Park Chan-wook could hardly be described as a household name in the western world however, his films probably are much more noted than those of some other Asian directors. Park Chan-wook is the director of The Vengence Trilogy which comprises of Sympathy for Mr. Vengence, Oldboy and Lady Vengence - and he really can do revenge.
I'm a Cyborg, But That's Okay is a bit of a departure from those films though, for starters it's a comedy. A bit of an odd comedy granted, but mostly a comedy. Cha Young-goon (played by Lim Su-jeong)is a girl who's in a mental home because she believes she is a combat cyborg. Actually Young-goon's main problem is not that the fact that she thinks she's a cyborg, her problem is that because of this she will not eat and spends her days licking batteries and trying to talk to the machines around her. Anyway, in the hospital she meets a whole host of other patients, each with their own set of problems, including a handsome young man called Park Il-sun (played by the popular Korean singer Rain who believes he has the ability to steal anything from anyone, including personality traits.
So, what we have is essentially a love story with a twist. The twist being that it's in a mental hospital. I really liked this film, though I'm starting to truly believe that I like all films. It was a sweet story, it had a good few laughs but I thought it managed to deal with creating the characters without getting too caught up in the mental hospital aspect of everything. There was a good balance there between the craziness of the situation and the core of what made the characters the way they were. It put me in mind of another Korean director - Bong Joon-ho who directed Memories of Murder and The Host - not because he's Korean particularly but because he's very good at getting that mix between humour and darkness. I can't think of any up-and-coming American director doing that at the moment.
Anyway, I don't have much else to say about this film except that it's well worth a watch. I saw it in a packed theatre as part of the 2008 Jameson Dublin International Film Festival. I'm not sure if it's going on general or even arthouse release wherever you are dear reader, however if you have a chance I would recommend watching it, even if you have to go searching for it in some odd video rental store.
Oh wait, two other things worth noting; nobody pulls out any teeth with hammer nor does anyone eat a live octopus in this film! ;)
Monday, 31 March 2008
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.
Labels:
2008,
6/10,
Be Kind Rewind,
cinema,
comedy,
drama,
Jack Black,
michel gondry,
Mos Def,
review
Saturday, 23 February 2008
In Bruges (2008)
Ireland doesn't tend to feature much at the Academy Awards... Ok, this year wasn't too bad with Daniel Day-Lewis winning and Saoirse Ronan nominated, however, generally, it's more of an observers night for Irish fans. Except in 2004 when Martin McDonagh won the Oscar for Best Short Film for a quiet little film called Six Shooter.
I have to admit I didn't see Six Shooter until after it won, it got repeated a couple of times on RTÉ then so I caught late one night. I'm glad I did though, it's a great short film. Anyway, In Bruges is the first feature length film from the aforementioned writer/director.
So is it any good? Well I think so! I have to admit though, it was actually quite different from what I expected and it was actually a lot funnier than I thought it would be. I don't really want to say too much about it, I enjoyed it because it is so different from what I'd expected from the trailer. I will say though that Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson are both excellent, the relationship between the two of them is very well played. Given that most of the film just involves the two of them, this is very important!
I really liked the pacing of the film as well. It's been a while since I've been interested in various "reveals" that a film-maker generally pops in to move a story along. Often they are either so sign-posted as to make no difference or they're so left-field that it just makes the film ridiculous. In this case I thought they really worked. There was a good mix of action, characterisation, plot exposition and humour and in my eyes a good mix of different elements is what all films should really be aiming for.
Unfortunately, as always, it's not perfect. I didn't particularly enjoy Clémence Poésy's character. She was alright but I thought having her there was a bit of a waste of time to be honest.
But overall, it's smart, funny, good looking ;) and there's a midget in it (or is he a dwarf?). What more do you want?
8/10
EDIT: Fionnuala - Ireland at the Oscars - ok fine, there was that song once that did pretty well... ;)
I have to admit I didn't see Six Shooter until after it won, it got repeated a couple of times on RTÉ then so I caught late one night. I'm glad I did though, it's a great short film. Anyway, In Bruges is the first feature length film from the aforementioned writer/director.
So is it any good? Well I think so! I have to admit though, it was actually quite different from what I expected and it was actually a lot funnier than I thought it would be. I don't really want to say too much about it, I enjoyed it because it is so different from what I'd expected from the trailer. I will say though that Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson are both excellent, the relationship between the two of them is very well played. Given that most of the film just involves the two of them, this is very important!
I really liked the pacing of the film as well. It's been a while since I've been interested in various "reveals" that a film-maker generally pops in to move a story along. Often they are either so sign-posted as to make no difference or they're so left-field that it just makes the film ridiculous. In this case I thought they really worked. There was a good mix of action, characterisation, plot exposition and humour and in my eyes a good mix of different elements is what all films should really be aiming for.
Unfortunately, as always, it's not perfect. I didn't particularly enjoy Clémence Poésy's character. She was alright but I thought having her there was a bit of a waste of time to be honest.
But overall, it's smart, funny, good looking ;) and there's a midget in it (or is he a dwarf?). What more do you want?
8/10
EDIT: Fionnuala - Ireland at the Oscars - ok fine, there was that song once that did pretty well... ;)
Labels:
2008,
8/10,
Brendan Gleeson,
cinema,
Clémence Poésy,
Colin Farrell,
comedy,
crime,
drama,
In Bruges,
Martin McDonagh,
Ralph Fiennes
Monday, 18 February 2008
Juno (2007)
You've probably heard of Juno; it's the indie comedy which has been nominated for four Oscars - comparisons abound with Little Miss Sunshine from last year - and like Little Miss Sunshine, it's a cheerful little film, it jaunts along with its clever little offbeat jokes and it's oh so postmodern...
Hmm... I sounded quite negative there... I actually liked this film, I thought it was very good, in fact one of the best films I've seen this year (granted it's only February but I've seen a good few films). I laughed, I almost shed a tear, but I just don't think that I'll be thinking about Juno and her quandary in six months time. It was all just very neat and shiny, it was all very slick and "sorted". It was just all too easy and I felt like I was being played.
I should probably tell you a bit about the film... Juno is a 16-year old girl - smart, independent, given to speaking in ridiculous slang (thankfully that's mostly contained to the first ten or fifteen annoying minutes) and above all pregnant. The father is Bleeker, sweet kid but Juno doesn't seem to appreciate this. Anyway to go any further plotwise would be to give it away but obviously pregnant in high school is not the greatest situation to be in and the film follows the tale of the pregnancy.
What I liked about this film was all the smaller roles, Bleeker (played by Michael Cera) was particularly good, as was J.K. Simmons as her father. It was the cast of characters around Juno that made her more believable, simply because on her own she was too cool, too sure of herself. Looking back at the film we didn't really get much from her, it was the reactions to her that made the film interesting. That said, she was pretty funny - wisecracks don't make a character but they do make you laugh and that's always good.
To be honest, I did think it was a sweet film, I did laugh and I did like it but I think there was an opportunity here to make a really great film and it was lost. I would have liked to see Juno "deal" a bit more. I would have liked it all to be harder *look away if you don't want to know a plot point* - which is not the say that I wanted to see disowned or anything - *you can look again* but I just think don't think that anyone learned anything from the events in the film. Not that people have to learn things the whole time but... I don't know, there just could have been more to it... That said, I'm still giving it 8 out of 10, I still think it was a good laugh and it's well worth seeing.
Anyway, two random points to mention. One, it did quite remind me of Napoleon Dynamite. Two, I can't believe this is the same guy who made Thank You For Smoking. I loved Thank You For Smoking and while this was a good film I do think it was a bit of a safe step back... but then that's just my opinion... What did you think?
8/10
Hmm... I sounded quite negative there... I actually liked this film, I thought it was very good, in fact one of the best films I've seen this year (granted it's only February but I've seen a good few films). I laughed, I almost shed a tear, but I just don't think that I'll be thinking about Juno and her quandary in six months time. It was all just very neat and shiny, it was all very slick and "sorted". It was just all too easy and I felt like I was being played.
I should probably tell you a bit about the film... Juno is a 16-year old girl - smart, independent, given to speaking in ridiculous slang (thankfully that's mostly contained to the first ten or fifteen annoying minutes) and above all pregnant. The father is Bleeker, sweet kid but Juno doesn't seem to appreciate this. Anyway to go any further plotwise would be to give it away but obviously pregnant in high school is not the greatest situation to be in and the film follows the tale of the pregnancy.
What I liked about this film was all the smaller roles, Bleeker (played by Michael Cera) was particularly good, as was J.K. Simmons as her father. It was the cast of characters around Juno that made her more believable, simply because on her own she was too cool, too sure of herself. Looking back at the film we didn't really get much from her, it was the reactions to her that made the film interesting. That said, she was pretty funny - wisecracks don't make a character but they do make you laugh and that's always good.
To be honest, I did think it was a sweet film, I did laugh and I did like it but I think there was an opportunity here to make a really great film and it was lost. I would have liked to see Juno "deal" a bit more. I would have liked it all to be harder *look away if you don't want to know a plot point* - which is not the say that I wanted to see disowned or anything - *you can look again* but I just think don't think that anyone learned anything from the events in the film. Not that people have to learn things the whole time but... I don't know, there just could have been more to it... That said, I'm still giving it 8 out of 10, I still think it was a good laugh and it's well worth seeing.
Anyway, two random points to mention. One, it did quite remind me of Napoleon Dynamite. Two, I can't believe this is the same guy who made Thank You For Smoking. I loved Thank You For Smoking and while this was a good film I do think it was a bit of a safe step back... but then that's just my opinion... What did you think?
8/10
Labels:
2007,
8/10,
cinema,
comedy,
Ellen Page,
Jason Reitman,
Juno,
Michael Cera,
Oscar,
review
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)