3 Women (1977)

3/5

Robert Altman's 3 Women is a curious, intriguing film. It follows the amusing and awkward interactions between the optimistic and oblivious Millie (Duvall), the shy and idolizing Pinky (Spacek), and the silent and artistic Willie (Rule). The plot is apparently based on a dream Altman had, and indeed the mood is very surreal. That is perhaps its strongest aspect, thanks to stellar cinematography and editing, and is reminiscent of the unsettling environment in Kubrick's The Shining. You have no idea where it's going, but you won't be satisfied until you find out. While the film might be called slow, it's never boring. While it might be called dull, it's never uninteresting. This is largely due to the strong performances and rich characterizations.

Near the end, unfortunately, it loses coherence and tightness. It spins wildly out of control and it's difficult to keep track of everything that's going on. It starts quite a few new threads and leaves quite a few loose ends. Worst of all, it fails to answer the questions it raises and leaves everything ambiguous. There's good ambiguous (where you have a few option to choose from), and there's bad ambiguous (where you have no idea what's going on). This was bad ambiguous. Still, for the first 90 minutes, I simply could not take my eyes off the screen. This is a fantastic movie with an end that will frustrate many, but might fascinate a few. If it sounds interesting, I suggest you give it a chance. Otherwise, leave it unwatched.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075612/

Scandal (1950)

3/5

Akira Kurosawa's Scandal is a rather middling film, I am disappointed to say. The plot follows a tabloid scandal alleging a love affair between painter Aoe (Mifune) and singer Saijo (Yamaguchi). Furious, Aoe threatens to sue the tabloid's publisher (Ozawa) and hires attorney Hiruta (Shimura) to help. But Hiruta's gambling addiction compromises their case. While the movie is more than a simple legal drama, it fails to satisfy on that basic level. After watching so much Boston Legal lately, my expectations for the genre have risen exponentially. And Scandals fails to meet them.

On a technical level, there is little to impress. I remember next to nothing of the cinematography and editing. Even the performances by Mifune and Shimura felt a bit like staged overacting given the rest of the piece. Where Kurosawa excels is in the human drama. The heart of the movie is Hiruta's relationship with his dying daughter. The man's vice fills him with guilt and he has no idea how to express it appropriately. All he can do is call himself a worm and beg for his daughter's mercy. It is a sentimental tale that ends ultimately in redemption, but not without a heavy dose of sadness along the way. As I said of One Wonderful Sunday, Scandal is not as good as Kurosawa's more famous works, so you should wait to watch it until after you've seen the rest of his oeuvre.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0042958/

Casablanca (1942)

5/5

Michael Curtiz's Casablanca is without a doubt the greatest romance to ever grace the silver screen. The story follows Rick Blaine (Bogart) in Casablanca during World War II. While the rest of France is German-occupied, Casablanca represents a bastion of hope for those trying to flee to America. After two letters of transit find their way into Rick's gin joint, so do married freedom fighters Victor Laszlo (Henreid) and Ilsa Lund (Bergman). We soon find out that Rick and Ilsa shared a past together once, in Paris.

The plot exhibits the same sentimental heartbreak as in every love story, with both parties guilty of misunderstandings and mistakes. But the plot itself is not what makes this movie great. It is the way the story unfolds, the way we are introduced to the characters, the way they appear to evolve and develop before our very eyes. And yet the people we see at the end of the movie are the same as those at the beginning; it is merely the lens through which we see them that changes. As we discover more about each character's intentions and motivations, we go from despising them and the hurt they caused each other to adoring them and their tremendous love for each other. Our hearts are manipulated so forcefully and so easily, it is almost inhumane.

The emotional roller-coaster ride we go through would have been effective if all it had was a script as phenomenal as this one, but the acting is what makes it real--and what makes it hurt. Bergman and Bogart are at their best, able to evoke pity, horror, hatred, and sympathy at the drop of a hat. And after all they put us through, we are grateful to have met them. For everyone who has seen this movie, Bogie will always be Rick and Ingrid will always be Ilsa.

As for the rest of the cast, they are spectacular all around. From the minor performers to the major supporting roles, the film is chock-full of memorable characters. They infuse the piece with witty banter and humorous irony. We are intrigued by the cordial competition with black marketeer Ferrari (Greenstreet) and the affectionate back-and-forth with Captain Renault (Rains) as their beautiful friendship begins. And we cherish their presence.

Technically, the film is rather unremarkable. The editing manages an economy of scenes, albeit with a few extraneous ones. The lighting and cinematography get the job done, with some well-lit shots and well-composed long takes. Unlike Citizen Kane, the filmmaking is not what makes this movie great. It is the flawless love story between Rick and Ilsa that tugs at our heartstrings and attracts us to this movie. And it will always be Rick and Ilsa that brings us back to it, over and over again, as time goes by.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0034583/

The Notebook (2004)

3/5

Before I start this review, I should note that there were certain distractions that took my attention away from the movie for several minutes at a time. Thus, it may be an unfair assessment. However, I remain confident in my rating within plus or minus 0.5 stars, which I don't use anyway. With that in mind, let us begin with the review.

The Notebook is a rather simple boy meets girl tearjerker love story. The title refers to a notebook detailing how the couple met and fell in love. Now a grandfather, the man reads it to his Alzheimer-stricken wife to help her get back the memories the disease stole from her. It's a tender premise, at risk of being filled with saccharine sentimentality and overwrought melodrama. For the most part, it manages to avoid the sappiness associated with its cliched and tired story, and instead infuses it with just the right amount of emotion. This is in large part due to the acting by the two leads (Gosling and McAdams), whose performances allow us to feel empathy instead of resentment for the cocky boy and rich girl who find true love in each other. As far as the story and acting goes, this is about as good a film as any other romance.

Technically, the film is about the same as your typical romantic fare. The painterly compositions could be quite stunning, but the overuse of slo-mo was a bit excessive. The simple editing served the story well, with some efficiently-cut scenes and some unnecessary ones. The dialogue, what I heard of it, wasn't particularly poetic or cheesy. All in all, this was a fairly average romance with a few good qualities and a few bad qualities. If it seems like this is your type of movie, you'll probably enjoy it. But it won't change anybody's mind about the genre.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0332280/

Nashville (1975)

4.9/5

Robert Altman's Nashville is a truly astounding picture. The film follows a series of singers at various stages in their career, whose lives intertwine during a few days in Nashville. In all these people resides a common love for music, which makes the film feel like a living, breathing entity whose experiences are those of everyone involved. Thus, we see the aged singer (Gibson), who must give up his fans to the younger generation. We see the Lothario rock star looking for true love (Carradine), the son in his father's shadows who never got to sing (Peel), the backup singer waiting for her chance at fame (Black), and the radiant celebrity with her adoring fans (Blakley). Throughout these few days, a reporter from the BBC tries to interview the celebrities (Chaplin), a politico tries to promote his presidential candidate (Murphy), and a bizarre man with goofy glasses performs magic tricks and gives rides to random women on his motor-tricycle (Goldblum). And there are many more characters I don't have space to describe. While these 20 or so personages are introduced in the first 20 minutes, they make such an impression on you that you remember them for the entire movie.

The editing in this movie is pure magic. There are five or more storylines taking place at any one time, each one with overlapping dialogue and music. And yet there is never a confusing moment in the picture. You always know exactly where you are and exactly which people are involved. And it is hilarious and moving all at once, thanks to stellar writing and acting. However, the weakest aspects of this movie are its lighting and cinematography. Bland, washed-out colors and cheesy extreme zooms heavily date the film. Combined with a 2.5 hour running time (which probably could have been trimmed to 2 hours), the film fails to invite modern audiences in. But give it a chance, because this is a truly magnificent portrait of American culture.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0073440/

The Thin Man (1934)

3/5

The Thin Man, despite all the critical acclaim and crossword hoopla, is little more than a simple detective comedy. The plot is more convoluted than a film noir, with characters that look oddly similar to other characters and unnamed coppers and gangsters appearing and disappearing randomly. If I understood it better, I might give you a synopsis. Instead, I do not even know to whom the title refers. Hand in hand with its tortuous plot is its rather tepid, ordinary dialogue. The writing as a whole is average at best and boring at worst. The same could be said about the rest of the technical aspects of the film, from cinematography to editing.

So far, I'm painting the picture as a rather humdrum one. But the acting of the two leads (William Powell and Myrna Loy) as Nick and Nora Charles truly elevates the film above its mediocre components. Their playful antics and face-making, their incorrigible yet lovable dog Asta, and their unflappable sousing all come together to make an indelible impression on the audience. I can see why they made five sequels starring the couple. Despite my praise for the leads, they weren't on screen enough for me to make this movie worth it. I want more Nick and Nora. And Asta. I don't picture myself watching the sequels because I don't know if I can sit through all the subpar qualities engulfing their talent.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0025878/

One Wonderful Sunday (1947)

3/5

Akira Kurosawa's One Wonderful Sunday spends the first 80 minutes detailing a depressing, terrible Sunday. Two young lovers, Yuzo and Masako, in post-war Japan lead an honest but poor existence. They go on dates each Sunday; on this one, they have just 35 yen combined. The hopelessly optimistic Masako wants them to make the most of it, using their imagination if they must, but the cynical Yuzo feels like an inadequate boyfriend and becomes depressed over the situation. He is difficult to get along with, and Masako leaves. But that is in the first 80 minutes. After that, the movie does a complete reversal. As the film metamorphes, it becomes filled with tender moments. Yuzo finally succumbs to Masako's tireless optimism and lets his imagination run wild. Kurosawa here exhibits his brilliance, as he refrains from showing on screen what they imagine, but instead lets us use our imaginations with them. And it truly does turn into a wonderful Sunday.

Technically, the movie is a mixed bag. We witness the beginnings of Kurosawa's greatness, in conception but not in execution. Every so often we see raw, amateurish attempts at elegant camerawork, heartfelt acting, and evocative music. But the camera lingers just a bit too long, making the movements feel unnatural instead of fluid. And the editing is just a little off, making the acting feel staged. And the sound quality went in and out, making the music overdramatic instead of subtly on-point. There is one point where Kurosawa breaks the fourth wall and communicates with his audience, and it almost works. It is so close, but just not quite there yet. Over the next few years he refines his work to the mastery we now associate with him. But One Wonderful Sunday is not as good as his more famous work. Don't watch this until after you've seen the rest of his oeuvre.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0039871/

Angels & Demons (2009)

4/5

I did not expect to like Angels & Demons, because I hate the work of both Ron Howard (Cinderella Man) and Dan Brown (The Da Vinci Code), but I ended up enjoying it very much. The plot follows symbologist Robert Langdon (Tom Hanks) and his female compatriot (Ayelet Zurer) in the Vatican as a potential Illuminati threat to destroy the city becomes a reality. The plot is wholly convoluted and unnecessarily complex to an obscene degree; but if you suspend your disbelief, it entertains.

Like it or not, the story is where the movie really excels. The mysteries, the clues, and the suspicion abound in perfect proportion. As the movie progresses, the fear, the tension, and the uncertainty buid up to a climactic finale. The constant twists and turns are unpredictable, and they work. Technically, the movie was nothing to write home about. The acting is acceptable, the cinematography is mediocre, and the editing is average. Still, for its story and entertainment value, I cannot help but recommend this movie.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0808151/

Moon (2009)

2/5

Moon is an average science fiction movie in the same vein as Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. The plot follows space miner Sam Bell (Rockwell) and his robotic assistant Gerty (Spacey) nearing the end of a 3-year stint on the moon. After recovering from an accident, his body begins to slowly weaken and degenerate; he experiences hallucinations, vomits up blood, and loses his teeth. And that's not even the weirdest part.

The plot is interesting, to say the least, which is why I wanted to see the movie. But it failed to live up to my expectations because of atrocious pacing. There was no build-up, climax, or denouement. The movie peaked about halfway in, and after that you just sat and watched events you don't care about transpire. Without any prospect of progression, the audience will find the movie boring and slow, which is what I found it. (I even caught myself nodding off a few times, but perhaps a food coma from a delicious chicken bake was partly to blame).

The acting by Sam Rockwell was riveting, as it had to be to support the one-man show. Kevin Spacey's performance was acceptable, but his role was uninteresting. The editing was annoying (especially during the fight scene) and the special effects were wholly unconvincing. The rest of the technical aspects of the movie were nothing to write home about, and indeed I choose not to write home about them. Moon was an interesting concept, with some excellent moments, but on the whole should be avoided by the general public.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1182345/

M (1931)

5/5

Fritz Lang's M is a masterpiece of early sound film, and of art as a whole. The plot follows the public outcry surrounding the police's inability to catch a child murderer. As the police crack down on known criminal hideouts, hurting their illegitimate businesses, those same criminals start hunting down the child murderer themselves. In one of the film's most arresting scenes, they find a man they suspect is the murderer and mark his jacket with the letter M, following him around the city. The story is unfortunately a timeless one; it is a saddening portrait of human decay, of psychiatric problems manifested in aberrant desires and needs, of mob mentality and uncontrollable bloodlust. But it is also one of law and justice, of sympathy pervading the darkness, and of appealing to our higher sensibilities. It shows us the lows of society, yes, but it also shows us the highs of the human condition.

Made just four years after the first talkie, it uses both sound and silence to generate suspense. In fact, Lang sometimes uses opposing audiovisual cues to make it all the more terrifying. Images of a peaceful street and children playing as the killer's signature tune is whistled in the background, slowly increasing in volume, is infinitely more chilling than simply seeing the killer approach. But Lang uses more than just sound; his cinematography is impeccable even by today's standards, his editing remains vibrant modern, and the performance he gets out of Peter Lorre still stand out. I cannot remember feeling this much empathy for a murderer outside of Psycho. This movie retains its power after so many years because it touches on our fears, our hopes, and our duties as humans and as members of society. It shows us who we are, who we might be, and who we should be.

IMDb link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0022100/