http://thor.marvel.com/

USA 2011  Directed by: Kenneth Branagh  Written by: Ashley Edward Miller, Zack Stentz, Don Payne  Produced by: Kevin Feige  Cinematography by: Haris Zambarloukos  Editing by: Paul Rubell  Music by: Patrick Doyle  Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Anthony Hopkins, Stellan Skarsgard, Kat Dennings, Idris Elba, Colm Feore, Tadanobu Asano, Rene Russo

I never saw the appeal of Thor as a comic-book hero. Actually, if picky, I’d say Thor is not even a superhero by any means. He’s a Nordic mythical deity cast to Earth by his father Odin. And, with his red cape, ironclad armor and a little gold, winged helmet housing a set of goldilocks, he’s borderline a Halloween mascot.

“Thor” the movie is an attempt to make the character less kitsch – red cape, ironclad armor, and long flowing goldilocks for all the females to swoon over. Chris Hemsworth (Thor) took a lot of time working out for the ladies. Outside his armor he’s a pin-up for Levi’s commercials…at times where it would barely hold on to his tight derrière. His piercing blue eyes could raise your body temperature to tip the mercury.

But, “Thor” is a superhero comic-book adaptation. And it’s mostly for boys. What bright idea was it to make it into a romantic comedy? Sure, there were moments of clashing and flying fists and bodies. Of course there was a ton of CG effects that required a small nation of computer animators. But for the most part, the story somewhat circled around Thor and his love interest, Jane Foster, played sappily by the recent Oscar doll, Natalie Portman. However, the fault doesn’t lie with the actors, considering there are a few more big-screen heavyweights aside from Portman – Anthony Hopkins (Odin), Stellan Skarsgård (Jane’s senior yet timid colleague), and cameos by Jeremy Renner and Sam Jackson. It’s just that all the crucial stakes raised by the characters weren’t…all that crucial.

Thor’s an arrogant god born with invulnerability. Because of his hard head that put his realm in danger of going back to war with its nemesis, the frost giants, Thor is stripped of his powers by his father and cast to Earth as punishment. There, he meets Jane, by accident, and struggles to regain his senses and worth for his triumphant return. But then, the film segues to Jane and Thor getting acquainted for a really long time, leaving all the action and plots to the curb. Somehow, Thor (a daft god) finds Jane (a geeky, squeaky astrophysicist) really interesting. But, unlike other sensible action movies where at least the distressed dame would be the cause for the hero to go berserk and blow things up, Jane was just there to have coffee talk with Thor. And for the final battle, she isn’t even really in harm’s way; accept maybe stubbornly tiptoeing into crossfire.

Throughout the film, one character stood out sincerely, Kat Denning’s sexy, pouty Darcy – Jane’s intern, who found Thor, Jane, and the entire scenario to be a farce. It made a lot of sense on paper to point Kenneth Branagh to the director’s chair…for the amalgamation of theatrical period-costumed figures with modern-day countryside simpletons. But the delivery missed the target by a long shot. “Thor” was handled with little sensitivity to the comic-book genre and over-saturated melodrama that left it out by the backdoor like a wet dog. So despite the thunderous disputes and whirlwind high-school crush, Branagh hammered the last nail in Thor’s coffin.

Filed under: TITLE T, US YEAR OF PRODUCTION 2011 Tagged: anthony hopkins, Ashley Edward Miller, Asian Movie Blog, asian movies, Chris Hemsworth, Colm Feore, Culture, Don Payne, Entertainment, film, film review blog, Haris Zambarloukos, Idris Elba, Kat Dennings, Kenneth Branagh, Kevin Feige, Life, marvel, Marvel Comics, MOVIES, Natalie Portman, Patrick Doyle, Paul Rubell, Rene Russo, Reviews, Sam Raimi, Stellan Skarsgard, Tadanobu Asano, Thor, Thor Movie 2011, Thor Movie 2011 home page, Thor Movie 2011 imdb, Thor Movie 2011 pics, Thor Movie 2011 poster, Thor Movie 2011 review, Thor Movie 2011 stills, Thor Movie 2011 synopsis, Thor Movie 2011 trailer, Tom Hiddleston, Zack Stentz ]]> http://goninmovieblog.wordpress.com/2011/05/10/thor/feed/ 0 gonin thor-poster01 Line Master New Fine thor-still05 thor-still01 thor-still02 thor-still03 thor-still06 thor-still04 thor-still07 tony_gonin_signature 1 Star Rating_200 Related Movies Logo_Final clash-of-the-titans-movie-poster_THUMB Sucker Punch_Poster01_THUMB the_green_hornet_poster02_THUMB http://goninmovieblog.wordpress.com/2011/04/27/limitless/ http://goninmovieblog.wordpress.com/2011/04/27/limitless/#comments Wed, 27 Apr 2011 16:18:00 +0000 J. http://goninmovieblog.wordpress.com/?p=5275 ]]>

http://www.iamrogue.com/limitless/fullsite/

USA 2011  Directed by: Neil Burger  Written by: Leslie Dixon  Based on: The Dark Fields by Alan Glynn  Produced by: Leslie Dixon, Ryan Kavanaugh, Scott Kroopf  Cinematography by: Jo Willems  Editing by: Tracy Adams, Naomi Geraghty  Music by: Paul Leonard-Morgan  Cast: Bradley Cooper, Abbie Cornish, Robert De Niro, Anna Friel, Johnny Witworth, Robert John Burke, Tomas Arana, T.V. Carpio, Patricia Kalember, Andrew Howard

So much to do, so little time; some of us feel like this while others are just the opposite – with little purpose in life and thus feel like too much time on their hands. “Limitless” opened the window and let us peek out to the great wide open of possibilities and also see what could happen if one tries to fly too close to the sun. It’s a classic moral tale told through the lens of a very unique and innovative director, Neil Burger. Some of the imagery done here are downright trippy. But it styled the story so fittingly. After all, it is a science fiction piece about a loser writer, Eddie Morra (Bradley Cooper), with a mental block that got handed a miraculous tip in the form of a little transparent pill, which can optimize a person’s brain function to 100%. But with great power comes greater threats, turbo-charging all the stakes to overload.

This film rides heavily on Bradley Cooper, his first-time lead role. As an alumnus of The Actors Studio in New York (the Mecca for actors to be), he had all the training, intensity, and charm to silence any speculations over his ability to keep the audience in the seats and his supporting actor at bay – Robert De Niro, who plays Eddie’s boss, mentor and rival, Carl Van Loon.

The pill clocks in at 30 seconds to take effect and lasts 24 hours. At which time, Eddie crawls out of his grimy world and into one that is saturated with clarity, edge, detail and speed. A drug addict with a larger-than-life dream, Cooper’s repeating transformation from the slummed-out slacker to the golden boy with the Billionaire Boys Club swagger is easily entertaining as is sympathetic. It’s this constant contrast between the light and shadows that draws you in. Along the way, other characters are seen leveraging from this pill, each giving a notable attempt at this transformation; to which, surprisingly, was Eddie’s loan shark, a Russian immigrant – played palatably satisfying, maybe even trumping Cooper, by Andrew Howard.

With a plot that keeps twisting but never sliding far from its own truth – although a couple of scenes could have propelled it to ace status – “Limitless” carries enough weight to fend off any lip-gnawing thriller and yet has the humor, light or dark, to find everyone able to enjoy it with a few snorts and slaps to the knee. At the end, it even leaves the story open for new chapters and us wanting more…as long as the writers don’t run out of their limit of magic little pills.

http://www.suckseedthemovie.com/

THAILAND 2011  Directed by: Chayanop Boonprakob Written by: Chayanob Boonprakob, Tossapol Tiptinnakorn  Produced by: Jira Maligool, Chenchonnanee Sppnthonsaratul, Suwimol Techasupinan, Wanruedee Pongsittisak  Cinematography by: Naruphol Chokkhanaphitak  Music by: Genie Records  Cast: Jirayu Laongmanee, Pachara Chirathivat, Thawat Pornrattanaprasert, Natcha Nualjam (Nattasha Morrison)

It doesn’t happen very often that a Thai comedy is more than a random potpourri of tasteless, one-hundred-year-old jokes and failed 1910’s/1920’s slapstick references, so it’s a pleasant surprise to see SUCKSEED succeed not only in the comedy department, but in many more ways.

SUCKSEED tells the story of two childhood friends from Chiang Mai, Koong and Ped, who both somehow fancy the same girl, their classmate Ern. Ern leaves for Bangkok after primary school, but a few years later their paths cross again and they accidentally reunite in high school after Ern returns to Chiang Mai in 2006.

To impress the girls (especially Ern) and to challenge his twin brother Kay, a star guitarist, Koong decides to form a band, Koong And Friends, assigning Ped to play bass and basketball player Ex as drummer. At first it all looks like just another one of Koong’s short-lived ideas, but after finding out that Ern is an ace guitarist herself and his brother is entering a nationwide music award with his band The Arena, Koong becomes dead serious about Koong And Friends.

Together they decide to enter the talent competition as well to leave their mark – this way or another. But the odds are against them and things turn for the worse when Koong’s and Ped’s battle over Ern intensifies and Ern switches sides and decides to perform with The Arena at the music awards. Friendship, love and musical success – all seems impossible the closer the competition comes.

SUCKSEED works as good as a comedy as it does as a drama, love story and film about music, thanks to a wonderful script, the perfect cast and an array of participating Thai bands and singers (thanks to Grammy’s stable of some of the best rock/pop bands in the country – a well-calculated cross-marketing measure for Grammy / GTH, but also admittedly a great benefit for the audience). So there’s something in for everyone and, amazingly, I found mostly older people watching the film in local cinemas than teenagers who supposedly are the core audience. That speaks for the quality and maturity of SUCKSEED as a film, and it also proves that it was a good idea to pull in some bands that were most popular a long while ago, like Blackhead.

Still, SUCKSEED is a genuinely charming and smart film that is much more a coming-of-age drama than just a loose collection of motifs and genre quotes: it is very convincing in various departments, yet it is also mostly original, featuring fantastic timing, pace and sense for subtleties, mastering noise and silence equally well, throwing in a lot of pretty creative ideas (like the imaginary appearance of bands whenever the characters lose themselves in the music), twists and intelligent dialogue without ever overshadowing the story or the characters.

One of the film’s biggest achievements is that it always feels natural and organic, no matter what (and no matter what flaws show here and there). I should especially mention that the direction and cinematography are unobtrusive, only taking centre stage when necessary (SUCKSEED features some hilarious and exceptionally creative sequences, first and foremost the stellar scene with Blackhead joining Ped at the market), but otherwise let the story and actors drive the film – something you don’t find too often in Thai cinema.

As for the cast I wouldn’t say that all of them are great actors (and how could they – most of them are newcomers), however, they are the ideal cast for their roles nevertheless and display great enthusiasm, talent and partly also versatility, all of which makes me look forward to their next projects. Here are some promising new actors at work that we will most probably see a lot more often in the future.

SUCKSEED, despite some of its goofy looking poster artwork, teenage ensemble and motifs that generally concern a younger audience manages to transcend its story and make it universally relevant for everybody – SUCKSEED turns out to be heartfelt, fresh and authentic, with far above-average IQ, humor and artistic craftsmanship, let alone a brilliant soundtrack that even those who are not familiar with Thai music will most certainly appreciate.

The film is as funny as it is fun to watch – maybe I am getting senile, but I consider SUCKSEED an accomplished work that I have enjoyed more than most Thai movies in recent years. SUCKSEED is the 2011 surprise hit so far – and the Thai movie to beat in the months to come.

J.

http://suckerpunchmovie.warnerbros.com/

USA 2011  Directed by: Zack Snyder  Written by: Zack Snyder, Steve Shibuya  Produced by: Deborah Snyder, Zack Snyder  Cinematography by: Larry Fong  Editing by: William Hoy  Music by: Tyler Bates, Marius De Vries  Cast: Emily Browning, Abbie Cornish, Jena Malone, Vanessa Hudgens, Jamie Chung, Oscar Isaac, Carla Gugino, Jon Hamm, Scott Glenn

They say if you want something done right, you gotta do it yourself. And in this day and age, with advanced technological support, it has become truer than ever. I’m sure Zack Snyder would be the first to agree, and eagerly trying to prove he can keep up with his peers such as Christopher Nolan, by making “Sucker Punch.” I personally don’t necessarily see Snyder as a filmmaker, but rather a hyper-action visual artist. His detail in composition, lighting, and movement is borderline impeccable, and usually always aims at one thing – a mind/eye devouring feast. And each of his films is a work of art.

Adding to his usual roles, Snyder directed, produced, and co-wrote “Sucker Punch.” But whereas pieces like “300” or “Watchmen” had been visually and verbally outlined, and simply needed a loyal adaptation, SP manifested from the pit of Snyder’s creative blender. And this is where it hit a speed bump.

The trouble with making ultra-stunning effects is they can easily become your crutch rather than a style. And the audience expects you to raise the bar each time, but that simply can’t persist, because all of Snyder’s bells and whistles jingled and jangled in his earlier pictures, which gave him notice in the first place.

With a blank canvas, Snyder painted a world of Baby Doll, a young woman (although she looked 14 in her Japanimation-fashioned outfit and makeup) desperately trying to survive and escape the insane asylum that she was committed in by her malicious stepfather. It seems, in this dark and dingy institution, only pretty young females are the patients. And even the head psychiatrist is a busty eastern European seductress played by the always sumptuous Carla Gugino. Through her guidance, Baby Doll finds herself able to bend the cruel reality into a spirited fantasy, fighting her way, along with her inmate patients, through Japanese feudal times and WWI Germany, and eventually to freedom. Sometimes there were dragons, other times futuristic robots. But at all times, girls were kicking bad guys’ asses, while in killer heels, dangerously short skirts and deadly décolletages. And?

The entrance to the fantasy world was always accompanied by a song played out in the room and Baby Doll’s irresistible dance that would set all the men in a trance, allowing the other girlie inmates to do their business – collecting items that would piece together the steps for all of them to escape. Till the end, we never saw what her dance actually was; it was always through the expressions of the men that we knew her moves were mesmerizing. And even though the color schemes and costumes contrasted between the two worlds, one element seemed to remain constant amongst the characters – really long eyelashes. Why?

If a film/story can be depicted by a genre of music, “Sucker Punch” would be a techno-trance maxed out on decibel levels. The action almost never seizes, and never quite allowed any downtime to peel back any layers of the characters. And yet, the actions almost always stayed at the same level, too – never really advanced the game from previous scenes. Sometimes, the fight sequences were caught too closely by the camera that was obviously placed on a lawn mower, giving way to vertigo and light reminder of last night’s dinner. This repeated several times throughout the show. What for?

In the end, through the psychiatrist’s final analysis, “Sucker Punch” concludes that the key to setting us free in this cruel world is…us. Really? Is that it? Can this be the punch-line to this episode? Did Snyder really go through all that pain to reveal a message that could be found inside a fortune cookie? I guess the audience got suckered in this one. Snyder needs to get back to what he does best: visualization – dust off his ego and hang up his writer’s hat, for awhile. And let’s hope his new installment of “Superman” will fly a bit higher, under the producing wings of his multiple-hat-wearing peer, Christopher Nolan.

http://www.nuimage.net/

USA 2011  Directed by: Prachya Pinkaew  Written by: Kevin Bernhardt  Produced by: Frank DeMartini, Peter Safran, Daniel Bernhardt, Tom Waller, Avi Lerner  Cinematography by: Wade Muller  Editing by: David Richardson  Music by: Robert Folk  Cast: Kevin Bacon, Djimon Hounsou, Jirantanin Pitakporntrakul, Ron Smoorenburg, Abhijati Jusakul, Sahajak Boonthanakit, Byron Gibson, Creighton Mark Johnson, Weeraprawat Wongpuapan, Suteerush Channukool

I am not sure if the phrase “highly anticipated” applies to Prachya Pinkaew’s US debut. First of all, it’s not a phrase I’d use as I have never been fond of his sketchy direction in the first place – frankly speaking, most of his movies are only watchable because of some fine action scenes and outstanding martial arts display; as movies, however, they are generally sub-standard. Secondly, when has the US debut of an Asian director ever been a revelation? Right. Last but not least, when has a US B-movie that is shot more or less entirely in Asia ever been any good? Well.

So everything points towards a disaster, not even taking into consideration that Mr. Pinkaew now has to work with real actors, not stuntmen, something like a real script (featuring real English dialogue) and cater to an international audience that expects more than a niche Muay Thai show. But as positive thinking is a virtue I have tried to look forward to ELEPHANT WHITE, primarily thanks to the unspoken promise of another memorable performance by Kevin Bacon, and possibly Djimon Hounsou. Now how did that all turn out?

Let’s begin with the screenplay: ELEPHANT WHITE is a solid action drama (or so it seems at first) about an assassin who is hired by a Thai businessman to avenge the murder of his daughter by slave traders, injecting some initially welcome touch of exoticism and mysticism along with authentic locations and local flair to boost the film’s sweaty atmosphere. As long as all that contributes to the story, place or character development that’s fine with me. Thing is, the script quickly ups the ante and deviates from the actual story, indulging in kitsch and melodrama instead, focusing more on triggering all sorts of emotions than on a believable storyline (even though the final twist is meant to render much of what happens in the movie a “mystery” (which by then however is completely revealed and explained).

Add to that a relationship between the main characters that remains largely incomprehensible and is defined through some seriously clumsy dialogue and action scenes that never make sense. The script relies on an intangible past, and it eventually all comes down to Curtie Church in need of weapons and Jimmy The Brit supplying them, for reasons only Mr. Bernhardt knows.

While revealing no huge immediately detectable formal issues (other than Mr. Pinkaews previous films, which suggests that the American team has significantly contributed to the film’s hygienic factors and taken Mr. Pinkaews work to a hitherto unknown, albeit not exactly high level) ELEPHANT WHITE however has astonished me with a so far rarely seen repetition of largely identical chapters: again and again Church gets himself new weapons from Jimmy, assassinates the bad guys, works on his “relationship” with Mae, needs more and different weapons, and it all starts all over again.

ELEPHANT WHITE is not unentertaining, has some good moments and features some serious shootouts and other action sequences, but what exactly is its point? I’ve been digging a lot, but there is simply no story here, unless you count Church’s relationship with Mae and its implications as a somewhat relevant “love story”. Apart from that we see an unfortunately disappointing performance from Mr. Bacon, who is speaking with a very fake and very exerted English accent while otherwise giving me the impression of being mentally absent throughout his scenes; a key idea and surprise ending that is by far less clever than it thinks it is; and a revenge plot that is thin as paper, or better, is nothing but an initial reason to send Church on his spiritual journey.

All things considered, ELEPHANT WHITE is basically a half-assed blend of ANGEL HEART, BANGKOK DANGEROUS, Hong Kong Action flicks and Thai martial arts. I am not sure what the mission was really, but it is safe to say it wasn’t accomplished. Also, Mr. Pinkaew doesn’t do his country a favor by replicating the same old clichés any foreign director would have gone for as far as Thailand is concerned, while on the other hand never developing a signature style or having any noticeable impact on the story or its visualization.

ELEPHANT WHITE is a mediocre action drama that could have been better but most certainly never ever really good no matter what – not with this sort of script, director and acting. When the dust has settled all that remains is a B-movie that will have a very hard time to find an audience.

J.

http://unknownmovie.warnerbros.com/

USA, GERMANY 2011  Directed by: Jaume Collet-Serra  Written by: Oliver Butcher, Stephen Cornwell  Produced by: Joel Silver, Leonard Goldberg, Andrew Rona  Cinematography by: Flavio Labiano  Editing by: Timothy Alverson  Music by: John Ottman, Alexander Rutt  Cast: Liam Neeson, Diane Kruger, January Jones, Aidan Quinn, Frank Langella, Bruno Ganz

From the trailer, “Unknown” looked very much like a reprise of Liam Neeson’s last espionage film, “Taken.” The setting, the weather, the color, the fashion…all represented a clear reminder of the fast-paced, Bessonesque hyper-flick. Whereas “Taken” had a very small, personal agenda that took Neeson’s character on a rampage, “Unknown” aimed a bit too high, and left somewhat a dry taste on the palate.

“Unknown” tells a tale of an undercover agent who’s lost his memory in a taxi accident. Upon waking up from his coma, he believes he was his cover, Dr. Martin Harris, who’s in Berlin to join an exclusive event with his wife (obviously also an undercover agent, played blankly to a T by January Jones). En route to finding out his true self, Harris traces back to the immigrant taxi driver named Gina (Diane Kruger), who had left him after the crash. Gina’s involvement to Harris’s recovery was the slack crutch that sloppily carried the story – offering Harris a rundown apartment to crash because he had no credit or ID; a dingy club to hide when they were being chased by hit-men; saved Harris’s life just in time by running down and crushing not only one, but two bad guys, and finally a happy Hollywood ending by walking away hand-in-hand with Harris into their new life.

Hollywood clearly wanted to create a new sub-genre – action movies with aged thespians, and supported by an overwhelmingly talented cast that could have walked through the script in their sleep, or needed a holiday break between serious films and picking up awards.

Of the lineup, Bruno Ganz’s “ex-spy in need of purpose” was oddly introduced to Harris by an awkward nurse that cared for him while he was comatose in the hospital. Why did a nurse even know a spy from the cold-war era was beyond me. And, when Ganz heard the death of the nurse, he just waved it like she had it coming. (Okay, maybe there should have been a background check on that lady. Another movie maybe, moving on.) Ganz produced a fantastic character that smoothly obtained the pieces for Harris. His character had an air of righteousness without the ego, and knew the fine line that crosses through good and evil. Even in the face of an unbeatable nemesis, the director of Harris’s spy shop, he elegantly drops a sachet of cyanide into his tea and collapses into his enemy’s embrace, the ever suave yet Shakespearean Frank Langella. This was a gentle reminisce of the golden era of spy sparring. But we are in the 21^st century, and what’s needed was some nonsensical action. Hence, punches, karate chops, and a fast car chase, backwards. Here was the first hint about Harris’s real background – a street car-racer.

The action of the film was too close for comfort, literally. Almost all scenes had the camera up the actors’ noses and armpits, and car wheels’ axles and exhaust pipes. Was it necessary, well, maybe yes, because the film sometimes seemed so low budget (due to a star-studded cast) that no cash was left to shoot full sets or prop the camera properly on anything stationary. And, few attempts at CG effects were richly rewarded to the freshmen computer specialists at the local county technical school.

Finally, after Harris is made aware of his true identity – an international spy set to assassinate a middle-eastern prince and a biologist – he quickly regains his optimism and skills to redeem his wicked self. And, upon the credits’ rollout and the most stunning shot of the whole film – the Berlin train station under a blanket of snow – one quickly settles into the comprehension that Hollywood wishes to remind us, every once in awhile, just how short our memories are for such films: the Bourne trilogy, “Memento,” and especially, “Total Recall.” But, in the age of Youtube and digital downloads, you can assess that “Unknown” would quickly settle onto the shelves of unmemorable.

http://www.fm2010.co.kr/

KOREA 2010  Directed by: Kim Sang-Man Written by: Kim Sang-Man, Kim Hwi Produced by: Je Jeong-Hun, Kim Hong-Baek  Cinematography by: Kim Tae-Gyeong  Editing by: Sin Min-Gyeong  Music by: Kim Jun-Seong  Cast: Park Soo-Ae, Yoo Ji-Tae, Ma Dong-Seok, Choi Song-Hyeon, Shin Da-Eun, Jeong Man-Sik, Kim Min-Kyu, Jo Seok-Hyeon, Nam Ji-Hyun, Kwak Byung-Kyu

There are basically two kinds of thrillers: the type that gradually reveals the (secret) connection between the victim and the killer, including a climatic surprise ending, and the type that solely concentrates on a cat-and-mouse game with as many twists and turns as possible, trying to outsmart the audience with genuine ideas lending weight to its dramatization of terror. Either way, both concepts can be highly intriguing and artistic if everything comes together perfectly.

MIDNIGHT FM falls into the second category: the story about a popular TV anchorwoman and late night radio show host who is stalked by a madman starts conventional and sticks to its formulaic routine of attack and counter-attack until the end, interspersed by occasional guessing games and gimmicks, but otherwise predictable moves. Hostages, children, a suspicious fan, police investigations, time pressure and some incidences prior to the actual events are supposed to add extra thrills, but are all pretty much common elements of any genre film today. Meaning, unfortunately MIDNIGHT FM is far from perfect.

While MIDNIGHT FM proves to be a solid and relatively tight film throughout it lacks the extraordinary: it’s a movie you can watch, or cannot watch, either way makes no difference. You’re not going to miss anything that you cannot see on TV every second day of the week or the next best genre film brings to the table as well.

Without real highlight, without anything special to report, I am not sure what to write about: MIDNIGHT FM isn’t great, and it certainly isn’t bad, it’s an ok crime saga, a couple-compatible thriller made for a multiplex-audience seeking mild thrills but would otherwise be easily offended by I SAW THE DEVIL and the likes. MIDNIGHT FM is anything but award-winning material, so don’t let respective awards tell you otherwise (that’s not saying Soo-Ae’s performance isn’t worthy of a Best Actress award). Expect nothing much, and you’ll get exactly that.

J.

http://www.emp.hk/title.php?film_id=66

HONG KONG 2010  Directed by: Benny Chan  Written by: Chi Kwong Cheung, Cheung Tan, Alan Yuen  Produced by: Benny Chan, Albert Lee Cinematography by: Anthony Pun Editing by: Chi Wai Yau   Music by: Nicholas Errera  Cast: Andy Lau, Nicholas Tse, Bingbing Fan, Jackie Chan, Jacky Wu, Yu Xing, Xin Xin Xiong

Armies march, bullets fly, monks pray and fight, evil lords say evil things while Jackie Chan provides comic relief – all orchestrated by Benny KILLER CLOWNS FROM OUTER SPACE Chan.

SHAOLIN or THE NEW SHAOLIN TEMPLE is an update of Jet Li’s debut from 1982, but is mostly related by name and concept, not so much through storyline or characters. Released closely to Chinese New Year 2011 it is one of the less commercial almost-CNY-films, however tries to draw in the crowds with household names (Andy Lau, Jackie Chan et.al.) and big PR (concentrating on budgets, locations, stars etc.). So how did it turn out?

Let me answer this question by going into a few details. SHAOLIN is, in principle, supposed to be a martial arts movie, and I believe that is what most people who know the Jet Li film or any of the other Shaolin-themed flicks of the past decades expect. What sense does it make therefore to cast an ageing star and non-martial-artist (Lau) as the hero, an ageing martial arts star solely as comedian (Chan) and a few younger, more capable fighters as cannon fodder? None, right. Also, you wouldn’t expect SHAOLIN to be primarily an epic tale of rival warlords and the westernization of China, repeating pretty much what last year’s blockbusters have featured well enough. SHAOLIN pays relatively little attention to Shaolin, the monks and the martial arts heritage, instead loses itself in confusing plot threads, personal feuds and vaguely developed characters who mostly contribute nothing to the development of the story, which by the way would work quite as well without the Shaolin.

As expected, Benny Chan’s direction has no focus, resulting in a movie that seems randomly assembled, with various units filming all kinds of scenes and a failed attempt to patch things together. One again Mr. Chan proves to be a stranger to coherence as much as a stranger to the more traditional martial arts cinema, as well as having little eye for details. The extensive wirework feels outdated and repetitive, frankly speaking it’s unimpressive, the way the action scenes are captured lacks verve and inspiration, the extensive use of doubles is too obvious and many special effects seem out-of-place. What I found most lackluster is the fight choreography, as the film passes by without a single original idea to beef up the action. And the training sequences of the monks are a bit funny to watch, as their positions and movements never seem aligned correctly – the choreography of any Lady Gaga show is more precise than those training sequences.

Thematically, SHAOLIN is by the book, featuring ideas like brotherhood, hierarchy, code of honor, love, trust and betrayal in A-Z order, ticking off one by one from the must-have-ingredients list. The most remarkable message of the film, especially bearing in mind that Chinese New Year was around the corner, is that materialism and pursuit of money shouldn’t be our main goals in life (SHAOLIN doesn’t really answer the question what should be instead, though). So in light of the ever money-centered CNY SHAOLIN tries to make a point, but I am not sure if the audience will really get it or mostly miss the one or two respective lines of dialogue by Andy Lau’s character.

I don’t know what others have seen in SHAOLIN, but as far as I am concerned SHAOLIN is an exceptionally uninteresting film, a whopping two hours of boredom, a revue of incoherent scenes and plot threads leading nowhere, a mixed bag of whatever sprung the makers’ minds. What were they thinking? Armies march, bullets fly, monks pray and fight, evil lords say evil things while Jackie Chan provides comic relief.

J.

http://www.greenhornetmovie.net/

USA 2010  Directed by: Michel Gondry  Written by: Seth Rogen, Evan Goldberg  Based on The Green Hornet by: George W. Trendle, Fran Striker  Produced by: Neal H. Moritz  Cinematography by: John Schwartzman  Editing by: Michael Tronick  Music by: James Newton Howard  Cast: Seth Rogen, Jay Chou, Christoph Waltz, Cameron Diaz, Edward James Olmos, Edward Furlong, Analeigh Tipton, David Harbour, James Franco

So Seth Rogen is a movie star. And he’s made to where he is through a string of formulated comedy roles. Let me rephrase this: he’s made it to stardom by walking through a series of films playing himself. Which is fine, he did what he did. As Woody Allen famously said, “If you cast right, then actors won’t need to act.” And, because of Rogen’s own belief of his star power, he’s decided that he’s got enough audacity to write and produce a feature film. And looking at the resources pool, what better story to tackle than to jump on the bandwagon and reprise a bygone TV series onto the big screen. And, I mean big; so big that the studio had dropped $120 million into making “The Green Hornet.” Otherwise, in Hong Kong, back in the ‘70s, also known as “The Kato Show,” due credit by then an unknown Asian actor named Bruce Lee.

Now we’re getting somewhere. As camp as it was and lasting only just a season, “The Green Hornet” garnered cult status. Not because the show was fantastically scripted or well-played. It simply rode on the shoulders of the lightning-fast, and charismatically enigmatic little Bruce. No one had seen anything like it back then. The kids loved it… Seth Rogen may have been one of those kids. Although probably by a decade later, seeing it on reruns.

The platform was great: a cult show, money to burn, a movie star at the helm (Rogen); add on a few more stars from other parts of the world, and voila, a movie golden egg is laid.

Not quite.

To start, Rogen is not a character actor, he’s a personality. The title character is supposed to be a millionaire mastermind that orchestrated all the fights and heists, and required someone with a bit more depth and believability. Think Christian Bale’s Batman. As a matter of fact, the Green Hornet “is” a carbon copy of Batman. Bruce Wayne (Batman’s alter ego), a billionaire playboy that is a masked vigilante by night. And plug in Kato in place of Batman’s sidekick, Robin, and there’s your springboard TV show. To be precise, both “Batman” and “The Green Hornet” were airing at the same time back in the day as TV series. Both equally kitsch.

Fast forward to today, as producer, looking at what the neighbor’s doing – Nolan’s “Batman Begins” and “The Dark Knight,” I’d probably want to jet the other way too. Except, where Rogen knew which road not to head down, he didn’t figure out which way is right. So “The Green Hornet” seemed like a hodge podge of action and reaction, with the missing ingredient of intention.

Seth Rogen wasn’t completely blurred by his fame. Somebody probably told him to curb his enthusiasm and holster his desire to gobble up every second of the hero scene. And so, Taiwanese pop star Jay Chou was called in to play a masterful Kato, an ass-wupping McGuyver – a multitalented gadgets engineer – and a helluva coffeemaker. I suppose it’s a good way to get away from Bruce Lee’s version, who was just a butler with really, really cool moves. But, again, the formula didn’t work here. No Asian sensation worked well playing in the Hollywood sandbox, aside from Jackie Chan doing silly comedy routines. But Jay Chou’s Kato wasn’t supposed to be silly. Sometimes, he reminded me of an Asian Leonardo Dicaprio, with a lot less acting chops and a whole lot more verbal flops.

Adding to this confusion cuisinema is Cameron Diaz as Rogen’s wishful love interest, who actually fell for Chou (just to be safely non-prejudice). She looked like she’d stepped out of the original TV show – a dozen wrinkles older than both Rogen and Chou put together; her involvement in the whole story was…thinking back, didn’t really need to be there. That’s how much money the studio had coughed up – enough to spill it on an A-list starlet just for laughs. Finally, they thought a serious Oscar-winning foreign heavyweight was needed to round off this bowl of badass: Christoph Waltz. But even his menacing Nazi Doberman fangs from “Inglourious Basterds” didn’t pinch a reaction here. Not one moment was he convincing as an organized crime kingpin on a ruthless path to monopolize the city.

“The Green Hornet” was a continuing series of moments waiting for a punch line that would never surface. Its editing looked far better in the trailers than the actual scenes. The dynamics between its cast were often awkward without development. A few clips of innovative fight sequences got me sitting up, then only put me back down with nonsensical car crashes. And there were lots of them. So, in the end, was this tribute to Bruce Lee, or to the fan-boy fantasy, or just to Rogen’s own ego? Maybe the sequel will tell. Let’s just hope the studio will run out of money for a trilogy.

http://www.greenhornetmovie.com/

USA 2010  Directed by: Michel Gondry  Written by: Seth Rogen, Evan Goldberg  Based on The Green Hornet by: George W. Trendle, Fran Striker  Produced by: Neal H. Moritz  Cinematography by: John Schwartzman  Editing by: Michael Tronick  Music by: James Newton Howard  Cast: Seth Rogen, Jay Chou, Christoph Waltz, Cameron Diaz, Edward James Olmos, Edward Furlong, Analeigh Tipton, David Harbour, James Franco

THE GREEN HORNET is built around three main premises. First of all, that James Reid is some sort of ass and that Britt Reid is the good guy, what is important for him becoming a credible superhero. Secondly, the friendship or companionship between Britt and Kato: the Green Hornet is essentially a duo, as none of the two can be without the other. Third of all, a strong adversary causing necessary conflict as well as the need for a new superhero in the first place.

Now, THE GREEN HORNET clearly runs into trouble after a few minutes. Take the father-son relationship to begin with: it doesn’t occur to me how anyone can believe that the father is an ass and Britt is the good guy. Clearly, the father is right about everything he does, says or demands from Britt. Britt Reid however is a loser, a guy with no goal in life or motivation, a parasite, pretty much the Paris Hilton of the Reid clan, minus the fragrance and fashion deals. In conclusion, the Britt Reid character as portrayed here is anything but likeable, and his transformation into an incapable hero doesn’t exactly change that first impression (also not after he and the audience learn that his father wasn’t as much of an ass as we all thought).

Then, the Britt-Kato thing doesn’t work out at all: I am amazed how little effort has been spent on clarifying their relationship in the first place. The story goes something like this: Britt fires most of his father’s staff after his untimely death, discovers that his coffee looks different one morning, asks for the guy who usually makes his coffee (Kato), and demands him to come back. So what could be more logical than Kato, a highly capable inventor and martial artist who doesn’t know Britt at all at this point, comes back right away to live happily ever after as chief barista of that couch potato? Once the first coffee is served, we all come to realize how great a guy Kato is and Britt convinces him, for no obvious reason, to become his sidekick. Again, who’d want to be the sidekick of a fat brat? Ouch. This is, without any doubt, some of the worst scriptwriting I have seen in a while.

Last but absolutely not least, the Chudnofsky character never develops into the great villain he could have been. Once again the script and its character development are a huge letdown, introducing Chudnofsky with verve and esprit in his first scene (which is also the only memorable scene of Christoph Waltz, unfortunately), only to dismantle the character quickly through an array of idiotic scenes, turning a potentially charismatic villain into a one-dimensional decal. I’d like to think that this is not Mr. Waltz’s fault, but that the actions and dialogue as defined by the script simply gave him little room to play that character any better than he has.

What makes things even worse is a range of further pitfalls, namely Seth Rogen and Cameron Diaz. We all know that THE GREEN HORNET is first and foremost a Seth Rogen film now, and that shows (but not in the right way): as much as I like Mr. Rogen’s earlier work he tries to adapt the Green Hornet to Seth Rogen, instead of adopting his trademark character to the Green Hornet. The result is that Mr. Rogen’s interpretation of the Hornet makes the film look like a spoof, not the quirky hero-anti-hero tale it’s supposed to be. And there is a fine, but distinct line between a comedic vigilante movie and a spoof. THE GREEN HORNET however never gets it right.

Also not with the help of the ever-overacting Cameron Diaz who could come right from the set of THERE’S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY. In fact, many of Ms. Diaz’ scenes seem like first takes, and that also goes for a considerable number of scenes throughout the film.

Altogether that makes for a mediocre movie, a viewing experience that is spoilt by frequent annoyances and incoherence throughout, an impression no punch line, action sequence or set piece can reverse. THE GREEN HORNET is like a high-speed train without a train driver, racing full-steam on the wrong track into the wrong direction from beginning to end, without ever looking back or noticing that about nothing is right and everything’s wrong.

THE GREEN HORNET acts big, but tanks big time. It aims to be larger-than-life entertainment, but ends up a record-breaking waste of budget and resources, one of the most remarkable cases ever seen in contemporary cinema. The only reason no one notices is because it makes money nevertheless.

J.

http://www.ispitonyourgravemovie.co.uk/

http://www.ispitonyourgravemovie.com/

USA 2010  Directed by: Stephen R. Monroe  Written by: Jeffrey Reddick  Produced by: Lisa M. Hansen, Paul Hertzberg  Cinematography by: Neil Lisk  Editing by: Daniel Duncan  Music by: Corey A. Jackson  Cast: Sarah Butler, Chad Lindberg, Daniel Franzese, Rodney Eastman, Jeff Branson Andrew Howard, Tracey Walter, Mollie Milligan, Saxon Sharbino, Amber Dawen Landrum

Meir Zarchi’s I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE wasn’t really a discourse on gender roles or a prime example of female empowerment, was it? So I guess that doesn’t make the 2010 remake a film of highly ethical intent either.

Even by genre standards I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE was never a truly accomplished work, but simply the right film at the right time (just like THE SOCIAL NETWORK is now). Amid video nasties, changing global politics and increasingly confusing, drifting pop culture output and lifestyles it seemed to be the perfect moment to cater to those who rent even the most disgusting stuff from the dark corners of the local video store and at the same time piss off the mainstream as good as possible. It wasn’t enough for a new SNUFF though.

In the context of early 80’s horror I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE mostly lived off of its general idea, even more of its title I believe, and less of its sketchy execution: I still think that the name made people watch it in the first place, followed by its reputation and content. Seen in a larger context I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE was nothing more than a cheap re-imagining of John Boorman’s DELIVERANCE, so overall it got far more attention than it deserved.

While being anything but a real genre milestone, it’s now a classic and a bit of cultural heritage, and an update seemed to suggest itself. So here is I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE 2010, and it follows the path of many contemporary remakes. Essentially, the film is a polished 2.0 version, featuring surprisingly artful dramaturgy, cinematography, editing and acting. The standards are comparable to what you can expect from a 2010 horror remake, and bearing in mind the gritty subject the new I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE seems almost too commercial.

Its biggest achievement is probably that it’s still politically incorrect, nasty and brutal, an uncomfortable, relentless rape-and-revenge flick that spends half of its time on psychological and the other half on physical torture. The more sensitive among the viewers (although I can’t really think of any reason a sensitive viewer should end up watching I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE) will notice that the film spends a substantial amount of time “preparing” the prey for dinner time, including inflicting extensive terror before the climatic rape sequence. It is debatable if this a) provides better reason for the victim to kill the tormentors, or b) is an extensive indulgence of violence that consumes the largest part of the film’s running time.

From a cinematic point of view the pace and gradual increase in momentum works very well for the film, working its way up from a subtle, but always present threat level to an almost unbearable, intense atmosphere shortly before the rape. What follows then is an entire second act that replays the sequential dramaturgy of the first act, only this time everything is accelerated.

And now for the biggest letdown: I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE is completely unrealistic and not believable as soon as the revenge part starts. It is highly satisfying though, especially as the character description of the bad guys is relatively well-rounded, but that probably only means it appeals to our lower instincts more than our Christian upbringing. Where the film’s narrative falls apart is when the innocent city-girl-writer becomes a super-heroine torturing the rednecks with the help of ultra-sophisticated set-ups, methods or weapons. I don’t doubt she is capable of dreaming that all up, but I don’t see how she’s able to execute it.

If you’re in it for the thrills and frills and furbelows I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE is an ok genre flick that’s as good or bad as its contemporaries. If you mind a serious slasher turning comical in the second half despite all brutality you’ll find better examples of the rape-and-revenge bracket elsewhere.

J.

Not sure what to think of the Koreans remaking my favorite John Woo movie THE KILLER yet, but there’s pros and cons at time of writing. Pros: John Woo supervises  and produces, and John H. Lee (71: INTO THE FIRE) directs. Cons: 3D (never a good sign for quality filmmaking), nobody Josh Campbell is writing (adapting?) the screenplay, the film is – seriously – an English-language (!) version (despite featuring a Korean star and Korean-American director – what sense does that make?).

Hope for the best and expect the worst I’d say. Any which way, I’d bet anything that the remake will not live up to the original. More soon.

J.

JAPAN 2009  Directed by: Tsuyoshi Shoji  Written by: Fukushima Yoshiki  Editing by: Tsuyoshi Shoji  Cast: Chika Arakawa, Kumi Imura, Rika Kawamura, Akari Ozawa, Yu Tejima, Hoshina Youhei

Now it’s not that we ever expected anything inventive from the live movie adaptations of the ONECHANBARA franchise, quite the opposite: if anything, the ONECHANBARA movie had to rock, and it was very disappointing to see the first installment fail so miserably.

ONECHANBARA: THE MOVIE was a timid, half-hearted attempt to bring the essentials of the game, namely blood, guts and heroines in skimpy outfits, to the big screen. It was unfinished business, a rushed, sloppy video-game-goes-J-splatter exercise, and surely one of the most dissatisfying genre movies of that year.

ONECHANBARA: THE MOVIE – VORTEX must therefore be considered one of the few sequels that actually correct most of the mistakes of the original film. That is even more surprising as it is a direct-to-video release. Just about everything turns out to be better though: from production value to the story, the action choreography to the dialogues, ONECHANBARA: THE MOVIE – VORTEX is far more solid, thought-out and homogenous, or simply speaking, it’s outright fun.

Nothing spoils the viewing experience (like was the case with the predecessor), but just don’t expect a new genre milestone: this is still action on a shoestring budget, but they know how to work around it this time. Take the special effects, for instance: hardly any physical “blood” is spilled, most of it is CGI, based on a conceptual post-production approach, but it has impact and gets the job done in high-paced fashion.

The bottom line: if you had to pick one of the ONECHANBARA movies, make sure you avoid the first one and skip straight to ONECHANBARA: THE MOVIE – VORTEX.

J.

https://www.dmm.co.jp/hanatohebi3

JAPAN 2010  Directed by: Yusuke Narita  Written by: Masayoshi Azuma  Novel by: Oniroku Dan  Cast: Minako Komukai, Shohei Hino, Mari Komatsuzaki, Kotono, Shunsaku Kudo, Kei Mizutani, Yasukaze Motomiya, Ayumu Saito

You should think that the Pinku Eiga is coming of age by now. FLOWER & SNAKE 3 leaves it kind of open however if it has, or hasn’t. It may simply be a matter of definition though, or maybe a matter if time.

FLOWER & SNAKE 3 has little in common with the likes of ANGEL GUTS or other Nikkatsu productions of the late 70’s or 80’s. Transgressions that once defined the genre – or creativity, as you may prefer to call it and were once a hallmark of the Japanese pink film – have made room for convention. Disregard the question if we have to attribute that creativity to censorship or not it must be noted that the Japanese pink film has always been more inventive than its western counterparts.

To be precise, the key difference is that the pinku eiga is imaginative while the western sex film is mostly solely descriptive. Like, say, the difference between Internet Explorer and Safari. This stronghold is genuinely made in Nippon, and few filmmakers outside the country have come close to the specific vision of pinku eiga directors or their literary sources.

Now how about the coming of age of the pink film? FLOWER & SNAKE 3 has come of age in the sense that it has evolved far away from the origins of the genre and represents a glossy interpretation of European soft core, a fantasy that could have come from the ever-playful mind of Tinto Brass, a film that turns transgression into fashion, lauding S&M as the new standard of the mainstream. Indeed, many ideas have moved from the periphery of society into its center, however, that doesn’t mean that the auteur has to follow that example and start depicting what is instead of what could or will be.

Losing that specific edge means losing a good part of the pinku eiga identity: there are more similarities than differences to western productions, even though FLOWER & SNAKE 3 still seems more story-driven and tries to define pleasure and pain as an expression, or result, of the relationships between the characters. But it’s a far cry from what made the pinku eiga a genuine category and that is also why I cannot think of many reasons why you need watch it.

J.

http://kokuhaku-shimasu.jp/

JAPAN 2010  Directed by: Tetsuya Nakashima Written by: Tetsuya Nakashima  Novel by: Kanae Minato  Produced by: Yuji Ishida, Genki Kawamura, Yoshihiro Kubota, Yutaka Suzuki  Cinematography by: Masakazu Ato, Atsushi Ozawa  Editing by: Yoshiyuki Koike  Music by: Toyohiko Kanahashi  Cast: Takako Matsu, Masaki Okada, Yoshino Kimura, Mana Ashida, Kaoru Fujiwara, Kai Inowaki, Sora Iwata, Daichi Iwata, Daichi Izumi, Karin Kato, Takuya Kusakawa, Ayaka Miyoshi, Hiroki Nakajima, Yukito Nishii, Hotaru Nomoto, Rena Nonen, Naoya Shimizu, Tsutomu Takahashi, Makiya Yamaguchi, Kasumi Yamaya, Ayuri Yoshinaga

Life’s not always butterflies and rainbows. Sometimes it’s so-so, then you die. When a teacher’s daughter drowns in the pool of a school it is ruled as an accident. But at the end of the term, and at the end of her engagement at that school, Yuko Moriguchi, the teacher (played by Takako Matsu) reveals to her class that it wasn’t an accident, but cold-blooded murder indeed, committed by underage students who are in the room now. Without naming the culprits she meticulously goes into every detail of the bloody deed and her findings, knowing that the murderers cannot be punished as they are protected by the very law that should actually put them behind bars. Finally, at the end of her revelations, it turns out that she has decided to take the law into her own hands and avenge her daughter’s death in an unorthodox, yet very efficient way. But what’s a shock for the culprits as much as for the classmates is just the beginning of a vicious game with unpredictable outcome.

Yuko Moriguchi’s confession (in one of the most memorable openings of any movie I believe) is just the first of many to follow. KOKUHAKU is structured episodically with each confession concentrating on one of the main characters. The movie finishes on a high, with a climatic ending that will definitely blow you away. KOKUHAKU is an enormously satisfying and intense viewing experience, from the first frame until the credits start rolling, not least thanks to the very sophisticated script (based on the equally sophisticated novel by Kanae Minato), a superior plot engine as well as meticulous direction, cinematography and editing.

Despite many trademark features of revenge flicks or Japanese end-of-the-world movies KOKUHAKU is more of a theological discussion on the values in life, and the worth of life itself. It also debates the state of the nation and the future of Japanese society, which could as well be a universal discourse applicable to any other place out there. Choosing the form of a psychological drama KOKUHAKU is also, or first and foremost, a nail-biting thriller, even if most of it is dialogue, not action.

The dark and sinister world of KOKUHAKU is the perfect place for broken characters and leaves little room for normality as we know (knew) it. It is not easy to identify with any of the figures, mostly we tend to agree with what Yuko is doing, but the way the script portrays the villainous characters is rich, brilliant, borderline genius. The fascination even for the most despicable person is one of the outstanding achievements of KOKUHAKU, and the way the film finds a lyrical tonality to describe evil reminds of Bret Easton Ellis. You can feel the presence of the literary source throughout.

Good and bad seem like twins in KOKUHAKU, but eventually you will realize that they actually don’t exist. The longer you search for the thin red line that divides the two, the more the movie points towards a possible conclusion, the more you come to understand that good and bad are concepts based on human belief, and they exist only as far as society replicates these values through its members day in, day out. But what happens in KOKUHAKU is that there is no one left to believe in anything, and society evaporates right in front of our eyes, because good and bad are all the same to all of them and so they cease to exist.

The same happens to the concept of revenge: it requires a specific angle to work, and that angle is very hard to find in a world without values, norms or any form of social fabric, a world, where suicide is a commodity, if not a blessing, for many. Eventually, Yuko gets her revenge, makes the murderers’ existence take a turn for the vaguely complicated and brings them down to their knees, almost – or really – lose their minds. Or so it seems. “I’m just messing with you”, those are the last words she says to one of them, and they are also the last words of the movie that’s been messing with us all along, but not without a point.

KOKUHAKU does not promote eye-for-an-eye mentality, and neither does it leave judgment to the lord or into whose jurisdiction this responsibility falls in your case. It’s essentially humanism against nihilism, with humanism winning at the end against this overwhelming urge to succumb to the same sick logic that teenager tries to seed.

Does all that change the world we live in? I am not certain. Does it make us understand why and how society can fall apart? Yes. Does it make sure that we won’t let some deranged adolescents piss all over us? Absolutely. KOKUHAKU is a battle cry: it’s the last line of defense against ignorance, stupidity and people or attitudes that are just totally fubar. I hope I did not forget to mention that KOKUHAKU is also a truly exceptional movie, in every aspect. I’m not messing with you.

J.

http://www.bayrong.com/

VIETNAM 2009  Directed by: Le Thanh Son  Written by: Johnny Tri Nguyen  Produced by: Jimmy Pham, Thanh Truc Nguyen  Cinematography by: Dominic Pereira  Editing by: Ham Tran  Music by: Christopher Wong  Cast: Johnny Tri Nguyen, Thanh Van Ngo, Hieu Hien, Hoang Phuc Nguyen, Lam Minh Thang

Once upon a time Thailand was the rising star of martial arts cinema. Those were the days of raw energy, no-holds-barred filmmaking, stunts without wires or safety net and a good portion of disrespect towards genre conventions. But the only constant is change, and maybe it’s time for a reality check.

Looking at one of the latest productions coming out of the kingdom, BANGKOK KNOCKOUT, it becomes apparent that times are a-changing indeed: in a forum, amid all the expected and undifferentiated praise for another “martial arts masterpiece”, one member pointed out correctly that all there was to the trailer was “wirework and sped-up frames”. Even though the film does not rely on trickery alone, it is also a fact that current Thai martial arts films are not true to their origins any more. What once made Tony Jaa and co. successful has been replaced by a more commercial, “convenient” approach that can easily satisfy the masses without breaking bones and risking lives anymore. It’s the beginning of a McDonaldization of Thai action cinema: mass production of something that feels just like the real thing to the casual viewer, but really isn’t.

Now watch CLASH for a change and you will see a lot of the qualities that many Thai movies are missing nowadays, and we have missed for a while. That’s not saying that CLASH wouldn’t resort to trickery as well, but the result is substantially different: CLASH hurts and gives you little reason to believe that it’s not for real most of the time. Legibility of intricate action is not about the better choreography (arguably, CLASH features better choreographed action sequences indeed, even though they are very much inspired by the Tony Jaa school), or better technology, or the better cast, but is about attention to detail: Thai action flicks have never been especially refined, but lately they are increasingly sloppy, careless and almost solely eying a quick ROI, believing good enough is good enough.

CLASH, on the other hand, is getting almost everything right: the action is not always spectacular, but raw and realistic, the script above average with a lot of detailed, well-rounded character description and clear rationalization; then, the cast can do more than just deliver great stunts, and the editing and direction are clearly more crafted than anything Prachya Pinkaew has delivered in all those years. Add to that a significant dose of 80’s Hong Kong gangster film flair and you have a smooth genre blend that is entertaining, gripping and romantic (that goes for both, the love stories as well as the deaths). Oh, and it also has Ms. Thanh Van Ngo, something missing in most Thai actioners I believe.

Nearly a decade after ONG-BAK Thai martial arts cinema is not such a potent symbol for the success of action made in Asia anymore, as it seems too content with its own achievements and leaves innovation and honest filmmaking to others. It is with a bit of regret that I notice that Mr. Nguyen is leaving for Hollywood, dedicating his skills to X-MEN: FIRST CLASS; then again, he wouldn’t be the first one returning to Asia rather sooner than later (not that we don’t wish him good luck).

It is more likely however that we will see the ascendance of Hong Kong cinema once again, rising from the ashes; but whatever Asian cinema will be claiming or reclaiming the martial arts throne in the future, it will have to prove its dominance in other areas than just stunts and grunts, and take both its subject and its audience more seriously than most recent films from Thailand.

J.

http://www.fearyourneighbor.com/

USA 2009  Directed by: Robert A. Masciantonio  Written by: Robert A. Masciantonio  Produced by: Charles Smith  Cinematography by: Jeff Schirmer  Editing by: R. Emmet Sibley  Music by: Kurt Oldman  Cast: America Olivio, Christian Campbell, Lauren Rooney, Pete Postiglione, Joe Aniska, Sarah McCarron, Amy Rutledge, Mink Stole, Meredith Orlow, Giovanna Galdi, Tracy Toth, Robert A. Masciantonio, Stink Fisher, Megan Madsen

Does it sound cynical saying you’re bored by a movie that depicts torture and mutilation from beginning to end? Even though it’s not the on-screen violence in particular that makes you yawn frequently throughout NEIGHBOR, it is true nevertheless that the film, despite its acts of cruelty, leaves you unimpressed and strangely detached from what’s happening.

NEIGHBOR is not the first film of its kind, and it’s certainly not the best: most of what makes up the backbone of the story are common genre ingredients, presented as a salad buffet of best-of moments. Built upon what feels like a remake of Skip Wood’s THURSDAY director Robert A. Masciantonio is juggling around with serial killer motifs, revenge flick excerpts and editing techniques of psychological thrillers, without ever coming to a conclusive result.

An even bigger problem is the choice of the lead actress: America Olivio is portraying her character with harrowing overacting, incapable of nuances or adding the slightest human touch or personality to the figure she plays. Ms. Olivio is not exactly talented, and that’s too little to make a film centered around a single character work. Imagine HENRY played by Ron Howard, and you get the idea. Thanks to Ms. Olivio, NEIGHBOR tends to be unintentionally comedic most of the time, not hauntingly realistic.

If you have ever studied serial killers you will have noticed that no matter how insane they seem, or irrational, they always have a very good reason to kill, even if that “good reason” is only a good reason in their world. Unfortunately, Mr. Masciantonio believes that a serial killer movie is all about killing and neglects the fact that serial killers are driven by lust, fear, dead mothers or slimy soap bars. The reason NEIGHBOR never feels threatening is because “the girl” is unreal, like a remote-controlled, lifeless robot without a purpose, and all that’s left for the audience is to sympathize with the victims (played by a solid cast, surprisingly).

Bottom line is there is just no real story to NEIGHBOR, nothing the movie is “about”, what puts it in the neighborhood of THE TOURIST. So don’t waste your time, and grab a copy of DREAM HOME instead.

J.

http://the4movie.com/

http://www.sahamongkolfilm.com/th/filmdetail.php?id=423

THAILAND 2010  Directed by: Ekkasith Thairatana, Chukiat Sakveerakul, Kongkiat Khomsiri, Phawit Panangkasiri Written by: Ekkasit Thairatana Produced by: Prachya Pinkaew Cast: Akarin Akaranitimetharat,  Alexander Rendel,  Chanon Rikulsurakann, Thanapon Arrunneth, Patrapisit Sappasawattichod, Alice Toy, ArttanunPiyaserth, Sirikarin Ployong, Janjira Chumneansiri, Ananda Everingham,  Peerapol Sehnakol, Thitti Vejchaboon, Pakorn Chatborirak,  Thema Kanchanapairin

If certain producers go on like this we will have more omnibus horror movies coming out of Thailand soon than feature films. Here we go again: LUD 4 LUD a.k.a. THE 4 MOVIE is one of the last productions to be finished end of last year and has just hit Thai cinemas in January.

The four segments are directed by writer and first-time director Ekkasith Thairatana, Chukiat Sakveerakul, Kongkiat Khomsiri and Phawit Panangkasiri. Mr. Thairatana’s segment is called CLEAN UP DAY (GRIAN LAANG LOK | เกรียน ล้าง โลก) and is merely an appetizer. The story revolves around a group of guys debating global warming and its causes, leading to the core of the story that identifies humans as the root of all evil and reveals a plot to kill all humans through a lethal virus.

The second film is the sarcastic THE GIFT SHOP FOR THE ONES YOU HATE (RAN KONG KWAN PEUA KON TEE KUN GLIAT | ร้าน ของขวัญ เพื่อ คน ที่ คุณ เกลียด) directed by Kongkiat Khomsiri (SLICE). A white-collar office worker is promoted to be the new manager of his department, but not everyone seems to be delighted. Soon he receives questionable gifts, all obviously sourced from a mysterious shop around the corner of his office called The Gift Shop For The Ones You Hate. Nomen nest omen.

The third entry is directed by Phawit Panangkasiri and called EERIE NIGHTS (KEUN JIT LUT | คืน จิต หลุด): a group of criminals is on the run and hides from the police in an abandoned hospital. There, things get quickly out of hand (literally) with the criminals beginning to fight and a ghost starting to haunt them.

The final episode then is a ghost comedy called HOO AA GONG (ฮู อา กง), telling the story about a Thai-Chinese family that has to watch over the body of the deceased grandfather. The family members feel awkward about the task, and so does the spirit of the grandfather who prefers to be rather active than lying dead in his bed.

Different from other horror anthologies in recent years LUD 4 LUD is mostly straight forward with only a little hint of Buddhist subtexts (as in EERIE NIGHTS) or references to the widespread belief in ghosts a.k.a. spirits. LUD 4 LUD isn’t really much of a horror movie, but mostly plays with our expectations towards the genre while in fact mostly not dealing with any supernatural ingredients at all: only the 4^th segment is about real ghosts, while the segments 1-3 are trying to trick the protagonists as well as the audience into believing that something otherworldly is going on, which however is not. Since the last installment is a comedy I am not sure if I shall call THE 4 MOVIE a horror anthology at all.

Out of all entries THE GIFT SHOP FOR THE ONES YOU HATE is clearly the most original, creative and entertaining movie of the pack, leaving the others trailing behind. The first film starts interesting but turns out a lame duck, unsuccessfully trying to blend into the oh-so fashionable environmental debate, while formally kind of copying James Wan’s camera-moves-up-and-down-and-in-and-out-of-a-parking-lot set piece from DEATH SENTENCE. The conclusion then is totally random and renders the rest of the film meaningless.

Mr. Khomsiri’s movie stands out through its inventive idea, good script and proper execution, making it feel like a short feature film rather than a long short and delivering proper dramaturgy and character / story development while finding the right balance between paranoia film and horror-thriller, while embedding his scenario into a context that is very familiar to all of us. It could all happen to you, and that’s why this segment is the most terrifying after all.

The third segment feels too much like an adaptation of NAK PROK (THE SHADOW OF THE NAGA) and disappoints through predictable twists. However, it also features a great Ananda Everingham who looks like he just left the set of RED EAGLE (INSEE DAENG) and some uncomfortable gore (the only real on-screen violence of the quartet that has contributed to the film’s 18+ rating). EERIE NIGHTS is a one-man-show without ghosts, but has a touch of karmic lecture that makes it probably the most meaningful story here.

Lastly, LUD 4 LUD’s only real ghost story makes for a really funny finale, albeit for a stupid-funny one. Don’t expect anything remotely intelligent, HOO AA GONG is just for laughs and as tasteless as it gets, throwing in a big bouquet of masturbation scenes, gay jokes and corpse slapstick. Most of the humor works quite well however, and the ending is the most satisfying one of all films.

LUD 4 LUD is pure entertainment, free of the complexity or intellectual qualities of some of the other omnibus or contemporary horror films from Thailand. If your only concern is having a good time, then there is nothing to worry about.

J.

http://yamato-movie.net/en/

http://yamato-movie.net/index.html

JAPAN 2010  Directed by: Takashi Miyazaki  Written by: Shimako Sato  Story by: Yoshinobu Nishizaki  Manga by: Leiji Matsumoto  Produced by: Toshiaki Nakazawa  Cinematography by: Kozo Shibazaki  Music by: Naoki Sato, Hiroshi Miyagawa  Cast: Takuya Kimura, Hiroyuki Ikeguchi, Aya Ueto, Meisa Kuroki, Toshihiro Yashiba, Naoto Ogata, Shinichi Tsutsumi, Reiko Takashima, Isao Hashizume, Toshiyuki Nishida, Maiko, Toshiro Yanagiba, Kazuki Namioka, Takumi Saito, Takahiro Miura, Tsumoto Yamazaki, Naoto Takenaka

Once upon a time, in a galaxy far far away, was a planet on the verge of collapse: the earthlings are about to be wiped off the face of mother earth by alien invaders called Gamilas. Space Battleship Yamato is leaving for a last mission to retrieve a device from outer space that can save the earth and reverse its process of decay. What the crew doesn’t realize: no one knows if the device really exists, or if the Yamato can indeed reach the remote planet where it’s supposed to be located. But earth’s rulers and Yamato’s crew has no choice as resistance against the alien brood is futile and without the device the human race will die a horrible death for certain.

SPACE BATTLESHIP YAMATO has been enormously successful in Japan since its beginning in 1974, while in the West STAR WARS, STAR TREK and BATTLESTAR GALACTICA have left little room for another SciFi soap opera of epic proportions. Consequently, SPACE BATTLESHIP YAMATO is like a parallel science fiction universe from Japan, with many details reminiscent of the Western counterparts. Wether or not Susumo Kodai is a Han Solo copy, or wether or not that red device was inspired by R2D2 I do not recall, what I can say is that SPACE BATTLESHIP YAMATO makes quite creative use of its assets as well as it shows a genuine quirkiness that only the Japanese can get away with. I don’t think any SciFi flick from the US could literally turn a WWII battleship into a larger-than-life USS Enterprise.

SPACE BATTLESHIP YAMATO makes up for some of its shortcomings that range from hectic storytelling, lack of depth of character development to sketchy direction and some superficial acting with charm and tongue-in-cheek attitude, as well as with likable characters. The fact that large parts of the mission remind of Noah’s ark and its undertaking will probably not escape most viewer’s attention, but luckily the film is rather interested in the modernization of the classic TV series than preaching, although it cannot be denied that its subject – at least and / or coincidentally – makes for very environmentally conscious entertainment (if there was something like “certified organic filmmaking” SPACE BATTLESHIP YAMATO was surely qualified to receive the honors).

But SPACE BATTLESHIP YAMATO isn’t really serious: it’s a SciFi saga with a pedal-to-the-metal attitude from beginning to end, and the makers also throw in some nice set pieces for good measure. The film is very commercial, yes, it’s trying to please a younger audience, yes, Mr. Yamazaki is still an untalented (but successful) director, yes, but SPACE BATTLESHIP YAMATO is also good fun.

Love it or hate it, SPACE BATTLESHIP YAMATO is a decent adaptation of the series and a decent SciFi flick in its own right. Then again, maybe that’s not too difficult after AVATAR.

J.

http://www.thesocialnetwork-movie.com/

USA 2010  Directed by: David Fincher  Written by: Aaron Sorkin  Book by: Ben Mezrich  Produced by: David Fincher, Scott Rudin, Dana Brunetti, Michael De Luca, Cean Chaffin, Kevin Spacey  Cinematography by: Jeff Cronenweth  Editing by: Kirk Baxter, Angus Wall  Music by: Trent Reznor, Atticus Ross  Cast: Jesse Eisenberg, Andrew Garfield, Justin Timberlake, Brenda Song, Rooney Mara, Rashida Jones, Armie Hammer, Max Minghella, Joseph Mazello

Facebook: a social and business phenomenon that made Mark Zuckerberg the youngest billionaire in the world – $25 billion – all in a matter of 40 days. That is not luck; it’s an anomaly. That is a story that should be told. It’s a story that would intrigue everyone on the planet, since just about everyone is a member of Facebook.

The movie opens with Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg) having an intellectual debate with his girlfriend in a bar. Mark’s main concern isn’t about the topics at hand, but to convince his girlfriend that no matter the issue, he must come out the winner. And this sets off the premise for the movie and distills Mark, an undergrad at Harvard’s computer science faculty, down to the simple aim – toes are about to be stepped on.

Since this film is a biopic, the main plot is fleshed out for the director and writers. The magic of making it bigger than life relies very much on the cast to magnify the personalities of the story. Here, the cast was brilliant. Jesse Eisenberg’s motor mouth made the audience believe that he had the IQ to deflate anyone’s spirit, including that of an experienced attorney. Andrew Garfield’s Eduardo Saverin (Zuckerberg’s partner) was the perfect tool for Zuckerberg’s strategy of bringing Facebook to life, and to be finally betrayed by the very same guy. Eduardo’s downfall was slow and transparent. It was a key ingredient to make the audience see just to what degree an egomaniac like Zuckerberg is.

I must say, kudos to Justin Timberlake for portraying the slippery, and very entertaining, Sean Parker of Napster’s fame. His greasing and assistance to Zuckerberg’s ascension were sharp and deserves some kind of recognition. It proved Timberlake as a notable actor. Although, at the end of the story, there’s no wrap-up as to what happened to Sean Parker. Guess you’ll have to Google him to find out.

“The Social Network” was a fast-paced, popcorn-worthy feat, and handled like a tight drum by David Fincher. However, with Fincher’s bystander style, it never brought any of the characters to my heart, aside from Sean Parker, who kept everybody at an arm’s length because he’s a slippery leach anyway. The context of  “The Social Network” is hugely popular with all of us with a LAN connection. And so I wonder, would it hold its own ground if it was fiction?