Ma dentro questa cornice si muovono tanti elementi pregevoli. Prima di tutto i personaggi, interpretati da grandi attori. Per celebrare l’ultima puntata dello show intervengono infatti tutti i cantanti che hanno reso famosa ed amata la trasmissione: Meryl Streep e Lily Tomlin (ma quanto sono brave?!) sono due sorelle che cantano della famiglia, dell’amore per i genitori, del buon Dio; Woody Harrelson (Natural Born Killer) e John Reilly (Magnolia) sono due cowboy sboccatissimi che intonano canzoni beffarde e volgari (ma molto molto divertenti!); Kevin Kline è semplicemente eccezionale, nella parte di uno strano “guardiano” che scimmiotta tutti gli stereotipi del detective e del noir. Tutti gli attori, anche quelli poco conosciuti, i caratteristi, e quelli che dicono solo una battuta, sono semplicemente superbi. Assieme al significato palese del film – che è una struggente celebrazione funebre, un ritrovo di fantasmi che cantano sul palcoscenico della morte – ciò che rende davvero grande Radio America è infatti… tutto il resto! Cioè il cinema, con le sue regole e le sue leggi: tutti quelli che hanno partecipato a questo film, statene certi, di cinema ne capiscono, eccome!

Gli attori sono incredibili, la sceneggiatura brillante, i dialoghi eccellenti… ma soprattutto, Dio mio, Altman è in uno stato di grazia che solo a pensarci vien da piangere! La regia del maestro è semplicemente perfetta. Come ci aveva abituato nei suoi capolavori (Nashville e America Oggi), la macchina da presa riesce a ritrarre la complessità, e contemporaneamente a raccontare i dettagli, a isolare le storie, a penetrare nel cuore dei personaggi. Con una tecnica ormai nota a chi ama Altman, il regista parte spesso con un piano medio in cui sono rappresentate azioni differenti… e magari l’azione che ci interessa davvero è quella sullo sfondo. Di qui, il nostro inizia a muovere la macchina, per raggiungere due personaggi che parlano, per isolarli dal contesto. Poi, magari, la macchina da presa si muove seguendo i personaggi in un altro ambiente, e poi magari li abbandona a metà di un dialogo per intercettare un’altra azione… con il risultato che la macchina da presa sembra non esserci! Con il risultato di una naturalezza inarrivabile, frutto in realtà di una meticolosissima messa in scena. La regia è insomma il massimo. Tanto che, per i patiti del caro vecchio Bob, Radio America costituirà un tassello importante nella filmografia di un gigante della regia.

Radio America, di Robert Altman, USA, 2006, 100 minuti

Cast: Woody Harrelson, Tommy Lee Jones, Garrison Keillor, Kevin Kline, Lindsay Lohan, Virginia Madsen, John C. Reilly, Maya Rudolph, Meryl Streep, Lily Tomlin.

Uscita: 1 giugno 2006

--If I don’t come back, tell mother I love her.

--Your mother’s dead, Llewelyn.

--Well then I’ll tell her myself.

Enjoyment of a film often depends upon our preconceptions and how well a film meets those expectations. Quite often, we hear so much buzz about how great a film is supposed to be that nothing can live up to our mental ideal. Conversely, a film that is supposed to be bad can often surprise us because our expectations are so low. Another way what we expect from a film can change our experience is if we misunderstand a filmmaker’s intentions. If you go to a fantasy film and don’t like it because things happen that couldn’t actually occur in real life…well, you’ve set yourself and the film up for disappointment. I’ve seen many people say that No Country for Old Men was a great film until the ending. I disagree, but I think I know why they feel that way. The movie contains great suspense and action sequences with one of the most memorable villains in recent memory. Because of this, many people expect the film to fit into the conventions of a thriller. It’s not a thriller – it’s actually a character driven piece.

Winner of this year’s Academy Award for Best Picture, No Country for Old Men was directed by Ethan and Joel Coen and was adapted from Cormac McCarthy’s critically acclaimed novel. Ethan and Joel Coen are the sons of college professors and have shown in their work a love of classic films. They’ve made a film noir (The Man Who Wasn’t There), a screwball comedy (The Hudsucker Proxy), a gangster film (Miller’s Crossing) and a road picture (Raising Arizona). No Country for Old Men has the trappings of a thriller, but it’s essentially the story of three men and how they deal the circumstances they find themselves in.

Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) finds himself running for his life after stumbling across the remains of a drug deal gone sour and a suitcase containing two million dollars. He is pursued by Anton Chigurh, played by Javier Bardem in an Oscar winning performance. Chigurh wants his money back and is willing to go however far it takes to attain that goal. The relentless killer does allow extraordinary acts of mercy. He often asks his victims to flip a coin to decide their fate, thereby releasing himself from the responsibility of his actions in his own mind. There is a breathtaking scene near the end when someone not only refuses to play his game but points out to him, “The coin don’t have no say. You do.” This shifts the guilt of his actions back to him, but he doesn’t want to accept it and he responds, “Well, I got here the same way the coin did.”

The third man in this tale is the sheriff, Ed Tom Bell (Tommy Lee Jones), who follows the carnage and tries to end it. He is struggling with the violence he sees on the job and ponders the dark side of human nature. At the beginning of the film, he tells us in voice-over about a young man who had wanted to kill someone for years and finally did. He showed no remorse and believed that when he was executed for his crime he would be going to hell. It doesn’t seem to bother him. Ed Tom is bothered by this and by all the other incomprehensible things he sees people do to each other. He is afraid that in order to deal with these kinds of criminals a person would have to live in the darkness with them. As he puts it, “I don't want to push my chips forward and go out and meet something I don't understand. A man would have to put his soul at hazard. He'd have to say, ‘O.K., I'll be part of this world.’"

To understand the ending that so many people complained about, I think it’s important to look at the movie’s tagline: “There are no clean getaways.” If you’re expecting a thriller, then this movie ends in an anti-climax. If you accept that this is a character study and remember the tagline, then you understand the fates of the characters and why the movie ends not with a bang but with a meditation.

Mike Deerfield returns to the U.S. after his tour of duty in Iraq and abruptly goes missing. His father Hank a spit-and-polish ex-MP from the Vietnam era goes looking for him. What he finds goes to the heart of American combat experiences in the Iraqi conflict. Academy Award?-winning* Crash filmmaker Paul Haggis teams with Oscar?- winning* actors Tommy Lee Jones Charlize Theron and Susan Sarandon in a probing powerful fact-based look at fathers and sons?and at a nation and the young soldiers it sends into battle. Jones plays Hank whose quest lays bare a tangled web of cover-up murder mystery and profound revelation about the personal costs of war.

In the Valley of Elah is available at Amazon for $14.99. To Order click here
Amazon Product Pages contain a lot of other details on this product as Customer Reviews, Sales Ranking, Special Offers, Alternate products that customers are going for and much more.Want to read these details? click here

Want to get some other Format / Binding / Version? You can search for them from here

Other Products of Interest

• Michael Clayton (Widescreen Edition)
• Gone Baby Gone
• The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford
• The Brave One (Full-Screen Edition)
• We Own the Night

A parte qualche lungaggine – il viaggio verso il Messico ogni tanto sembra interminabile – e nonostante il tono del racconto non riesca sempre a miscelare bene le due anime del film – una drammatica ed esistenzialista, l’altra beffarda e grottesca – Le tre sepolture è un film pregevole, che mischia atmosfere post-western alla Peckinpah, con personaggi che potrebbero uscire da un film (minore) di Robert Altman, tipo Tre donne o Jimmy Dean, Jimmy Dean. Ci sono poi scene decisamente riuscite e addirittura visionarie, come quella nel bar messicano, con quel sottofondo di pianoforte straziante e ripetitivo, punto di svolta in cui lo spettatore inizia a cogliere in Pete segni di sfilacciamento interiore, e inizia a percepirne la disgregazione individuale. Bello è anche il finale, secco e sofferto, così come è davvero triste il personaggio del vecchio “eremita”. I temi dominanti sono indubbiamente ben trattati (l’amicizia, l’immigrazione messicana negli Stati Uniti, l’angosciante stile di vita delle cittadine americane in cui il massimo è andare al centro commerciale nel week end). Qualcosa, però, non convince proprio fino in fondo. O forse non è questo il punto: infatti, a ben vedere, il film sta nella propria misura senza strafare e senza alcun orpello, quindi realizza i propri presupposti con onestà e tanta professionalità. Certo, i presupposti dell’opera non sono necessariamente entusiasmanti, ma non si può dire che Le tre sepolture non abbia alcuni tratti davvero originali. Nonostante tutto questo però, non mi arrischierei a dire che si tratta di un film memorabile…

Le tre sepolture, di Tommy Lee Jones, USA, 2006, 120 minuti

Cast: Tommy Lee Jones, Barry Pepper, January Jones, Dwight Yoakam, Melissa Leo, Vanessa Bauche.

Uscita: 10 febbraio 2006

Dopo essere stato licenziato dalla CIA, Osbourne Cox (John Malkovich) torna a casa, si scola una bottiglia di whisky e continua a lavorare alla sua autobiografia. Perderà il disco con tutti quei dati in una palestra nella periferia di Washington D.C.

Non è un paese per vecchi il trailer

Il disco finisce nelle mani dell’istruttore Chad Feldheimer (Brad Pitt) che, insieme alla sua collega Linda Litzke (Frances McDormand) decide di ricattare Cox: l’uomo riavrà i dati solo dietro riscatto. Una somma con la quale Linda potrà realizzare finalmente il suo sogno proibito… ovvero sottoporsi ad un intervento di chirurgia estetica! Come se non bastasse Katie (Tilda Swinton), la moglie di Cox, ha una storia con un agente del tesoro, Harry Pfarrer (George Clooney)… se conoscete abbastanza i Fratelli Coen, allora sapete bene che in questo grottesco casino dai toni di commedia ci scappa il morto e la situazione si farà davvero complicata…

Questo è “Burn After Reading – A prova di spia”, pellicola con la quale i vincitori dell’Oscar Joel ed Ethan Coen apriranno la 65° edizione della Mostra Internazionale d’Arte Cinematografica di Venezia. Dopo aver vinto la statuetta più famosa del cinema, i Coen hanno per il momento abbandonato il thriller crepuscolare per tornare alla loro cara commedia nera. E le star hanno fatto la fila per lavorare con loro. Per la terza volta George Clooney torna a collaborare con i registi dopo “Fratello dove sei?” e “Prima ti sposo, poi ti rovino”: “George diventa più vecchio – ha detto Ethan Coen – e con lui anche i suoi personaggi, ma questo non vuol dire che diventano più saggi!”. Nei panni di Pfarrer, Clooney sfoggia barbetta, camicia a quadretti ed un espressione da tontolone mentre maneggia la pistola alla cieca.

Ma la vera new entry della famiglia Coen è proprio Brad Pitt, già membro del nuovo Rat-Pack con Clooney, Soderbergh & Co., che da tempo non chiedeva altro che lavorare con i due registi. Nel ruolo di un istruttore fissato col body bulding e che forse ha visto troppi film su rapimenti e riscatti, Pitt sfoggia un ciuffo degno di Elvis Presley e non esita a prendersi in giro e rovesciare totalmente la sua immagine di sex symbol con una forte carica di autoironia.

Questo è l'Universo dei Fratelli Coen, capaci di prendere le star e trasformarle in perfetti abitanti del loro mondo: tra le icone create dai registi ricordiamo il grandissimo Javier Bardem in "Non è un paese per vecchi", Frances McDormand sceriffa incinta in “Fargo” e naturalmente Jeff Bridges nei panni di Drugo Lebowsky, insieme a tutti i personaggi di contorno di quel film, tra cui spicca un indimenticabile John Turturro nei panni del pederasta giocatore di bowling Jesus.

Non è un paese per vecchi (Tommy Lee Jones)

Geniali, originali ma soprattutto prolifici: il loro nuovo film non è ancora uscito nelle sale e già Joel ed Ethan Coen si preparano al loro prossimo progetto, una black comedy intitolata "The Serious Man". Ambientata nel 1967, la pellicola racconta di Larry Gopnik (Michael Stuhlbarg), un professore del Midwest la cui vita va a rotoli dopo che la moglie gli comunica di volerlo lasciare. Nel frattempo il fratello (Richard Kind), un inetto che non ha mai lavorato, gli invade la casa senza alcuna intenzione di andare via.

Le riprese della pellicola cominceranno a Minneapolis il prossimo mese. “The Serious Man” sarà prodotto dalla Working Title e distribuito dalla Focus Features. Vi ricordiamo intanto che l’appuntamento nelle sale con “Burn After Reading – A prova di spia” è fissato per il 19 settembre prossimo.

www.film.it

]]> http://kalafudra.wordpress.com/?p=668 Thu, 21 Aug 2008 13:48:04 +0000 kalafudra http://kalafudra.wordpress.com/?p=668 In case you don't: The Dark Knight, Batman, Christian Bale, Christian Bale's yummy ass, Christian Bale's other yummy features, Bruce Wayne, The Joker, Jim Gordon, Harvey Dent, Rachel Dawes, quotes, but also, sadly, refrigerators. And anything else that keeps me from swooning in the middle of this post.

So, yesterday was Christmas. And Easter. And my birthday. And every other holiday in the world that means anything to me or anybody else. And of course, yesterday was the premiere of The Dark Knight in Austria.

Where should I start? I guess, best by saying that my expectations were so high, they were nearly beyond achievable, but this movie did it anyway. It's a wonderful feeling, when you can expect so much and still leave the movie theatre completely satisfied.

[If there's anybody left, who hasn't seen the movie yet (like all the Austrians, who didn't get premiere tickets), be warned, after the picture and the break, there will be SPOILERS!]

There's so much I want to say about this movie,  I really don't know where to start, or how I will fit it all in one post. [You should see me now, I'm scaring myself with the tempo I type in...]

Batman/The Dark Knight/Bruce Wayne:
Okay, just to get it out of my system: Christian Bale is sooooo fucking hot. *sigh*
Good, now I can focus on the other stuff. His acting: impeccable. Perfect. I love - also loved it in Batman Begins - they way he changes his voice, when he's Batman.
The way Batman's portrayed: It's everything I ever loved about him, just more intense. His conflict with what and who he is, who he has to be. His self-sacrifice. His commitment. His failures. His dark side. It's like the Nolans (Jonathan and Christopher) looked inside my head and saw "my" batman, carefully removed him from there and made him clearer.
What hurt a lot, though, was that they let the Joker win. Batman's one rule is to never kill the people he "hunts". And the Joker brought him to break it, by killing Harvey Dent/Two-Face.

The Joker:
Just to remind you:

As much as I loved Jack Nicholson, Heath Ledger just enters a whole new universe of batshit insane. Apart from the obvious stuff like blowing things up, killing, abducting and wearing clown's make-up, there's the story he tells about how he got his scars. [Those would be wonderful stories, by the way, very sad and depressing, yes, but they are really good stories.] There's his constant quoting of movies ("You complete me.", "You remind me of my father. I HATE my father.", which I am sure I have heard in a movie before, I just can't remember which one. Equally, deadra is sure she heard, "I'm like a dog chasing cars, I wouldn't know what do with it, if I caught one." before, but can't remember, where, either. imdb doesn't know. Googling doesn't help, so if you know, where those quotes are from, please let me know).
He really is scary as hell.

Harvey Dent/The White Knight/Two-Face:
Again, to remind you:

Tommy Lee Jones's Two-Face is almost funny. Aaron Eckhart's is really scary. And so very tragic.
I wouldn't have thought that I could be much surprised by the movie, as much as I read about it before, but that Two-Face dies in the end, really caught me by surprise. My guess was that they'd keep him for a next movie.
The way his story was told, his fall, if you will, was amazing. Not one moment off. Although I knew that Harvey Dent would become Two-Face, I hoped till last that somehow, it wouldn't happen, that they would find a way around that, that Harvey Dent could stay whole.
I loved that at first his coin was all white, all heads, all good, but then gets burned, just like him. Wonderful symbol.

James Gordon:
I always loved Lieutenant Commissioner James Gordon. Gary Oldman is just the perfect cast for him. His fake death, though, was one of the weaker points in the movie, I think.
But, in my opinion, he has the best quotes in the whole movie (Although the Joker and Alfred are good candidates as well):
[About Dent]: He's not the hero Gotham deserves right now, but he's the hero it needs.
[About Batman]: Because he's the hero Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now...and so we'll hunt him, because he can take it. Because he's not a hero. He's a silent guardian, a watchful protector...a dark knight.
[About himself]: I don't get political points for being an idealist... I have to do the best I can with what I have.

Rachel Dawes:
Rachel is cool. Maggie Gyllenhaal is cool and it was probably the best decision ever to get her and not The Annoying One to play Rachel.
I like that this summer, we already have three strong women in comic adaptations - Rachel Dawes, Pepper Potts and Betty Ross. Not so easy to find, unfortunately. And then they go and destroy it all by fridgeing Rachel...
Don't get me wrong, still really, really like the movie. And I understand that you need a trigger for Two-Face and that Bruce Wayne wouldn't be Bruce Wayne without him dating tons of women. But reducing Rachel to that - to the trigger for the future lifestyles of two guys - is pretty sad... She would have deserved better.

Alfred:
I love Alfred. I love his dry humour and his biting commentary. And I love that he's played by Michael Caine. What more could you ask for in a butler?
I also like that it gets shown that his relationship with Bruce is so much more than the simple butler-master relationship, and how deep it actually goes.

Summarising
I excpected darkness and I got darkness. Almost depressingly much so. There's nobody, who stays a good guy, not Harvey Dent, obviously, not the Batman, but also not James Gordon. The way he hurt his family by posing dead - not good. Maybe the best decision he could make in the situation, but still not a good decision. The same can be said about Alfred destroying Rachel's letter.
I mean, the best guy was probably this large black dude with the nice branding on his neck, who throws the detonator overboard. And even he was one of the mobsters.
What I didn't expect was how funny it and especially the Joker was at the same time. And I mean laugh out loud funny. ("You complete me." Hilarious! "How about a magic trick? I'm going to make that pencil disappear." Macabre and great.)
That Scarecrow (Cillian Murphy) had another appearance was pretty cool. I like that.

What I sure as hell didn't expect was that they gave us a 15 minutes intermission. Not necessary, people. Not necessary at all.

Now, I want that they get to work on a third movie again, right away. This time, I want to see Cat Woman. A good Cat Woman. One who's worthy of that name. [Yeah, I'll never have enough.] In the meantime, I guess I will be seeing this one again.

1978, the year of my birth. And what an over the top, campy movie I share that year with. To expand on the premise a bit, Laura Mars is a fashion photographer who is making headlines with her latest project: photos of models posed in violent, dangerous, and macabre situations, many set up to look like crime scenes. The trouble begins when people involved in the project (her book publisher, her publicist, some of the models, etc.) start turning up dead. Even worse, Ms. Mars is "witnessing" these murders as she goes into sudden trances during which she sees what the killer is seeing. As the movie progresses, she tries to help the police discover the killer before he comes after her or any more of her colleagues.

I was thoroughly entertained by the movie, but there was a lot to laugh at, despite it being a thriller. One reason I enjoy watching movies from the 70s and 80s is to see the cultural differences: the clothes, the hair, the music, and even the language. It's also fun to see recognizable actors in their earlier roles.

Eyes of Laura Mars is a movie that doesn't disappoint when it comes to capturing late 70s culture. In particular, the photo shoot scenes were quite a spectacle, giving the models a chance to strut around to disco tunes (including "Shake Your Booty" and "Boogie Nights") while wearing very skimpy outfits. I'm sure it was all very hip for its time, but now these scenes come across as super cheeseball. Also campy are the scenes in which Laura Mars goes into her trance-like state while witnessing the murders. The music is over the top. The edges of the picture are blurred to create the effect of looking through someone's eyes (as in Being John Malkovich). And Faye Dunaway's panicked screaming could win her a Razzie.

Yes, Faye Dunaway plays the main character, Laura Mars. She is nearly unrecognizable, compared to the older, more plastic Faye Dunaway that I am familiar with. Despite her exaggerated acting, she was well cast as the glamorous, self-assured, artsy photographer. She was beautiful in this movie.

Tommy Lee Jones plays John Neville, the detective assigned to the case. It is interesting to watch his relationship with Laura Mars evolve. I'm sure this movie isn't one of Mr. Jones' proudest moments, but he did an admirable job with the part. And I couldn't get over how young he looked! I always enjoy watching movies that he is in.

There were a few other actors that I recognized. Brad Dourif played a shifty-eyed chauffeur. He has been in many movies, including the Lord of the Rings Trilogy (he was Grima Wormtongue). He is also the voice of Chucky the doll in the Child's Play movies. I also recognized Rene Auberjonois, as Laura's friend and manager Donald. He has done a lot of voice over work, but he may be well known by some for his role as Clayton Endicott on the sitcom Benson, and as Odo on Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. And finally, Raul Julia played Laura's ex-husband. I knew Raul Julia best for his role as Gomez Adamms in the early 90s Adamms Family movies. I am sure he starred in much better movies, though, before his untimely death at age 54.

Is this movie worth watching? Sure, if you have extra time on your hands. There are some plot holes, and there's never an explanation for why Laura Mars has visions of the murders. But, it keeps you guessing until the very end. John Carpenter wrote the screenplay, and despite the campy 70s moments, there is also plenty of suspense. I would say it's one of his better screenplays - better than his much more well known Halloween movies.

I'll leave you with this tidbit. Today's suspense movies typically end with some edgy guitar-based song or creepy sounding music. Not Eyes of Laura Mars. As the credits roll, the audience is serenaded by Barbra Streisand, singing "Prisoner." Weird stuff.

I am concerned.  I'm afraid there is something going on at Chesapeake's design department.  My fiancé and I are concerned that your eyes have been altered on the billboards displayed here in the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex.  You look strange, Tommy.  In fact, my fiancé is scared to look at you.  I have to warn him of an approaching billboard.  He gets chills, I have to cover his arms.  Sometimes even having to blow on them to try and heat them up quickly.  Last weekend he said something about poking his eyes out so he wouldn't have to see you.  It was quite shocking and I didn't hear all of it because I covered my ears and swerved the car a bit but it started with poking something and he was hysterical.  I am afraid that you have some weird power over the greater DFW population.  I mean, if it happens to one person, there has to be others.  Maybe it's just me but I don't think this is what the ad campaign was designed to accomplish.  I understand the intimidation and celebrity factors but I'm convinced there is something else behind this.  Maybe someone doesn't know how to work Photoshop.  Maybe the billboard installers made some grave error.  Or maybe this is all part of some greater plan.  What if I'm not the only one who has to put on "ear muffs" and swerves when driving down the interstate?  What happens then?  How many lives will be lost?  Is Chesapeake paying you enough to have a massive pileup on your conscience?

Tommy, I'm frightened.

Sincerely,
Jen Milam

Well folks, we’re into triple figures! Yesterday, this blog received 101 views – that’s a lot of people with a lot of time on their hands right there. I welcome you all to today’s entry, reserving a special hello for my friend Laura, who read this entire thing from start to finish yesterday(!). Hats off to you, LD.

And of course thank you to the other 100 people that stopped by.

I’d like to begin this blog with a minor rant, if I may. Last night, I returned home from the movies too tired to watch something on DVD, so I decided to indulge myself in a very rare spot of television watching. After a brief flicking around the channels, I stumbled upon footage of the ‘V’ Festival – a music festival here in the UK – on channel 4. Can someone please tell me if there is a more risible band than ‘The Feeling’? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Feeling)

Everything contemptible and vacuous about modern society is present – the ‘I’m an individual, but I am going to show you this by dressing like everyone else’ skinny jeans, the logo t shirt/scarf/skinny tie/pointy shoes look, the floppy haircut, and perhaps worst, supposed ‘indie’ music which sounds like it’s been lifted off a tape of music specifically designed for games of musical chairs. What a horrible, vomitous, awful group they really are.

Rant over.

This weekend (and I suppose, to a degree, today’s blog) was all about being comfortable with myself.

As is most likely to be the case for a while as I go through this huge period of reconnection, my weekend was pretty clear. Sure, there was the return of the football season, or a trip to the gym; getting a car cleaned, or food shopping, but social-wise, I was pretty much clear. In my past life, this would have filled me with terror, now it is a double edged sword - which, while not perfect, is at least an improvement.

I am no good at being by myself. I like alone time, sure, but too much alone time can be a little… lonely.

The weekend began with a little more upheaval than I would have liked, however. My brother is 17. And he’s way too much like I was back then. If we subscribe to the Hoffman model that ‘parents, ergo me’, then it is very clear that my brother is my parent’s child. He is disconnected, as I was. He is uncommunicative and emotionally closed, as I was. He acts out, as I did.

And worse, he is into drugs. As I was.

Anyone with even a hint of my history will probably understand why I am so vehemently anti-drugs – nay, petrified of them. One step further down the left path, and I’d have probably been somewhere buried in the ground rather than writing this blog to you, as I am today.

My brother isn’t into the same ones I was – thank fuck – but he is a HUGE smoker. This in itself wouldn’t normally worry me – kids will be kids, and he does it with his friends, etc, etc, etc, but I felt a pit of fear in my stomach when I saw my brother, barely up for an hour, rolling a joint in his car. See, to me, that’s a problem, and it most certainly touched a nerve. I haven’t argued with anyone since I left Florence House, but we certainly did. I’m lucky – he’s a lot bigger than me, and I was half temped to slap the taste out of his mouth and let him know what a fucking idiot he was, but I’d probably have been on the wrong end of a beating for my troubles.

It just worries me. I know from bitter experience that there’s no talking to him about this, and no convincing him that I know better, or that it could lead to something that much worse. Truth is, he probably wants to, and will do, much worse, and much more. I can’t work out if I’m being overprotective, over bearing, or suitably worried. I wonder – is my past playing a part, or should someone somewhere be doing something about this? My parents won’t do anything – they’re so worried about his friends being his only social outlet, that they’d rather let him smoke his way through Amsterdam for 5 days (as he did last month) than actually confront, or ask him ‘why’.

It is a troubling, troubling situation for sure. And it really worries me.

It was an all too rare – and really, rather unwelcome – instance of social interaction on Saturday. The rest was spent by myself. It’s good, it’s bad, I can’t work out which. But in a world where I am a single man who has just begun to work out who this ‘David’ person is, it is imperative work.

Sunday morning arrived, and I was truly alone – my brother having jetted off to meet my parents in France. I read the newspapers, went food shopping, watched some football, fell asleep on the couch, and generally had a wonderfully relaxing Sunday. Unfortunately, Chelsea didn’t slip up as I hoped, but you can’t have everything.

And that really was it – the weekend, in a nutshell. (cue crappy ‘Austin Powers’ joke about being a nutshell)

Sorry, this blog hasn’t been as coherent as I would have liked. I’m exceptionally tired, and my mind is a little distracted today. I’m going to finish off today with a review of ‘The Dark Knight’, perhaps better known as the new ‘Batman’ movie. Last night, in my one social engagement of the week, my friend Ashley came and picked me up, and we finally went to see it. I’ll do my sign off after the review.

‘The Dark Knight’

In 1951, director Robert Wise, a master of science-fiction and genre horror – though he’s probably best known for being the director of ‘West Side Story’ – unleashed onto the world ‘The Day The Earth Stood Still’; on the surface, a story of an alien who visits Earth, telling its inhabitants that they must live in peace, or face destruction.

It was one of any number of cold-war era allegories about fear, intolerance, and the unknown. They were themes of their time – themes representative of a society living in fear, living in fear of McCarthyism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mccarthyism) and living worried that anyone – a neighbour, a friend, or a work colleague, could be a spy for the ‘Red Menace’ that(supposedly) stalked America. These fears were very much evident in ‘The Day The Earth Stood Still’, and of other films of the time – ‘Earth vs The Flying Saucers’, ‘The Blob’, and ‘The War Of The Worlds’. ‘Attack Of The 50ft Woman’ could be read as a fear of women’s liberation; ‘Village Of The Damned’ could be seen as a tale of children getting out of control. The list of examples truly is endless.

In 2008, the layman on the street will probably tell you that his number one fear is of a world going to hell, and getting there pretty fast. There were 5 trailers for the ‘Batman’ movie. It is no exaggeration to tell you that at least 3 were about a world in trouble, with only one man able to save them.

One of the better known ‘Superheroes’, ‘Batman’ is barely a superhero at all – he has no ‘powers’, except a seemingly endless chequebook, and is very much a beatable foe. Beginning life as a 1939 comic book character, ‘Batman’ has been through any number of incarnations – camp TV show character, dark and brooding comic book character, and a series of movies ranging from the dark. (Batman, and Batman Returns) to the ridiculous (the other two)

Re-imagined by the brilliant Christopher Nolan, (director of ‘Memento’) and starring Christian Bale (so brilliant in ‘American Psycho’) 2005’s ‘Batman Begins’ took a new stab at tapping into the ever-popular ‘Batman’ world, exploring the origins of the character, and taking on an altogether darker tone.

Perhaps most significantly, the cast was populated by actual actors, rather than the usual Hollywood-standard eye candy masquerading as something more. Take away the bat costume and gadgets, and Liam Neeson, Gary Oldman, Morgan Freedman, Michael Caine and others would have been a cast the envy of any Hollywood epic. Only Katie ‘no really, I’m in love with him’ Holmes striking a lone dull note.

The film was a rousing success, and a sequel was inevitable.

Taking close to a billion dollars worldwide, ‘The Dark Knight’ has taken the success of ‘Batman Begins’, and driven it to another level completely. Though undoubtedly, the box office has been swelled by the unfortunate death of Heath ledger, here playing ‘The Joker’, audiences world-wide have been flocking to a film seemingly so in touch with their own views of a world gone mad, with no-one to save them.

And get this – it’s actually a good film. Though a little long, ‘The Dark Knight’ delivers on all its promises, a real Hollywood rarity, and it’s dark tones and sombre taste is never wavered from.

Much has been made of Ledger’s performance, and yes, it is good, so good, in fact, that you cannot help but remember Jack Nicholson’s own ‘Joker’ as merely Nicholson in make up, but the standards are impeccably high throughout – Oldman, Freedman, Caine, Bale, and Aaron Eckhart as secondary character District Attorney Harvey Dent, later to become ‘Two Face’ (think Tommy Lee Jones in one of the later, awful ‘Batman’ incarnations) all bringing their ‘A’ game to the screen.

‘The Dark Knight’ is a rarely-flawed movie about a rarely-flawed character – a guy just like you and me, albeit with a wallet we all envy. It’s not perfect, but for a superhero movie about a guy who has no superpowers, there won’t be much better, and, in ‘The Joker’, perhaps we have one of screens great modern lunatics. ‘The Dark Knight’ is a movie of its time – desperate, grimy, corrupt, and dank, but it has a ray of hope lying therein.

Here’s hoping.

And with that, I am drawing today’s entry to a close.

Thank you for reading, y’all.

Closed Box.

This slice of cornball Americana is so much fun you'll be tempted to stand up and salute. Director and costar Clint Eastwood manages to turn what might have been ludicrous into a jubilant tribute to age and experience, and Space Cowboys succeeds as two movies in one--a comedy about retired pilots given one last shot at glory and an Apollo 13-like thriller with all the requisite heroics. With a dream cast of Hollywood vets playing old farts described in tabloids as "The Ripe Stuff," the movie jumps from a 1958 prologue (establishing their lost bid for space travel) to 40-plus years later, when the retired Air Force aces (Eastwood, James Garner, Donald Sutherland, Tommy Lee Jones) volunteer to rescue a falling Russian satellite that only Eastwood's character can repair.

It turns out that Russky bird is a cold war leftover equipped with live nuclear warheads, and Space Cowboys revs up to a rousing climax in which our heroes prove their mettle. But first the comedy: watching these codgers struggle to pass NASA's physical tests is a total hoot, with running gags about wrinkles, dentures, and oysters for sagging libidos. (Sutherland is the scene-stealer, but they're all having a blast.) Once in space, the movie gets down to business, and the visual-effects wizards at Industrial Light and Magic provide stunning vistas from Earth's orbit; a shot looking down at the boot of Italy is particularly beautiful. A subplot involving a weasely NASA administrator (James Cromwell) is rather perfunctory, but it hardly matters. Space Cowboys earns its wings, once again demonstrating Eastwood's comfort with any genre he chooses. --Jeff Shannon

In 1958, the members of Team Daedalus, a group of top Air Force test pilots, were ready to serve their country as the first Americans in space but were pushed aside. Now, as a Russian satellite fails and is about to crash into earth, Team Daedalus is back in action in a rescue mission.

Space Cowboys is available at Amazon for $10.99. To Order click here
Amazon Product Pages contain a lot of other details on this product as Customer Reviews, Sales Ranking, Special Offers, Alternate products that customers are going for and much more.Want to read these details? click here

Want to get some other Format / Binding / Version? You can search for them from here

Other Products of Interest

• The Mummy (Widescreen Collector's Edition)
• The Fugitive
• The Dirty Dozen
• Unforgiven
• Apollo 13 [HD DVD]

Pues como no podía ser de otra forma, aqui llego para hablaros de "El caballero Oscuro" por excelencia. Y aunque no voy a hablar de las pelis de Christopher Nolan (para ellas habrá un sólo post dedicado a las 2 películas en cuestión), si que me voy a meter a fondo en las pelis de Burton y Schumacher. Porque son las que  iniciaron a los de mi generación al mundo oscuro de ese superhéroe que da la casualidad que no tiene ningún superpoder como otros, sólo su fuerza de voluntad, su gran inteligencia y su peculiar actitud con determinados gagdets.

Si quereis conocer la historia de Batman, sus mejores cómics o cortos que se han realizado, no dudeis en pinchar en los diferentes especiales que se han estado realizando a lo largo del mes por parte de Snake.

Batman

Corría 1989 cuando llegaba a las pantallas de todo el mundo, la adaptación del "señor oscuro" realizada por Tim Burton. Y como no podía ser de otra manera, sería una película oscura y del todo surrealista (como acostumbra a hacer Burton con todas sus películas).

La película en sí, no nos muestra como "ha nacido" el superhéroe de DC Cómic, simplemente nos relata la vida de Bruce Wayne y su alter ego (Batman) a la hora de enfrentarse a su mayor enemigo, el "Joker". Más bien, diría yo, es la historia del Joker. Como pasa de ser un criminal más al servicio del matón de turno de la ciudad de Gotham, a ser el traicionado y buscando venganza, no solo con su antiguo jefe, sino contra Batman, que es el que en realidad le hizo un monstruo deforme.

Además, en la peli, el principal reclamo no era Michael Keaton (Bruce Wayne/Batman), sino Jack Nicholson (Jocker).

Revisionando la película, hay algunos detalles en los que no me había fijado anteriormente. Por ejemplo, un personaje bastante importante del mundo de Batman, sale en varias ocasiones aunque no sea del todo importante, de ahí que no se le preste especial atención en esta primera entrega. Es Harvey Dent (o Dos Caras en futuras entregas), encarnado por Billy Dee Williams (recordado por muchos como Lando Calrissian en "El imperio contraataca" o "El retorno del Jedi"). Simplemente hace de fiscal del distrito y poco mas. Es más, si no dijeran su nombre, tampoco se habría perdido mucho, porque su papel es del todo trivial.

Otro detalle, éste un poco más superfluo y banal, es el vestuario de Kim Basinger (Vicki Vale en la película). Siempre, excepto en una ocasión, aparece vestida de blanco, en contraposición a Batman. Un vestido demasiado recargado, al estilo "princesita de cuento" hace que destaque entre toda la multitud en la fiesta dada por Wayne al principio de la película, y es normal, que el anfitrión de la fiesta se fije en ella a distancia.

-

El argumento en sí, no esta mal para la década de los 80-90 (hoy se quedaría a medio camino, no nos engañemos). Vemos como Batman se inicia en las calles de Gotham reduciendo a los criminales de la ciudad, mientras que como millonario sigue haciendo su vida. Como Batman se enfrentará a un peligroso enemigo creado por él mismo, algo paradójico, porque se supone que el fue creado por ese mismo criminal, y como persona se enfrentará a la decisión de contar su secreto a la mujer que ama (algo que se repite en casi todas las entregas de Batman), a pesar de que en este primer film sea su mayordomo Alfred, quien desvele el secreto.

Michael Keaton fue el escogido por Burton, después de trabajar con el en "Beetle Juice", como "El señor de la noche", un papel bastante comedido si lo comparamos con su anterior trabajo. No destaca demasiado, a pesar de ser el principal protagonista, por la actuación desmedida y demasiado histriónica de Jack Nicholson como Joker.

Kim Basinger, por aquel entonces (y seguramente que ahora sigue siéndolo aunque en menor medida) sex symbol después de sus "Nueve semanas y media", cumple lo justo en su papel de "dama en apuros" que necesita ser rescatada por el héroe de marras.

En definitiva, una película bastante entretenida aún habiendo pasado casí 20 años después de que se estrenara. Como he dicho al principio, aún sigo sorprendiéndome de cosas que en anteriores visionados no me había fijado. La pelea final en la catedral es buenísima, donde apenas hay fx (que hoy nos avasallan con ellos).

Batman Vuelve

Pues como fue un éxito de taquilla (yo recuerdo haber ido al cine a verla a pesar lo pequeñaja que era), 3 años después, Burton cogió de nuevo la batuta e hizo la secuela, con más personajes, más villanos, y una historia mucho más suculenta (a mi parecer, que conste que siempre son opiniones personales), aunque algunas cosas (como "El pingüino"), fueran una verdadera "risión".

La historia comienza con la creación de los villanos. Primero "El pingüino", y después "Catwoman", que no es tan mala como parece. "El pingüino" (Danny DeVito) es un ser movido por la venganza por haber sido abandonado cuando era tan sólo un bebé por ciertas deformaciones en su cuerpo. Y como un "Rómulo o Remo", es criado por unos pingüinos, de los que adoptará su particular forma de ser y vestir.

Sin embargo, Catwoman (Michelle Pfeiffer) es una simple secretaria que descubre un gran secreto de su jefe, y por esa razón será asesinada. Pero los hados contribuirán a que regrese a la vida en forma de vengadora, con aspecto felino, porque son los gatos los que la traen del averno para cumplir su venganza.

También tenemos al villano sin poderes, Max Shreck (Christopher Walken), pero lo suficientemente malvado como para asesinar a su pobre secretaria o aliarse con "El pingüino" para dirigir la ciudad de Gotham.

Y por supuesto, tenemos a Bruce Wayne (otra vez Michael Keaton) y su alter ego Batman, junto a su inseparable mayordomo Alfred (Michael Gough, constante en las 4 películas de Batman a pesar del cambio de directores y actores), al comisario Gordon y algunos otros personajes en las aventuras de Batman.

Esta segunda secuela va de venganzas por parte de los malos. Venganza del pingüino contra la humanidad en general por hacerle como es. Venganza de Catwoman por su asesinato.

Y sin embargo, la historia de Batman, sigue siendo la misma que en la primera parte. Rico y millonario, conoce chica, que esta vez no resulta ser dócil y tranquila, sino que tiene una segunda cara como la que oculta Wayne, de la que se ¿enamora? a pesar del cambio de personalidad que sufre entre el primer y el segundo encuentro de los mismos. Su "remordimiento" de contarle quien es en realidad o no, mientras ella busca "justicia" (aunque yo diría venganza, pero no quiero ser pesada) hacia su asesino. Y mientras, El pingüino, se alía con Max Shreck para hacerse dueños de la ciudad, y hacer parecer a Batman como el malo. Mientras tanto, los protagonistas tendrán varios enfrentamientos con sus máscaras, pero finalmente acabarán descubriéndose mutuamente en un baile, donde se besarán bajo el muérdago (una escena de lo más trágica pero de las mejores de la película).

A pesar de que entre estas cuatro películas rodadas entre el 89 y 97 ésta sin lugar a dudas es mi favorita, el final es algo "surrealista" con todos los pingüinos secuentrando niños y luego corriendo al parque que finalmente vuelan. Es penoso el final de "el pingüino", aunque bastante más interesante el final de Catwoman.

Como curiosidad y punto final a Batman Vuelve, decir que en un documental que vi sobre las distintas Catwoman que se han hecho a lo largo del cine, decir que Michelle Pfeiffer, se tenía que "untar" literalmente de polvos de talco para poder enfundarse el traje negro de "la mujer gato".

Batman Forever

3 años pasarían hasta que se volviese hacer una tercera entrega de Batman. Esta vez a cargo de Joel Schumacher y Val Kilmer sería el encargado de dar vida a Bruce Wayne/Batman. Y con ellos, todo cambia. Empezando por el coche, más luminoso, más deportivo, más surrealista y comiquero.

Ahora tenemos a un Batman atormentado "hasta el infinito y más alla", perseguido por una psicóloga que quiere averigüar mas de él. Y para colmo de los colmos, le toca hacer de niñera de un "gamberro" que se ha quedado huérfano por un heroico acto que realizó él junto a su familia y que tuvo desastrosas consecuencias. Pero acabará al lado de Batman, luchando por la justicia y engendrando a un nuevo héroe, Robin (Chris O'Donnell).

También contemplaremos una ciudad mucho más gótica que la vista en anteriores entregas, igual que unos villanos mucho más desquiciados. Si Jack Nicholson se pasaba con su Joker en la primera, aquí nos encontramos a un Jim Carrey en un papel que le va como anillo al dedo por la sobreactuación que siempre realiza. Y un Tommy Lee Jones que se sale de su habitual papel para hacer de un "Dos caras" del todo histriónico.

A parte de que la mayor parte de la trama, se basa en los "malos sueños" de Wayne, de cuando matan a su padre y en los que la Dra. Meridian (Nicole Kidman) intenta a toda costa adentrarse, la película en sí esta más dirigida al público infantil por sus colores, y la forma en la que actuan todos, que sus predecesoras, donde Waine era un personaje oscuro, al igual que su alter ego. Aquí sin embargo, todos los protagonistas, desde Waine hasta el comisario Gordon, son mucho menos oscuros, más "simpaticotes" al espectador, y los chistes y gracias que introduce en la película Schumacher para un espectador seguidor de Batman, hace que esta película sea una pésima adaptación.

Batman y Robin

Y parece que Schumacher no escarmentó con la tercera entrega, así que presto y dicharachero, el señor firmó una cuarta entrega que jamás debió hacerse. 2 años fueron suficiente para reunir a un gran elenco de protagonistas para dar forma a un nuevo Batman, mucho más colorido (y sino ver la foto de arrriba).

Ahora le toca a George Clooney enfundarse el traje ¿negro? (más bien negro con unos toques plateados para darle luz y color a su oscura existencia). Vuelve a acompañarle Chris O'Donnell como Robin, y a esta pareja, acabará uniendose la sobrina del mayordomo, Alicia Silvestorne para recordarnos que algunas mujeres también pueden patear a las malas de turno (totalmente penoso).

Pero si el elenco de los buenos de la función no es nada mala, nos encontramos también con grandes del cine encarnando a los malos. Un Arnold Schwarzenegger será el encargado de dar vida a Mr. Freeze y Uma Thurman será Poison Ivy.

Pero a pesar de todos estos actores, la película resultó un bodrio infumable. Una película a olvidar de la historia de Batman. Sinceramente jamás me he arrepentido de pagar la entrada de un cine excepto en esta ocasión. Muchos actores buenos del momento (allá por el 97), pero un guión malísimo, una puesta en escena deplorable, unos efectos especiales de escándalo por lo malos que eran (el ahogamiento de Robin en el minilago que tiene montado Poison Ivy al final de la película es "rebobinar" la misma escena varias veces!!!). Las películas de Batman de Schumacher cada vez son para personas con edades mentales inferiores a 3 o 4 años, que serían los únicos en no ver el bodrio de película en la que participaron todos ellos.

Y lo que digo no va en broma, porque a parte del traje de Mr. Freeze (de verdad que "El duende verde" para algunos parecía un Power Ranger, mirar a Freeze, que parece una mezcla entre Robocop y un Power Ranger), lo que no tiene perdón es su atuendo de estar por casa, quizás para ver que no es tan malo como se nos hace creer en la película:

Y como se ha constatado en muchas ocasiones, las plantas no son el peor enemigo del ser humano (como se nos hizo creer hace bien poquito en "El incidente"), por lo que Poison Ivy, tampoco es que de mucho la talla vestida de color verde simulando el tallo de una flor con un color rojo de pelo del todo llamativo imitando la flor en si.

En definitva, jamás debió filmarse esta cuarta entrega (la tercera aún aún, pero esta......). Es más, aquí no vemos a la típica dama en apuros o trepa (caso de la tercera) que necesita a Batman, porque ahora Waine tiene una novia estable que sale en 2 ocasiones en la película, y que encarnó Elle MacPherson (ni comentario acerca de ella voy a hacer!!!). Rompe los esquemas de la primera y segunda, y sin más, convierte a un superhéroe con mucha historia detras en una simple niñera que se tiene que encargar de atrapar (recordemos que en la primera y segunda parte, los villanos siempre acaban muertos de una u otra forma) a los malos malosos y meterlos en el manicomio y que allí ellos se las arreglen solitos.

Un gran error de Joel Schumacher coger esta saga, porque la destrozó enterita, de principio a fin, de ahí que muchos recordemos los Batman de Burton y ahora los de Nolan, y cuando se habla de los Batman de Schumacher, en la cara nos aparezca una mueca de desagrado e indignación. Quizás por eso, Nolan cogió a un personaje que acabó siendo denostado por las últimas películas y le dió un gran lavado de cara y a casi todos nos ha gustado incluso más que los de Burton (también el avance en tecnología tiene mucho que ver). Pero las 2 pelis de Nolan, son otra historia totalmente diferente a esta saga, por lo que próximamente las vereis por aqui.

Karelia

Dr. Richard Kimble (Ford) is on the run from the law, in an attempt to find the one-armed man he saw murder his wife. He is relentlessly pursued by a U.S. marshall (Jones).
Do you know anyone who hasn't seen this movie? A box-office smash when released in 1993, this spectacular update of the popular 1960s TV series stars Harrison Ford as a surgeon wrongly accused of the murder of his wife. He escapes from a prison transport bus (in one of the most spectacular stunt-action sequences ever filmed) and embarks on a frantic quest for the true killer's identity, while a tenacious U.S. marshal (Tommy Lee Jones, in an Oscar-winning role) remains hot on his trail. Director Andrew Davis hit the big time with this expert display of polished style and escalating suspense, but it's the antagonistic chemistry between Jones and Ford that keeps this thriller cooking to the very end. In roles that seem custom-fit to their screen personas, the two stars maintain a sharply human focus to the grand-scale manhunt, and the intelligent screenplay never resorts to convenient escapes or narrative shortcuts. Equally effective as a thriller and a character study, this is a Hollywood blockbuster that truly deserves its ongoing popularity. --Jeff Shannon Do you know anyone who hasn't seen this movie? A box-office smash when released in 1993, this spectacular update of the popular 1960s TV series stars Harrison Ford as a surgeon wrongly accused of the murder of his wife. He escapes from a prison transport bus (in one of the most spectacular stunt-action sequences ever filmed) and embarks on a frantic quest for the true killer's identity, while a tenacious U.S. marshal (Tommy Lee Jones, in an Oscar-winning role) remains hot on his trail. Director Andrew Davis hit the big time with this expert display of polished style and escalating suspense, but it's the antagonistic chemistry between Jones and Ford that keeps this thriller cooking to the very end. In roles that seem custom-fit to their screen personas, the two stars maintain a sharply human focus to the grand-scale manhunt, and the intelligent screenplay never resorts to convenient escapes or narrative shortcuts. Equally effective as a thriller and a character study, this is a Hollywood blockbuster that truly deserves its ongoing popularity. --Jeff Shannon

The Fugitive is available at Amazon for $5.99. To Order click here
Amazon Product Pages contain a lot of other details on this product as Customer Reviews, Sales Ranking, Special Offers, Alternate products that customers are going for and much more.Want to read these details? click here

Want to get some other Format / Binding / Version? You can search for them from here

Other Products of Interest

• U.S. Marshals (Special Edition)
• Lethal Weapon
• Unforgiven
• Clear and Present Danger
• Under Siege

Distributie: Tommy Lee Jones, Charlize Theron, Susan Sarandon

Premii: nominalizare la Cel mai bun actor in rol principal (Tommy Lee Jones)

Nota: 8

Pe scurt: Este un film care reuseste sa surprinda urmarile razboiului din Iraq. Nu se refera la poporul irakian si nici macar nu sunt mai mult de cateva secvente din misiuni din Iraq, dar este prezentata transformarea unor pusti de 18 - 20 de ani care s-au trezit cu arma in mana in alt oras, in alta tara, pe alt continent fara sa stie cu adevarat de ce. Este vorba despre drama unei familii care isi cauta fiul disparut, de abia intors din misiune. Tatal (Tommy Lee Jones), militar de profesie retras la pensie porneste in cautarea lui Mike, dar la scurt timp politia descopera cadavrul baiatului. Si asa incepe o investigatie a celor intamplate.

In the Valley of Elah ar trebui sa te puna pe ganduri si sa meditezi un pic la ceea ce inseamna un razboi, nu din punct de vedere politic, ci din punct de vedere al soldatilor, al victimelor... al oamenilor.

Tommy Lee Jones primeste pe drept cuvant o nominalizare la Oscar, iar Susan Sarandon, desi apare doar in cateva scene, induce un realism extraordinar filmului. In schimb nu stiu care este rolul lui Charlize Theron si de ce a fost aleasa pentru rolul de politist. Parca nu i se potriveste.

Nu am aflat decat undeva pe la jumatatea filmului ca valea lui Elah este locul unde s-a dat marea batalie intre israeliti si filistini si unde David l-a invins pe Goliat. Scena in care Hank Deerfield (tatal) ii povesteste unui baietel legenda acelei lupte reprezinta dupa mine chintesenta filmului. Din pacate analogia cu scena legendara indica ca de data aceasta Goliat castiga in fata lui un David, un David care nu intelege de ce trebuie sa se lupte cu uriasul, dar o face oricum, un David caruia ii este foarte frica.

Iata trailerul unui film atipic de razboi, unde nu se gaseste glorie sau onoare, mandrie sau demnitate.

Radu D.

No Country for Old Men is a 2007 crime thriller film adapted for the screen and directed by Joel and Ethan Coen, starring Tommy Lee Jones, Josh Brolin, and Javier Bardem. Adapted from the Cormac McCarthy novel of the same name, No Country for Old Men tells the story of a botched drug deal and the ensuing cat-and-mouse drama, as three men crisscross each other's paths in the desert landscape of 1980 West Texas. The film examines the themes of fate and circumstance the Coen brothers have previously explored in Blood Simple and Fargo. Tommy Lee Jones plays Sheriff Ed Tom Bell, Josh Brolin plays Llewelyn Moss and Javier Bardem plays Anton Chigurh.

You've probably heard that Javier Bardem's performance in this is a surreal feat, and you heard correctly. He plays Anton Chigurgh, a psychotic murderer who is on a killing spree (thank you Captain Obvious). I emphasize the word 'psychotic'. The man is insane! I don't want to compare everything to The Dark Knight but I just have to this time, bear with me please. I compare Anton to The Joker in more ways than one and you'll see what I mean when you watch the film. I'm not going to spoil anything but let me just give you a brief explanation. They both portray unstoppable forces that act according to instinct alone and not reason. The only reasoning they have is their own and there is nothing one can do to negotiate or 'buy them off'. That's how powerful their characters are. Oh and Anton also flips a coin to decide one's fate. Sound familiar?

Tommy Lee Jones and Josh Brolin play their parts pretty well, too. When it comes to acting, No Country For Old Men exhibits some very fine performances. There's practically zero music in the film. Some effects here and there which act like background tones but that's it.

Now...here's the downside, in my opinion.

There's no doubt that No Country For Old Men is a quality-coated flick. But what's the use of so much quality when the film does nothing to affect you in any way? Right, there is no use. Although I know some people liked the movie to a great extent, I doubt even they would watch it for the second time in the next year or so. To be honest, this film does not cater to everyone's tastes. It has been produced to cater for those who look beyond the screen and into the technical details of a movie. It's done for people who love deep, dark messages that hide within a film. It's a movie that works well for critics who look for intellectual value and nothing more. It is only powerful for those who want to see that sort of power come from a movie. And for me, No Country For Old Men didn't fare well. Oh, don't get me wrong, I love slow, heavy, brooding movies with little dialogue. I enjoyed Letters From Iwo Jima, Flags Of Our Fathers, Zodiac, and Babel all the same. I like limited-release films, too. In fact, Children Of Men and The Fountain are some of my most-liked movies ever. So my dislike for No Country has nothing to do with the grittiness of the film or the heaviness of it or even the little dialogue. It's just not something I find appealing or exciting. If I wanted all message and no magic, I would have picked up the novel instead. Film is supposed to, arguably, deliver something more than the pages of a book. That's why comic movies are major hits. You've seen Spider-Man in still images, but watching him in motion on the big screen is something special altogether, isn't it? That's what I'm saying. No Country is a good adaptation. It's a wonderful film in terms of quality. But enjoyable it is not. And that is what makes me dislike a movie.

I don't expect every film to be a pop-corn blockbuster with radical CGI, extreme violence, lots of cleavage, and giant f*ckin' robots, but a movie has to be enjoyable to a certain extent. It doesn't have to be funny or sexy or pure eye-candy, just enjoyable. Zodiac has none of the mentioned, but it's enjoyable despite its heavy tonal value and the movie's slow pace. Although Javier Bardem's character in No Country is frightening and gripping, nothing of it sticks in your head for more than 15 minutes after the film. Well, that was the case with me anyway.

All that being said, No Country For Old Men should be viewed for the stellar performances alone. The film is highly realistic in terms of facial expressions and overall acting. But remember, it's not a film for everyone. Some may like it for the integrated messages. Some will enjoy the way it was filmed. Some will salute the acting. But very few will actually enjoy the movie.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wrap : No Country For Old Men gets a 3.8 out of 5.0 for being a film that has a heavy storyline that doesn't depend on violence or sex to pull it along. Not that there's anything wrong with the two but it isn't easy to gain an audience without the said aspects or to tug a film along. No Country did that and it's something to admire, at least. It has quality and great acting. Need a film to review for a college assignment? This is the perfect choice. Need a light flick after a long day at the office? Stay away from No Country!

I call these guys "strawflowers" Helichrusum bracteatum. They come in many colors, but this looked like a good poker hand to me.

Have some more:

I watched "No Country For Old Men" last night on pay-per-view. This is one book of Cormack McCarthy I had not read, so I didn't have that comparison thing going on in my head as I watched. Here's my review: no movie for the faint of heart. Someone I know well reviewed it thusly: "unwatchable." I disagree with that. I do enjoy Tommy Lee Jones, and thought he did well in this. The scene with him talking to the old man in the wheelchair was amazing.

Fans - mostly young males under thirty-five - whooped, hollered, and stomped their feet roundly - as the thrilling non-stop action in two of Enzo G. Castellari films (Inglorious Bastards and Battle Squadron) unfolded on the screen.

And, to the delight of die-hard film buffs - the respected Italian Film Director was on hand - to chat up the fans, answer queries, and sign a newly-released DVD packaged under the Severn Films label.

When I arrived at the New Beverly Cinema around 6:45, a line of excited filmgoers was already snaking down the block, in spite of the fact the doors would not swing open until 7:30. And, by the time the curtain fell, there was not a seat left in the house.

The popular director, who was celebrating his birthday, was wowed by the turn-out.

"It's so great to see so many young faces here."

Two of the lead actors - Bo Svenson and Fred Williamson - signed autographs and offered up some behind-the-scenes trivia.

Fred jokingly quipped,

"I came because I wanted you all to see how great I look."

The audience howled.

"There's nothing hanging down anywhere that shouldn't be hanging down," he joked.

Bo, a little more low key, noted that he was thrilled to attend because Mr. Castellari impacted his life both creatively and otherwise.

"He taught me Grace," Bo added humbly.

During the course of the night when I had the opportunity to get up-close and personal with a question or two, I was wowed by the man's vigor.

And, of course, his charismatic presence.

Last evening Mr. Castellari wore an elegant black suit (Italian?) with a well-coordinated dress shirt open at the collar.

One young man in the audience asked the legendary director if he could provide any advice for talent starting out in the field.

"Get experience," he commanded.

On the heels of this worthwhile advice, he noted that he came up through the ranks.

"I brought coffee to this person. Moved a chair over for that one."

Working as an assistant director was a good idea, he stressed.

"In Italy it is difficult now to produce a film. So much politics. Unless you are the son of an official. Then, yes. you'll get the chance. But no one will go to see the movie," he chuckled.

He hinted at the need for "confidence" in one's abilities and that there must be a base of knowledge to back up choices.

"When you say - 'place the camera here' - that is the big moment."

There was a bit of scuttlebutt about the differences between filmmaking in America and Italy.

Bo Svenson, for instance, noted that sound was never recorded on the set.

"There were so many distractions. While you're acting in a scene, someone is asking the person next to you if they want an espresso. Activity on the set continues during filming, unlike Hollywood."

I recall the ritual, vividly. Once the bell rings on the sound stage - and the assistant director calls out - "Quiet on the set" - no one utters a word.

Not in Italy!

Bo noted that looping later in the studio was not a process he hankered to.

"I prefer the spontaneity. The magic of the moment when the scene is being captured on film."

Distractions can be upsetting to some actors where the "eye line" is concerned.

Years ago - on the set of "Black Moon Rising" - I recall actor Tommy Lee Jones "going off" when an Executive standing on the sidelines twitched (!) and spoiled his concentration when he was emotionally involved in a scene.

Joan Collins is another who prefers no movement around the peripheral when she is working on-camera. On the set of a "Dynasty Reunion" - I was standing in the wings and caught her eye - but avoided her wrath somehow. When she noticed me a few feet away - instead of calling the A.D. to haul my butt out of there - she gave me an approving glance up-and-down and carried on.

Whew!

In Italy, it appears, you fly by the seat of your creative pants!

When the first feature flickered up on the silver screen I was inclined to let the storyline unfold. But, within minutes, I found myself sitting up and paying very close attention to Mr. Castellari's celluloid offering.

Clearly, a deft capable hand was at the helm!

From the get-go, Castellari's innate ability to draw the filmgoer into the action in a seamless - almost magical way - was evident.

There was a subtlety to the "set ups", too. In fact, each frame of celluloid was carefully crafted, a work of visual art.

Elsewhere on the canvas, Bo Svenson strode through the landscape, a virile manly presence capable of carrying the film.

Fred Williamson's machismo was also appealing - but, it was often his risk-taking in comic moments - that grabbed the audience and caused them to cheer from below the floodlights.

Hats off to the New Beverly Cinema for providing a high-energy night of satisfying entertainment!

Sällan har en film varit så upphaussad som förra årets "No Country For Old Men". Av den anledningen kändes det som en högst naturlig sak att redan på ett tidigt stadium göra en förhandsbokning av bröderna Joel och Ethan Coens senaste skapelse. Jag såg verkligen fram emot att få bilda mig en egen uppfattning av den här rosade thrillern, och efter en del personligt strul med DVD-spelaren var det så äntligen dags att luta sig tillbaka, men jag måste säga att jag tyvärr blev negativt överraskad. Här nedan berättar jag varför.

¤ FILMFAKTA
Titel: No Country For Old Men
Land: USA
Premiär: Cannes, den 19 maj 2007
Manus: Cormac McCarthy, Joel Coen, Ethan Coen
Regi: Joel Coen, Ethan Coen
Skådespelare: Tommy Lee Jones, Josh Brolin, Woody Harrelson, Javier Bardem, Kelly Macdonald

¤ Javier Bardem som Anton Chigurh

Till att börja med; Visst, rullen är förstås både snyggt fotad och bitvis riktigt spännande, men som helhet är den överskattad. Det är en bra film som får ett klart godkänt betyg, men det är bara en i mängden bland undertecknads 200 filmer i filmsamlingen. Den sticker inte i mängden. Det är i alla fall vad jag tycker.

Filmen handlar egentligen om Llewelyn Moss (spelad av Josh Brolin), en tuff och hårdnackad jägare från Texas, som av en mer eller mindre slump finner en stor summa pengar ute i ödemarken. En summa pengar som visar sig vara resterna av en misslyckad knarkuppgörelse. Men det som skulle kunna ha varit en "jackpot" för Llewelyn Moss visar sig snart bli någonting helt annat. Han är nämligen inte ensam om att känna till väskan med pengar. En totalt hänsynslös man vid namn Anton Chigurh (spelad av Javier Bardem), som bokstavligt talat låter ödet avgöra vilka av dem som kommer i hans väg som skall få leva och inte, och mycket snart börjar en våldsam katt-råtta-lek mellan denna Chigurh och Moss. Längs vägen kommer det att avlossas en hel del skottsalvor och ett stort antal människoliv kommer att släckas. Allting samtidigt som den åldrade sheriffen Ed Tom Bell (spelad av Tommy Lee Jones) är dem hack i häl.

Jag tycker att filmen är överdrivet hyllad av de svenska kritikerna. Visst har filmen många positiva sidor och den är bitvis riktigt nervpirrande, men det känns inte som att den når sin kulmen. I extramaterialet på DVD:n så pratar skådespelarna om det faktum att tre av de fyra huvudkaraktärerna - Moss, Chigurh och Bell - inte agerar mot varandra förens i slutet, och det är visserligen intressant på ett sett, men jag hade gärna sett lite mera dialog dem emellan. Jag tror att det kunde ha blivit många sköna repliker och så kallade "one-liners" där.

Nu har jag spytt mycket galla över den här filmen. Tillräckligt tror jag. Den har trots allt några goda sidor också. Javier Bardem, eller Javier Ángel Encinas Bardem som är hans fullständiga namn, är helt enkelt suverän som den iskalle seriemördaren Anton Chigurh. Hans "look", hans röst och hela hans sätt att agera är förstklassigt, tycker jag. Att han fick en Oscarsstatyett för bästa biroll var helt på sin plats. De andra skådespelarna - Josh Brolin, Tommy Lee Jones, Kelly Macdonald och Woody Harrelson - är också bra, men samtliga blir brutalt överglänsta av 39-årige Javier Bardem.

En annan positiv sak med filmen, som jag även nämner i inledningen av recensionen, är fotot av Roger Deakins. Hans tolkning av det heta, men på något sätt ändå karga landskapet som Texas ger, är riktigt, riktigt snyggt. Han - Deakins - har de senaste åren varit nominerad för sammanlagt sju Oscars, men aldrig nått ända fram. Kanske göra han det med sin kommande film istället - Revolutionary Road, tillsammans med Titanic-duon Leonardo DiCaprio och Kate Winslet i rollerna.

Det sista jag vill tycka till om vad gäller No Country For Old Men är DVD-skivan extramaterial. Det är en, det vill säga en enda, och den innehåller tre små filmer från inspelningarna av projektet. Dessa är bra. Varken mer eller mindre. Inget som man blir euforisk över, men inte heller något som man gnäller över. Men jag blir inte förvånad om det dyker upp en "dubbel-disc"-utgåva om ett eller två år.

¤ BETYGET: ++|+++

Peças de cenário ou vestimenta de filmes famosos irão à venda em Hollywood nesta próxima sexta-feira,dia 1/8/2008, assim leio eu no site da BBC hoje.  Fiquei fascinada em ver alguns dos itens.  Eu me apressei então em fazer um breve sumário do artigo e expandir um pouquinho.

1-   Uma miniatura original do TIE Fighter do filme de George Lucas, Guerra nas estrelas: uma nova esperança, Episódio IV, lançado em 1977 e re-lançado em 1999.  Esta miniatura original foi produzida pela ILM (Industrial Light & Magic), empresa fundada por Lucas, para  preparar os modelos, miniaturas e equipamentos dedicados aos efeitos especiais do filme.

Esta miniatura está cotada a US $150.000,00[cento e cinqüenta mil dólares]

2-      A máscara do Homem Aranha usada por Tobey Maguire traz esperanças de ser vendida por US $55.000,00.

3-    Para comprar o cálice sagrado do Graal, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (lançado em 1989), feito de fibra de vidro e resina e pintado para parecer cerâmica ou terracota você deverá dispor de aproximadamente US $20.000,00-US $25.000,00.

4-  Os fãs de Jack Nicholson ou dos livros de Stephen King provavelmente se engalfinharão para comprar esta machadinha usada no filme O iluminado  (1980), dirigido por Stanley Kubrik baseado no romance de King do mesmo nome.  A machadinha foi usada pelo personagem Jack Torrance para derrubar a porta do hotel nesta rodagem.

4-  Ou quem sabe, todos que suspiram com os longos cílios de George Clooney se interessem em dar lances na máscara-capacete que ele usou como Batman.  Meros US $ 6.000,00 são necessários para o lance inicial.  

Muitos outros itens estarão à venda no dia 1° de agosto; entre eles:  a  roupa de Daredevil de Ben Affleck; bonecos do filme Alien 3.   Não sou fã o suficiente de nenhum destes filmes para ficar tentada em seguir esta parte do leilão.  No entanto, não deixo de me divertir vendo tanta gente interessada.  Ainda bem que nem todos gostam do azul, não é mesmo?  Coitadinho do amarelo.  No entanto, há muitos outros ítens nesta venda de dois dias que são de interesse em outras áreas.  Há por exemplo, os desenhos para o vestuário de filmes, de Rosemary Odell, Vera West, Walter Plunkett e outros nomes dos figurinos de cinema.  Este ítens começam em US$ 200,00 e devem ser vendidos nas redondezas de US$ 400,00.