criterionforum.org

No thread yet on Chris Morris' subversive and brilliant - yet oddly accessible - satire of jihadism?

I've seen the movie twice, and its genius really shows on second viewing. It's superficially hilarious but also works on two deeper levels: it's quite profound and moving in its depiction of the wrong-headedness and confusion of modern-day terrorism, and it functions as a brilliant spoof of Hollywood movies in which a group of lovable heroes achieve their goal against all obstacles - the difference being that, in this case, the goal is infidel murder. Equally incisive is the manner in which Morris takes aim at other institutions (police, politicians, the well-meaning) and shows them to be as inept and dangerous as the terrorists themselves.

And what's remarkable is how genial the whole thing is. Funny, endearing characters, Lebowski-esque dialogue...and, of course, a shitload of blowing people up. Little chance of this being distributed widely in the States, and odds are likely that it will be completely misunderstood and underrated in the UK. But it's one of the best films I've seen so far this year.

I'm very much looking forward to getting a chance to see this, not just for the prospect of Chris Morris doing cinema but also since it sounds very similar to the Brummie terrorist segments from the bleakly hilarious Monkey Dust series!

Period piece about the remnants of Rome's 9th Legion trying to find their way out of Pict territory. It may only get a small release in theaters, with DVD as the main market, but I'm going to try to catch it (evidently, "The Descent 2" is going straight to DVD in the US). Marshall is one of my favorite directors- he knows his limitations, knows what he's good at, and knows what he likes.

After Dog Soldiers, The Descent, and Doomsday, we know one thing about Neil Marshall movies- any character is in danger of being eaten at any time.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1020558/

Well, let's hope this isn't another lazy patchwork quilt of other people's better films - Doomsday was enjoyable enough when it started, but got progressively more tiresome once it became clear that it was essentially a guided tour round the best bits of his DVD collection. And I went with high expectations, as I was genuinely impressed by The Descent.

I agree. The only reason to make an homage of a classic trash film is if you can find the kernel of excitement and expand on it, with better production values. Doomsday, in my opinion, did OK with the zombie references, and improved on the "Escape From New York" theme, but failed with the "Road Warrior" aspect. You quickly figured out that instead of watching "Doomsday", you could be watching "Road Warrior" again, and enjoying it more.

This movie, from the little I know, invites comparisons to "The Warriors", which borrowed from Anabasis. If so, you wonder why he didn't just shoot "Anabasis", unless it's because he really, really wanted to set it in Scotland.

Anyone catch this last night?

I just saw this, I thought Pacino was excellent, and nearly pitch perfect. Overall the production was nicely done. I think I'd have to reflect further, undecided if there was any other stand out performances. Goodman and Sarandon were about equally on par.

I'm not certain if it elevates itself out of the T.V. movie of the week, but worth seeing.

Sigh, and to think, when I saw the title of this thread I perked up, thinking they made some sort of film adaptation of the game where high culture and pop culture collide.

The trailer has just been unveiled - no subtitles, but no-one ever watched a Švankmajer film for the dialogue.

According to Film New Europe:

Acclaimed animated filmmaker Jan Švankmajer is currently working on his latest movie Surviving Life (Theory and Practice), which he is making with innovative methods. Is neither a computer animation or a feature film. In this movie, photo cut-outs of actors and are animated under the camera. The director also had to integrate with the actors’ speech. They first voiced syllables and vowels, as their expressions and movements were recorded and saved in computers. Each phase was then printed and cut out, and were then manually animated under the camera. Moreover, in some scenes the actors play live, but only part of their faces. Švankmajer also worked with “colors” – the live actors are in full color, while black and white photographs of their images “play” in the background.

And what is the premise of the movie? The main protagonist of this psychoanalytic comedy leads a double life. Whereas in real-life he has a wife who suspects him of infidelity, in the dream world he has a pregnant lover. To get to the bottom of this, he finally has his dreams interpreted.

Premiering at Venice next month, UK premiere at the London Film Festival in October, Czech commercial release in early November. And Švankmajer says that this will be his last film - which is fair enough: he's 75, and they typically take years to make.

Didn't see a thread on this film yet, but if I overlooked it, my apologies.

Just seen this film yesterday. I quite enjoyed it.

So far, it would solidly be in my top 10 of the year.

I thought the writing was close to perfect and felt very fresh, even though the setting has been done every which way.

I have only seen 'Lovely and Amazing' from Nicole Holofcener and wasn't impressed, but this. to me, is a solid little film. I would certainly recommend it.

I also have to say if Ann Morgan Guilbert is acting, she deserves some real recognition for this role. Just fantastic!

Anyone else seen this?

Might as well as make a topic for this as Watts at the very least will get nominated.

First off I've got to say that this film has increased my respect for Liman incredibly. I didn't know going in that he was his own DP, but he does a marvelous job in the role. He's not on the level of Soderbergh, but he still comes across as better than most. I especially enjoyed his use of POV which managed to bring a lot of genuine emotions to scenes that could have come across as much more silly. There's one POV in particular that lasts all of two seconds that does the film a lot of good. I also appreciate that he keeps the handheld to only the most emotionally charged moments like the car sequence and most of the third act. Curiously enough this is also where he avoids modern cutting styles and holds the shots sometimes as longer then a minute (though it should be noted that he never goes cut crazy). The third act sense of paranoia was easily the tightest bit on all fronts and I wish that had been the whole film given how strongly Liman works the suspence in only about twenty minutes.

Watts too is very good giving a subtle transformation that allows for her face to do all of the acting. She manages to make the occasionally maudlin, especially in the third act, dialogue she spews out seem like reality (something Liman manages to emphasis greatly). While she's definitely the MVP she's not alone with a really excellent supporting cast. This is completely an actor's film with even the tiniest roles getting their due. Luckily that aspect isn't ruined in the typical epic fashion of shoehorning the characters in, but feels mostly natural and balanced. There's a pretty massive chink in the chain though, Sean Penn. Joe Wilson is written as a ham, but Penn's fashion of ham just feels totally inappropriate to the role. It's actually funny that he's the one that worked the most on transforming into his person, yet he comes across the most as himself. There's not a single moment where I could forget that Penn was there, not Wilson.

Penn's not the only problem though. Liman seems to want to go two ways with the film. The first and most successful is a total axe grind. Liman wants the audience by the end of the picture to be out for Cheney and his cronies' blood. Of course the case could be made here that he's just preaching to the choir, but in this case I think that's somewhat good. This success of the film is nearly crippled though by Liman also wanting to present a Zodiac styled docu-drama. While this keeps the film from being condescending and nagging it also causes the emotional bits to fail and feel out of place. Liman's pushing of 'the government's bad, mkay' simply keeps the film lopsided and renders it only as good or entertaining. It lacks the x-factor that would allow for these elements to be forgotten. Really the end of the film, which desperately needed to be cut and only exists to make sure you got everything, is the best evidence to these weaknesses. Liman takes two cakes and pukes as a result.

Pretty much agreed, especially about Watts and Penn. Penn is pretty terrible here, taking a bombastic "THIS STORY MUST BE TOLD!" approach to the role and seeming really out of place.

But the most problematic aspect of the picture to me is that it falls into the same trap that it accuses the press of falling into. Penn's Wilson says at least twice in the movie that the "real question" ought to be why the administration is lying about Iraq's weapons, not who the Wilsons are, and the press has been successfully distracted by the administration into focusing on the latter. Yet the movie itself seems far too caught up in the question of the Wilsons, even though by its own internal logic it's the least important aspect of the story.

There's a certain tabloid mentality here that's really at odds with the political message - "so, the President is building a case for war based on false evidence and his aides have compromised national security to smear Joe Wilson, a guy who spoke up about it. The right-wing press then spreads all kinds of misinformation about Wilson and his wife, bringing the full weight of the US government down on two people and ruining their lives. So the one question I have is ... how did this affect the Wilsons' marriage?" It's a question that might fascinate the Maureen Dowds and Gail Collinses out there, but it's hard to take seriously given the bigger picture as well as the movie's own political framework.

Saw this tonight and I was disappointed. After reading some good advanced reviews for sometime now, I had high hopes. While the film was certainly competent, it never really got off the ground from there. Some memorable dialogue, yes, but it treaded water too often with cliched characters (as funny as the old lady was, they never gave her a past - she was just comic relief cranky old senior citizen cartoon character, although Guilbert does an excellent job working what she was given) and scenarios. Also - it very much falls victim to the indie-film cliche of characters expressing deep emotions in a flat, monotone, emotionless, blunt manner with the receiving characters also receiving the emotions equally as stagnant. This film certainly was capable of completely bypassing that 21st Century American "quirk", but instead went for it too often (and sadly more often as the film progressed). It didn't have to, which made it that much worse. The photography at times was also a bit nonsensical - it didn't manage space very well and aside from a few sidewalk shots it made almost no traction out of the much hyped NYC setting.

Some praise - some decent acting from Keener, Peet and Platt. As said previously, some good moments of dialogue. And some more gutsy situations that you don't normally see in a film such as

Spoiler

Peet and Platt pairing off for a most unusual and unexpected sexual affair.

As for the ending

Spoiler

it is mighty strange to see a feel-good ending about spending $230 on a pair of jeans. Also - the joke about the little vase breaking after she left is completely unnecessary and in bad taste - almost as bad as the tag-on joke radio broadcast ending to Duncan Jones' Moon.

This was a very pleasant surprise. The only review I read of this one before hand was very negative calling it dull and worthy not to mention how very hit and miss Film Movement can be about social issues pictures. Instead of my fear being confirmed I got a humourous and entertaining romp. Haroun elegantly uses intimacy to develop an epic scope.
While the story of Adam is always front and center it feels as if it were on the peripheral and that the other elements of story we get is the real stuff. For example by letting Adam's friend be placed in an identical situation and suggest that he is in his own film Adam becomes much more normalized. In fact, and I love love this unbelievably, Haroun does seemingly everything to ensure that we don't pity or feel sorry for Adam. All he wants is for us to understand the man. Adam himself is a complex sort who starts off full of pride and competitiveness. Unlike an other similar film it's not just egotism that trips up Adam to do something he'll regret. It's a need to win, to prove that he is the alphamale. Those sexual politics aren't commented on too heavily, but the movie does acknowledge how losing his job to his son emasculates him. He'll do anything to prove he's 'the champ'.
An other thing that I just love about African cinema in general is how no matter how modern the area lurches forward there's always these little elements of the old days or even the very modern poverty lying around. for example while everyone seems to have a vehicle and the roads are paved the buildings they pass by and the way the roads meld with their surroundings suggest a rural emptiness.
One particular aspect of this even leads to the funniest moment in the film where Adam as the gate keeper has to lift the poles blocking the entrance and exit. Eventually so many cars come by that he loses track and gets honked to hell. The whole film could easily be labeled a comedy actually if it weren't for the successful mood of drama that gets created. Behind these funny little bits is a very sad truth.
The film is mostly about that truth, but luckily never makes that presence overbearing. The social issues slowly creep up so that it's only when all of the threads knot together does it become obvious just why the movie was made. This is really the first great foreign film I missed from last year.

By the way I haven't heard of Haroun before, but it appears that a two of his other films are easily got. Is the HVE still the best edition of Abouna and is the Art Manhattan disc of Daratt any good. It comes with an other movie so I wouldn't mind some minor ugliness. Also any pointers to the other films on DVD would be great.

I picked up the Czech dvd of this film recently and highly recommend it. It's a quality disc and English-friendly.

I'm still processing the film, which felt bleak and eerily suffocating on first viewing. Svankmajer's interesting use of photo animation in place of live actors for some of the action, alternating with wooden or highly incongruous live action, makes this successful as a strange experience, at least. It's left a lot of odd impressions in my mind that keep bubbling up.

Svankmajer uses his technique of rapid cuts to closeups a lot here, especially in dialogue where closeups of mouths get heavy use. I love the use of the mouth shots in Lunacy, but here I found my complete lack of Czech an impediment - it's hard to know which word is being emphasized.

I went to see this mostly out of loyalty to Kitano, but expecting disappointment. I came out thrilled and eager to tell anyone who's ever had the least love for Kitano's work not to let this one pass by.
Many Japanese artists have mulled over the twin themes of sex and death; Kitano's obsessions are similar, but a little left of center. Throughout his work he has explored the relationship between play and violence, intertwining baseball games with yakuza murders, lovers' daydreams with bank heists, sumo wrestling with Russian roulette. In his most famous and acclaimed works (Hana-Bi, Sonatine, Boiling Point), the balance between the two poles has been maintained with perfect delicacy and strange beauty. in some of his more recent works, this balancing act has been purposefully upset, to the confusion or dismay of critics. But a film like Kikujiro, whose surface playfulness and innocence hides terrible threats, fears, and dangers, is just as significant and rewarding as his more overtly serious works.
Outrage often seems like the inverted mirror image of Kikujiro. It appears to be a straightforward, by the numbers Yakuza film, without any of the brightly colored interludes or moments of peace that marked Kitano's earlier forays into the genre. As the brilliant teaser trailer highlights, the film is filled to bursting with shouting, screaming, and snarling Yakuza, all rolling their r's as best they can. But in Kitano's hands the rules of the genre (and of the gangs themselves), which require constant bloodshed, leadership turnover, and duplicity, become the rules of an elaborately senseless game. In this game there is room for playfulness, albeit of a decidedly grim variety. The extremely inventive and numerous execution scenes all show childlike imagination at work, not unlike the elaborate human meatgrinders or fake vehicular disasters of "Takeshi's Castle" and other Kitano TV efforts. The life of crime is a game of life and death, which reckless gamblers idly, hopelessly play.
It's also an exquisitely well edited, shot, and scored film. The violence is awful and graphic, but not salacious. Again, it seems to me an important film for Kitano, and one that will also be so for those who continue to appreciate his work.

Why were you expecting to be disappointed? I told you guys it was great.