, and between thinking and knowing. Throughout the film, the character of the protagonist goes through a rapid transition from a vulnerable man who is coming to terms with the truth of his existence to a confident hero who's finally understood his purpose and in the process himself. The resilence of the human spirit is reflected in Neo's belief, Morpheus's faith and Trinity's (Carrie Ann Moss) love.

The film's other high point of course is the ingenuity employed in action choreography. The Lobby scene and the bullet dodging scene have already attained classic status and I'm yet to see a film that has sequences that could surpass the standards set by The Matrix (Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon included). Characters in the film are quite well etched and every actor delivers in a 'I-was-made-for-this-role' fashion. Keanu Reeves is perfect as the believable hero and perhaps turns his best performance since 'Speed'. Laurence Fishburne is excellent as the precise, wise and charming Morpheus. Hugo Weaving as Agent Smith is amazing in portraying villiany in a slow, deliberate & mechanical manner. Carrie Ann Moss does justice to the vulnerable yet dangerous Trinity. The dialogues in the film, especially those of Morpheus, make their presence felt and have a faint but certain rhetoric ring.

All in all The Matrix is everything i could have asked for in a film. And apart from being just a film, it is an exciting experience as well, no matter how many times you watch it. Of all the mindless films that are being dished out today (especially in the sci-fi genre)The Matrix comes across as a refreshing example of a film that has genuine content and vision that goes in tandem with its chic looks. So powerful is its impact that it keeps the head buzzing even hours after you have watched in. If you haven't watched this film, then watch it. I could go on and on about this film which i deem perfect in every manner, and yet i won't be doing justice to it. For as Morpheus says 'Unfortunately no one can be told what The Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.'

Ten on Ten