There's only really two directors that I would say I'm a big fan of, Michel Gondry and Wes Anderson, in case you were wondering... but I do admire the films of Quentin Tarantino. They're always so stylish, so cool. I met him briefly once at a signing in HMV Dublin and he was just as cool as I expected, security were keeping us all moving but I'm sure if he could he would have had a chat with all of us.
But like I said, I wouldn't describe myself as a big fan. I haven't exactly enjoyed all of this films. They're all classy and they're all... cool but I didn't really like Reservoir Dogs or Kill Bill: Vol. 2 that much and to be honest... and I know this is some kind of blasphemy to some, but I wasn't that pushed on Pulp Fiction either. Parts of it were good... I should point out that I only saw it a few years ago, so long after I'd heard a lot of hype about it, and I thought the same thing as I did after I saw Taxi Driver; is that what all the fuss was about?
Anyway, this isn't a review of QT, it's a review of Inglourious Basterds, so I should really get on with it.
I knew going into Inglourious Basterds that it's a long enough film, this theatrical release is 153 minutes long. I know it's a thing that might put people off and I think that's important to know from the outset. Personally I don't mind relatively long run times, as long as I know in advance. In fact I check how long all films are before I watch them. It saves me the annoyance of thinking a film is over when it isn't; in the past this had spoiled my enjoyment of a film... not any more. I recommend this tactic. So now you know how long it is, don't complain if your bum gets sore or you have to go to the toilet. Drink less and go to a comfortable cinema. Actually, these days 153 mins isn't even that long... so perhaps I didn't even need to mention. But now you know.
None of this tells you about the film though and to be honest I think you're better off not know much about it. It's a lot more interesting plotwise than I thought it would be. I guess I'd forgotten that behind all the talking and all the style, QT always holds his films up with a strong plot. (I haven't seen Death Proof though, despite having a signed book of the script, so don't go moaning at me if it doesn't have a plot). QT keeps the action in bitesized chunks and it makes the length easier to... digest as it were.
So finally, what did I think of this one? I thought it was a good romp, great fun and it futher reinforced my belief that Brad Pitt absolutely deserves an Oscar. I've thought that since 1996 though... but he is just so funny in this, if I hadn't seen 12 Monkeys or Fight Club I would have said he should just do comedies. Not that Inglourious Basterds is a comedy. Nor is it a war movie. It's kind of a thriller, action, drama with some funny parts. QT has done a great job of melding together the different genres and balancing them so it holds your interest. It's worth mentioning Christoph Waltz too, well cast.
It's not really like any other movie I've seen recently so I don't know how to recommend it really. Obviously if you're a Tarantino fan you should see but if you're not... then I guess it really depends on the kind of films you like. I wouldn't say that it's a big crowd pleaser. I thought it was brilliant but I just don't know how other people will experience it. Course it could be one of those films that captures the imagination and everybody loves. Certainly I didn't hear anyone complaining as I was leaving the cinema and I always listen around on the way out. On balance I think I should recommend it to everyone... but just don't go in with any particular expectations.
The thing about QT is that I don't really think his films have a definite signature. I mean ok, some people say his storytelling is his signature, or his reference to pop culture, or his use of music... but the fact is, you can't have three signatures, certainly not if you don't use all of them in all your films... He's not like Wes Anderson or Michel Gondry, who both have a definite visual style. It's not a bad thing that he doesn't but it just makes it hard for me to be sure about him. That's why, even though I really loved Jackie Brown, Kill Bill: Vol. 1 and a number of other films he was involved in - (though not Hostel, let me make that clear... not Hostel) - I'm just not sure if I love QT. This film's taken him one step closer though. I'm not entirely convinced that it's a masterpiece but it's definitely one of the best films I've seen this year, it's a film that I'd be happy to watch again.
Oh, also, it's not particularly gruesome or violent but if you are squeamish you might need to look away once or twice. It really mainly plot and dialogue driven.
8.5/10
An afterthought: I had a look at a couple of negative reviews and I must say, I just don't see why some people are criticising it because it doesn't accurately portray WWII or the different sides of the war. I really don't get it. It's a film, a work of fiction. Ok, it takes one idea from reality, but that doesn't mean it then has some obligation to be a documentary. It's not even particularly about the war, it's just set during the war. You could have made this films about an epic struggle between cats and dogs if you wanted to. Actually....
Showing posts with label michel gondry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label michel gondry. Show all posts
Wednesday, 19 August 2009
Wednesday, 19 March 2008
Be Kind Rewind (2008)
--** This blog has moved to www.averagefilmreviews.com, so if you like what you read then please come over and have a look! You can read all the old reviews over there including this one for Be Kind Rewind. You can of course continue reading this article here though. **--
Be Kind Rewind is the latest film from director Michel Gondry. It stars Mos Def and Jack Black. I don't think this is a good thing.
As I mentioned in my review of The Science of Sleep, I'm a big fan of Gondry, I think he's great, I loved The Science of Sleep and I think Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is one of the greatest films I've ever seen. However. Be Kind Rewind is not. Ah, I don't really want to be too hard it on... it wasn't awful... but it wasn't good.
Briefly, Be Kind Rewind is about a couple of guys, Jerry and Mike, who work/hang out in a local video store in a neighbourhood which city planners are set to turn into a souless shopping mall (or something along those lines anyway). Jerry is a bit of a conspiracy nut and could be fairly defined as a loser. Mike on the other hand has a bit more character about him, he's a neighbourhood boy who wants to prove to the father figure in his life that he can do more with himself. Mike's chance comes when that father figure - Elroy Fletcher (played by Danny Glover) leaves him in charge of the store. So far, so fine and dandy. Except that Jerry somehow manages to become magnetised and as a result wipes all the tapes in the video store thereby ruining the store and Mike's chance to prove himself. "Oh no!" I hear you say. Fortunately they come up with an idea... to recreate the films they've wiped and rent them out instead... it's a crazy plan but it just might work!
Anyway, the plan does take off and the plot goes from there. Unfortunately the film never really does. There were a couple problems that I see with it. The biggest problem I think it had was that it never really worked out what it wanted to be. Gondry has a tendency toward... a certain whimsical sweetness in his films... and there was a bit of that, with the "Fats Waller" sub-plot and the plight of the video store in the face of development, however they were never made much more of. Also there was the idea of the relationship between Mike and Elroy which was never really worked on. Instead the film is kind of taken over by the, admittedly funny, takes on the wiped videos. Which would have been fine if they really had taken over the film, except that they didn't either, instead there was this mish-mash of different themes and genres that never really came together. Add to this the fact that Jack Black pretty much played the same character that he always plays in comedies... which would have been find if this was just an out and out comedy... but it wasn't and it just became annoying.
All in all I think the Be Kind Rewind was really a lost opportunity. Now I'm not sure what direction I would have preferred Gondry to have taken with it but I am sure that it was a lost chance for Jack Black to do something a little different, in the same way that Jim Carrey did in Eternal Sunshine. I blame the director though, I do think that Jack Black is capable of playing other roles, I just think that Gondry was content to let him do his thing, there was so little direction in the film anyway that it hardly mattered. It was a real pity it didn't really work though, I mean The Science of Sleep was a mish-mash but there was enough of a core there with the relationship between Stéphane and Stéphanie to hold it altogether while Be Kind Rewind had nothing like that.
Anyway I know I'm kind of slating it... I do want to state though that it's not that I was expecting a lot more from it just because it's a Gondry film and he's one of a favourite directors. I was a bit apprehensive going into it anyway and I didn't know what to expect. Unfortunately it just turned out to not be a very good film... *shrug* It was pretty funny in parts though, I'd really like to watch more of the re-made videos.
Be Kind Rewind is the latest film from director Michel Gondry. It stars Mos Def and Jack Black. I don't think this is a good thing.
As I mentioned in my review of The Science of Sleep, I'm a big fan of Gondry, I think he's great, I loved The Science of Sleep and I think Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind is one of the greatest films I've ever seen. However. Be Kind Rewind is not. Ah, I don't really want to be too hard it on... it wasn't awful... but it wasn't good.
Briefly, Be Kind Rewind is about a couple of guys, Jerry and Mike, who work/hang out in a local video store in a neighbourhood which city planners are set to turn into a souless shopping mall (or something along those lines anyway). Jerry is a bit of a conspiracy nut and could be fairly defined as a loser. Mike on the other hand has a bit more character about him, he's a neighbourhood boy who wants to prove to the father figure in his life that he can do more with himself. Mike's chance comes when that father figure - Elroy Fletcher (played by Danny Glover) leaves him in charge of the store. So far, so fine and dandy. Except that Jerry somehow manages to become magnetised and as a result wipes all the tapes in the video store thereby ruining the store and Mike's chance to prove himself. "Oh no!" I hear you say. Fortunately they come up with an idea... to recreate the films they've wiped and rent them out instead... it's a crazy plan but it just might work!
Anyway, the plan does take off and the plot goes from there. Unfortunately the film never really does. There were a couple problems that I see with it. The biggest problem I think it had was that it never really worked out what it wanted to be. Gondry has a tendency toward... a certain whimsical sweetness in his films... and there was a bit of that, with the "Fats Waller" sub-plot and the plight of the video store in the face of development, however they were never made much more of. Also there was the idea of the relationship between Mike and Elroy which was never really worked on. Instead the film is kind of taken over by the, admittedly funny, takes on the wiped videos. Which would have been fine if they really had taken over the film, except that they didn't either, instead there was this mish-mash of different themes and genres that never really came together. Add to this the fact that Jack Black pretty much played the same character that he always plays in comedies... which would have been find if this was just an out and out comedy... but it wasn't and it just became annoying.
All in all I think the Be Kind Rewind was really a lost opportunity. Now I'm not sure what direction I would have preferred Gondry to have taken with it but I am sure that it was a lost chance for Jack Black to do something a little different, in the same way that Jim Carrey did in Eternal Sunshine. I blame the director though, I do think that Jack Black is capable of playing other roles, I just think that Gondry was content to let him do his thing, there was so little direction in the film anyway that it hardly mattered. It was a real pity it didn't really work though, I mean The Science of Sleep was a mish-mash but there was enough of a core there with the relationship between Stéphane and Stéphanie to hold it altogether while Be Kind Rewind had nothing like that.
Anyway I know I'm kind of slating it... I do want to state though that it's not that I was expecting a lot more from it just because it's a Gondry film and he's one of a favourite directors. I was a bit apprehensive going into it anyway and I didn't know what to expect. Unfortunately it just turned out to not be a very good film... *shrug* It was pretty funny in parts though, I'd really like to watch more of the re-made videos.
Thursday, 10 January 2008
The Science of Sleep (2006)
Until a few years ago Michel Gondry was primarily known as a music video director. His videos include Around The World by Daft Punk, Everlong by Foo Fighters, Come Into My World by Kylie Minogue and my personal favourite Dead Leaves On The Dirty Ground by The White Stripes. His first foray into feature films in 2001 with, Human Nature written by Charles Kaufman, was generally ignored however it was his next collaboration with Kaufman, Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind, that really made people take notice. With such a critically acclaimed film to his name it seems only fair that Gondry be allowed to be somewhat... indulgent with the next film he wrote.
The Science of Sleep is that film. Starring Gael García Bernal and Charlotte Gainsbourg, the film tells the story of an innocent man, a man who lives in a fantastic land where his dreams can help him realise a relationship with a women he's just met. It's a sweet story and I'll come straight out and say it. I thought it was great. I will say this, the weirdness hits you from the outset, everything I had heard before seeing this pointed to the fact that it would be strange but I had expected the film to build to it in the same way that we would have seen in Eternal Sunshine.
The plot itself is quite simple. Following the death of his father in Mexico, Stéphane (Gael García Bernal), a shy dreamy fellow, agrees to move to Paris to be closer to his mother as she has promised him that she has an apartment for him and a creative job in a calender company . He moves into the apartment and becomes entranced with his next door neighbour, Stéphanie (Charlotte Gainsbourg). However his life keeps getting in the way, his aspirations to be a graphic designer are stifled in the calender-making company as his actual position is completely mudane and is driving him further into his dream world. He shares a delicate bond with Stéphanie however he has become caught up in a lie pretending that he lives in another building. As he becomes more frustrated his fantasies start to consume him however his relationship with Stéphanie is growing and it all has to come to a head sometime... a fairly classic tale of boy meets girl.
That said, a simple plot can be worked into a great film and that's what Gondry has done here. His strength lies in his visual style and whereas in Eternal Sunshine he understated the stylistic end and carried a more complicated plot, in this film he fills out the plot with intricate visuals. If you're familiar with Michel Gondry's music videos at all then you'll notice different elements from the likes of Everlong throughout the film. From cellophane water to the patchwork horse, the details in this film are immense and, if I'm being honest, some people will probably find that this overwhelms the film. Even as a fan of Gondry I think do it’s somewhat indulgent however as weird, whimsical and sometimes engulfing, some of images are, I never felt that Gondry lost sight of his characters. Through it all I cared what happened to this two… kindred spirits if you will… and end of the day this is something that so many film makers fail to do.
Anyway, this is my first review for this blog and I’m afraid that I’m waffling on too much so I’ll stop now… let me know what you think, anything else about the film you want to hear? I hope you found this interesting, good bye!
The Science of Sleep is that film. Starring Gael García Bernal and Charlotte Gainsbourg, the film tells the story of an innocent man, a man who lives in a fantastic land where his dreams can help him realise a relationship with a women he's just met. It's a sweet story and I'll come straight out and say it. I thought it was great. I will say this, the weirdness hits you from the outset, everything I had heard before seeing this pointed to the fact that it would be strange but I had expected the film to build to it in the same way that we would have seen in Eternal Sunshine.
The plot itself is quite simple. Following the death of his father in Mexico, Stéphane (Gael García Bernal), a shy dreamy fellow, agrees to move to Paris to be closer to his mother as she has promised him that she has an apartment for him and a creative job in a calender company . He moves into the apartment and becomes entranced with his next door neighbour, Stéphanie (Charlotte Gainsbourg). However his life keeps getting in the way, his aspirations to be a graphic designer are stifled in the calender-making company as his actual position is completely mudane and is driving him further into his dream world. He shares a delicate bond with Stéphanie however he has become caught up in a lie pretending that he lives in another building. As he becomes more frustrated his fantasies start to consume him however his relationship with Stéphanie is growing and it all has to come to a head sometime... a fairly classic tale of boy meets girl.
That said, a simple plot can be worked into a great film and that's what Gondry has done here. His strength lies in his visual style and whereas in Eternal Sunshine he understated the stylistic end and carried a more complicated plot, in this film he fills out the plot with intricate visuals. If you're familiar with Michel Gondry's music videos at all then you'll notice different elements from the likes of Everlong throughout the film. From cellophane water to the patchwork horse, the details in this film are immense and, if I'm being honest, some people will probably find that this overwhelms the film. Even as a fan of Gondry I think do it’s somewhat indulgent however as weird, whimsical and sometimes engulfing, some of images are, I never felt that Gondry lost sight of his characters. Through it all I cared what happened to this two… kindred spirits if you will… and end of the day this is something that so many film makers fail to do.
Anyway, this is my first review for this blog and I’m afraid that I’m waffling on too much so I’ll stop now… let me know what you think, anything else about the film you want to hear? I hope you found this interesting, good bye!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Just click...
