Critical Film Condition

Find me a flaw in "V for Vendetta" and I’ll prove to you that it is not a flaw. The Wachowskis had many aspirations as movie-makers and adapting Alan Moore’s graphic novel "V for Vendetta" was among them. The movie is passionately written by them, though it is directed by James McTeigue, who worked for them as second-unit director in the "Matrix" trilogy.

Now, after the impact that "The Matrix" and its two sequels had in the business, the Wachowskis pretty much could do what they wanted in Hollywood, so "V for Vendetta" is not only perfectly executed due to the ability of its creators, it is a magnificent technical achievement where nothing is missing. Aside from a brilliant story, perfect acting and directing, the movie has all the effects, props, pyrotechnics it needs to tell its story convincingly.

The movie’s story is too complex to put into my humble words here, and using more than a sentence to do so could risk spoiling the plot for you. In short, "V for Vendetta" is heavily inspired by George Orwell’s "1984", only with some adaptations to our current reality and naturally, the presence of the character V, our hero and terrorist. The cast includes Hugo Weaving behind V’s mask, Natalie Portman as the girl who happens to stumble upon his plot and John Hurt, purposefully in the opposite role that he played in "1984" (where he was Winston, the victim, while here he plays the leader of the totalitarian government).

The first thing you’ll notice, about five minutes in, is that V is one of the greatest characters ever to be put into celluloid, something that is only enhanced by Hugo Weaving’s brilliant performance. V is a mix between a Shakespearean scholar, an charming gentleman and a killer/terrorist. His personality is shaped in a way that it is impossible not to fall in love with him and subsequently with his cause. V is probably one of the biggest reasons why this movie is so perfect.

The script is perfectly constructed in a way that the story escalates in sync with the character development, making us not only passionate about V’s cause, but putting ourselves in the position of the population of this not too distant world. It leads us to thinking if this is where we’re going to, and everything in our current reality suggests that, well, it is. Add to that Dario Marinelli’s touching and inspirational musical score and you have one of the most progressive movies in history.

Finally, there’s the unavoidability of action, whereas V shows his ruthlessness in what are probably the most dramatic action sequences ever. The final battle makes you wonder wether you should feel excited, astonished or emotional over the meaning that it all has.

"V for Vendetta" has many qualities that simply can’t be put into words. It is an unforgettable sensorial experience that will test your feelings and challenge your concept of modern cinema. It is definitely among the best movies I have experienced in my life and it should be watched for so many reasons that I won’t give myself the trouble to put them here.

Popularity: 2%

Many directors have a background in a lower position before they get to be “el capitano”. Robert Zemeckis worked for Spielberg before directing “Back to the Future”, Michael Bay worked at ILM before directing “Bad Boys”, etc. Len Wiseman worked for a long time in Special FX in effect oriented flicks like “Independence Day”, “Godzilla” and “Stargate” (no love connection to Roland Emmerich, though). I don’t know how, but Wiseman one day woke up, had an idea for a movie about Vampires vs. Werewolves and he just did that.

“Underworld” doesn’t have a gigantic budget… But for a director with no experience who wanted to shoot his own script, Wiseman got a big break and he proved, to some extent, that he had what it took to front such a big project (or else they wouldn’t have made the sequel).

The story goes that a clan of vampires and a clan of Lycans (werewolves) have been waging war for centuries. Selene, a smokin’ hot Death Dealer (hunter of Lycans) gets involved with a man with whom the Lycans are obsessed (and happens to have been bitten by one). To reveal more would spoil the plot, since “Underworld” has many plot twists (some good, some obvious, some plain stupid). Since “Underworld: Evolution” is a direct sequel of the original, I won’t tell the story here.

So, first the pros: Both movies have an amazing visual style, and while it copies the “Matrix” movies, it copies them well (if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it). The mix between neo-punk leather and some middle-age vintage clothing results in a sexy and coherent style. Also, the whole back-story about the feud between both clans brings some originality to the genre, simply forgetting about the likes of Dracula and other cliches, and giving each individual character some depth. Kudos for Wiseman for that.

However, the biggest problem in this movie lies within Wiseman himself. I think, with all honesty, that he has a great future as a director, since I loved “Live Free or Die Hard”. But Wiseman himself failed to notice that he lacked the experience in the director’s seat to direct a complex movie like “Underworld”. Many key moments display a lack of additional directing or a harder initiative by the man… Scenes that should’ve been shot more times, or scenes that should’ve been cut happen a little too often, and those are signs of immature and/or lazy directing. I’m not condemning Wiseman as a director, but even George Lucas didn’t helm all the original “Star Wars” since he knew that it was too much to handle.

The fact that the sequel is shorter, better acted out and put together, even though it has a less interesting plot is an obvious sign of the director’s improvement. However, the sequel lacks the originality of the first, and while it is obvious that when you continue a story there’s less room for originality, there should be some kind of “evolution” (no pun intended), right? But it seems like the story continues in a linear fashion, only paving the way for more action sequences. This is an action movie, people, so don’t fool yourself into thinking that you’ll be in for a scare.

My final grudge here is with the effects, even though it is an unfair grudge. While the original sells itself as an action blockbuster of sorts, the lack of digital effects and excessive animatronics make this look a little…. cheap. And in my short experience with visual effects, I know that there are moments where you choose between animatronics and digital for artistic purposes, not financial. The digital werewolf transformations are pretty cool, but once these things start attacking and digital is traded for big puppets, it looks like you’re watching another “Chucky” movie. The quick cuts and short camera angles try to hide this, but these things look as lifeless as can be. “Underworld” had a budget of U$20 million, so this really is an unfair grudge. However, the sequel cost U$50 million and the problem remains. The big werewolf looks awesome in the digital shots, jumping fifty feet in the air, moving quickly from side to side… But when the puppet shows up, it looks like a retarded version of the Frankenstein monster… with hair! I just expected a little more, especially from a movie directed by a man with such extensive effects experience.

Final verdict. Watch both movies. They’re fun and have their moments where you see that brilliance could have been achieved. However, the acting, directing, plot and effects are all just on average. Don’t expect it to change your life.

[starreviewmulti id=1 tpl=21 average_size='20']

[starreviewmulti id=1 tpl=21 average_size='20']

Popularity: 3%

With every event in our history, Hollywood tries to reap the benefits by producing hundreds of movies based on the subject manner.

While very controversial, the second war in Iraq has yet to deliver a motion picture up to the standards of what was produced, say, after the war in Vietnam (“Platoon”, “Apocalypse Now”, “Full Metal Jacket”). I’m a great fan of Sam Mendes, but his “Jarhead” was much more about the madness of war rather than the situation of war itself.

“Stop Loss” looks like it’s on the right track, though, telling the story of one young man (Ryan Phillipe) who completes his tour of duty in Iraq and wants to go back to his normal life, but is drafted again due to the lack of soldiers and the population’s general lack of faith in the war.

It looks like a movie that focuses on what America has become in the Bush era and, hopefully, it won’t get sidetracked into becoming just another war-teen movie.

And the crescendo in the third part with “Open Your Eyes” by Snow Patrol is a sign that Kimberly Peirce hasn’t lost her controversial touch after “Boys Don’t Cry”. Check it out:

http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1809761720/video/7131746

Popularity: 1%

Just earlier today I declared my growing love for independent film-making then this shows up at Apple… Really, people, there’s a line between innovative and pretentious and it is not a fine one.

Ellen Page, still feeling the buzz of an Oscar nomination, stars in this flick as Tracey Berkowitz, a 15 year old who is looking for her little brother in a suburban town. Along the way, she meets strange people and everything is portrayed in a stylized manner by dividing scenes in fragments (feel the whoohoo?).

The trailer doesn’t reveal much of the plot, which makes me wonder if there ever will be one. Other than that, it shows some scenes that make everybody wonder if Page will be naked in this movie and that’s about it. I mean, if you’re REALLY curious, watch it. I still want my two minutes of life back.

http://www.apple.com/trailers/thinkfilm/thetraceyfragments/trailer/

Popularity: 1%

Not only is it nice to see Brazilian actors performing in international motion pictures, it’s nice to see them in something with potential.

David Mamet declares his love for martial arts and Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu in this movie about a peaceful warrior (Chiwetel Ejiofor, possibly the next Denzel) forced to break his peace so that he can, well, feed his family. He is then invited to a rigged fighting tournament where he must overcome all odds. We’ve heard this a million times, but this one looks to be different somehow.

An all star cast with Joe Mantegna, Tim Allen, Emily Mortimer and Brazilians Rodrigo Santoro and Alice Braga complete the cast of what could be the underdog movie of the year. Mamet’s simplistic and heavily screenplay oriented film-making seems perfect for the storyline and the second trailer is a blast to watch.

http://www.apple.com/trailers/sony/redbelt/

Popularity: 1%

Everybody who knows me knows that I’m a huge “Matrix” fan. In my opinion, it’s one of the best franchises ever, and “Revolutions” is my favorite (sue me).

The directors wrote and produced “V for Vendetta”, another fantastic movie, but “Speed Racer” is their first job in the director’s seat since finishing the “Matrix” trilogy.

The first teaser was, you know, a teaser. It didn’t show much, other than the retro setting, some visual effects and Emile Hirsch looking perfect in the title role.

The second trailer though, was much better. Now, Apple has trailers 3 and 4 and all are awesome to watch. It seems like the Wachowski brothers have nailed it once again. The feeling is perfect, as are the effects and casting choices. All I gotta say is: GO SPEED GOOO!!!

http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/speedracer/

Popularity: 1%

Every actor goes through a mid-life crisis, and Tom Cruise has ben in his since ever. His trying to balance his career with serious roles and action movies has been a stepping stone in his recognition as a serious actor (and an Academy Award, naturally). "The Last Samurai" is definitely a sign that he’s on the right track, though.

Cruise plays Captain Algren, a scarred American army veteran from the late 19th century who is sent to Japan to train an army that will wage war against the nearly extinct Samurai. In all his arrogance (and inebriation), Algren loses the battle and is captured by the Samurai, killing one of them in the process. In the Samurai village, he starts to get a growing understanding of the Samurai culture through their General, Katsumoto (Ken Watanabe, brilliant) and later fully embraces it, questioning his past life and his understanding of the battlefield.

I’m not the first critic to say that Tom Cruise in a Kurosawa style Samurai movie is a very bad idea, but not only does Cruise give his best for the role (with astonishing results), but Edward Zwick (who would later direct "Blood Diamond") puts it all so well together that this truly becomes one of the most beautiful epics of all time. Add to that one of Hans Zimmer’s most inspired musical scores and you get a truly unique masterpiece.

The movie balances epic war battles with oriental philosophical teachings about life and honor and, as far as I know, gives the Samurai culture its due respect. Not only that, it portrays the Samurai as the fearless, dedicated warriors they were (trust me, these guys are badass).

But this review wouldn’t be fair without a paragraph dedicated do Ken Watanabe. Watanabe gives General Katsumoto such heart and soul that it is impossible not to be convinced, like Cruise’s character, that Bushido is the correct way of life. To live under oaths of honor is so noble that little else is necessary in life. This is one of the most influential and well developed characters in recent movie history and it took an actor of Watanabe’s caliber to portray him justly.

So, among the greatest epics in the industry’s already long history, "The Last Samurai" has a special place on my list due to its mix of modern epic film-making and classical storytelling. It is among the best movies EVER made and it shouldn’t be missed by anyone.

Popularity: 2%

Gotta love those movies based on Alexandre Dumas’ books. "The Three Musketeers", "The Man in the Iron Mask" are awesome adventures. Not always easy to adapt to the screen, not always the result of amazing movies, but always fun to watch. "The Count of Monte Cristo", on the other hand, is one of his few books that leaves French history in the background to focus on one man’s tale of the pursuit of revenge.

James Caviezel is Edmond Dantes, a humble sailor from the Napoleonic era of France who is getting his life together. He just got promoted in his job, he’s getting married to the woman of his dreams (the robotic Dagmara Dominczyk) and life’s good. His best friend, Fernand Mondego, is exactly the opposite: rich, but a screw up, and jealous of Dantes’ achievements. So jealous, in fact, that he betrays him in all his greed, sending him to the Chateau d’ If, an island prison, for life. There, Dantes meets an old soldier from Napoleon’s army, who in exchange for help in digging an escape tunnel, teaches Dantes everything he knows, from reading, writing and math to sword fighting and table manners. After 13 years, Dantes finally manages to escape and, with a map from the old man, he finds the treasure of Spada, giving him the opportunity to name himself a powerful Count and seek revenge on those who wronged him in the past.

While it seems like I revealed too much of the plot, the story of "The Count of Monte Cristo" is set on such a large and complex scale that what I wrote in the last paragraph is not enough to spoil anything. Dumas’ novels span decades of time, building up to a very strong climax and getting the reader really into the story. Therein lies one negative aspect of the movie. Dantes spends 13 years of his life in the Chateau d’If. With all modern techniques of prosthetic make-up it is not apparent enough that this much time has passed by and that all this time Dantes’ mind was getting more and more polluted by thoughts of revenge. And while Caviezel displays great acting skills as the hard, vengeful titular character, Dagmara Dominczyk can’t keep up with him, displaying a total lack of true emotion.

Other than that, this is one great movie. Aside from Dominczyk, all actors are great in their roles as they seem to be the perfect casting choices all around. James Caviezel (man, people like whipping this guy in the back) is very convincing as the humble man who becomes a powerful Count overnight, Guy Pearce is fantastic as the jealous Mondego and Richard Harris is always great to watch (he still is my favorite Dumbledore and I don’t even like Harry Potter that much).

On a side note, Luiz Guzmán, who plays Jacopo, Monte Cristo’s right-hand man and my favorite character in the story, steals the show (as he always does in his supporting roles).

This may be Dumas’ best movie adaptation to date (also because this is one of his best books) and Kevin Reynolds (best remember him from "Robin Hood" rather than "Waterworld") really keeps it all together for one enjoyable experience. Great sword fights, great characters and definitely the ultimate story about revenge. Don’t miss it.

Popularity: 10%