COMMERCIA ENTERTAINIA!

MOVIE: DISTURBIA (2007)
DIRECTOR: D.J.CARUSO
CAST: SHIA LABEOUF, SARAH ROEMER, DAVID MORSE, CARRIE ANNE-MOSS
RATING: ***

Disturbia is a blend of a teen movie and a murder mystery: A sort of Hitchcockian suspense thriller mixed disproportionately with stuff like ‘I Know what you did last Summer’. And though there’s not much of a mystery part, director D.J.Caruso tells us we ought to be content with the teenage voyeurism and the cheap thrills he manages to provide.

Kale Brecht (A refreshing Labeouf with a refreshing surname!), is a teen ‘disturbed’ by his father’s death right in front of his eyes, and gets sentenced to three months of house arrest as he punches his ignorant Spanish teacher right in his face at the slightest mention of his dad’s name. His mom (Anne-Moss) isn’t the least bit cared about the emotional turmoil of her son, nor is she perturbed by her husband’s death, for she unceremoniously cancels young Kale’s access to the TV and his X-Box, and is happy enough to date an apparently decent Mr.Turner (Morse). Though she grounds the boy, she doesn't care to leave behind a pair of powerful binoculars, a videocamera, and his iPod: Items of utility not only to Kale, but to the movie’s writers Chris Landon and Carl Ellsworth as well!

Jobless and on the verge of becoming a couch-potato sans a TV set, Kale discovers that the binoculars can be used to look at the world outside, particularly at his gorgeous new neighbour Ashley (Roemer), who appears to do nothing except capture his eye, through yoga, swimming and some substantial display of her perfect figure. Although Kale, with the company of his friend Ronald (Aaron Yoo), drools at Ashley most of the time, he still manages to spare some for his other neighbours, particularly an eerie old man in the form of Mr.Turner, who comes out for nothing except lawn-mowing. After some really funny sequences involving a couple of kids next-door and a cheap-thriller of a sequence involving the ‘vicious’ Mr.Turner, the story begins along with news reports about a series of kidnappings of brunette women. With the help of an informative news bulletin that describes a black Mustang with a dented front, Caruso, in the form of Kale, literally pins it upon Mr.Turner without any botheration to introduce secondary suspects, or add twists to the tale: A deed which tells you clearly that this is no murder 'mystery' you're watching. It's a teen-flick and nothing more. Nonetheless, a sequence of events with some delightful use of technology follows with the movie’s writers justifying the use of every object planted and predisposed in previous sequences by them, and the movie finishes off in a quite intense climax preceded by screams and tantrums.

Disturbia is a teen movie beyond doubt, and it poses to be no other thing except for its DVD covers and an interesting tagline. Looking through Kale’s binoculars tingle the voyeur in you, especially when your target lives in a house with see-through glass windows and spends most of her time in the pool or her roof – distinctly visible places. You're treated with nothing but teeny romance, and eventhough it is quite romantic as Kale narrates to an if-you’re-not-gonna-tell-me-your-iPod-is-history-along-with-60GB-of-your-life Ashley who’s already been instructed previously that the very next moment, she ought to kiss Labeouf in a one-minute sequence, after waiting for him to say what he saw of her. And Kale's a liar, because even a he looks mischievous enough for a moment to tell her that all that he saw was her red and blue bikinis and part of what lies beneath, he changes plans (apparently before quite some time!), as he drags along about how he deduced that she’s an inquisitive person who ogles at the mirror before she goes out everyday, which is not an "'I’m so sexy' look, but one that asks ‘Who am I?’”: A long monologue by Labeouf that provokes Ashley to tell him “That’s either the creepiest, or the sweetest thing I’ve ever heard…”. Calling all teens out there: Next time you get caught shooting a glance at your gorgeous neighbour, tell her that all you saw, was her trying to 'understand' the world around her. You'll be cleared of all peeping charges and plus, you'll get a good, long kiss. A dream no doubt!

Shia Labeouf pulls out a neat performance as the expressive Kale, and eventhough he hardly looks disturbed in the movie, he’s quite fun all the same. Aaron Yoo is quite fun too, and so is Sarah Roemer as the ever-bikini-clad Ashley. But serial killing isn’t meant to be a fun-ride that can be cracked by three fun-loving kids, with one of them getting the real necessity only in the last five minutes as his mom’s set to become a victim. Enid blyton never made killers part of her plot in her sleuth-stories: It was always thieves or kidnappers. Maybe something to learn for the writers of Disturbia. Carrie Anne-Moss has nothing to do except show-up in intervals of 15 minutes, with the last three minutes being the longest time she shows herself continuously. David Morse tries to exploit his Anthony Hopkins-like looks along with some skills borrowed from the man, as he eventually manages to scare you in a couple of sequences.

Whatever it may show to be, Disturbia is the usual Hollywood commercial sleuth-flick with good looking leads and goofy sidekicks. But Mr.Caruso ought to learn from ‘Zodiac’ that serial-killing ain’t fun-business...

MY TAKE ON A CLASSIC: AMADEUS (1984)

This is my little tribute to the man folks, as well as to the people who were good enough at heart to make a movie about the prodigy...

CLASSIC MOVIE

OPERATIC TO EPIC PROPORTIONS

MOVIE: AMADEUS (1984)
DIRECTOR: MILOS FORMAN (Based on a play by PETER SCHAFFER)
CAST: MURRAY.F.ABRAHAM, TOM HULCE, ELIZABETH BERRIDGE, JEFFREY JONES
RATING: ***** (GREAT MOVIE)

A Saul Zaentz production, AMADEUS directed by Milos Forman, has a tagline that speaks it all:

THE MAN...
THE MUSIC….
THE MADNESS...
THE MURDER...
THE MOTION PICTURE…

THE MAN: "'The Man' wrote his first concerto when he was four, his first symphony at seven, and a full-fledged opera at twelve!" exclaims a childishly-jealous Salieri. He plays his piano blindfolded, writes his notes without a single correction. "The music's here, inside my head. The rest is scribbling, bibbling and bibbling", says the man himself. He doesn't make copies of his notes, runs after his would-be wife in a public gathering, cuts across aristocrats' speeches, and says to his rival quite innocently, "How can you rewrite an opera that's already perfect?!". The character sketch clearly shows that this man's genius's incarnation...

THE MUSIC: Antonio Salieri (Abraham) unfolds AMADEUS as a masterful flashback-confession to a priest, housed in a madhouse. A rival of Mozart (Hulce), Salieri, whose music’s been made mediocre by that of Mozart, can’t help marveling at his music all the same. Salieri accepts grudgingly his mediocrity to the priest in a comic-sequence involving the enchanting Eine Kleine Nachtmusik. Conductor John Strauss and Forman then provide a treat of Mozart’s unforgettable, including the bold Marriage of Figaro, self-exposing Don Giovanni, and an excitingly-rendered Magic Flute along other prominent compositions. The man’s ingenuity is near-Mozart’s when he strengthens an already heavy sequence of Mozart feverishly dictating notes from his sickbed to a persistent Salieri, for his own requiem, with the music playing in the background the same way as it builds inside the prodigy’s brain.

THE MADNESS: AMADEUS is madness: Mozart is chief of all as the uncouth, indecent and eccentric prodigy, as he cackles at his own jokes, farts while imitating Salieri’s music in front of him and points out daringly to Duke Joseph II “I’m a vulgar man, sire… But not my music”. Salieri is mad as he calls the miracle that made his life worth was his father’s death, and as he later contradicts by saying that the very reason god staged the miracle was to make him a representative of the mediocre. The Duke’s mad as he enjoys Mozart’s raving. The movie’s evolution in itself is a cumulative craze of Forman, Schaffer, Hulce and Abraham for the man: It’s pure fanfare and devotion that’s the movie’s fervour.

THE MURDER: Or rather the rivalry: Not between the two composers, but between Salieri and Jesus Christ, who is accused by the former for “Choosing the wrong man to sing his song”. Salieri not just wants him to win, but for Mozart to lose. The fever hits a high as Salieri chucks an idol of Christ into the fireplace as the evil creeps into his mind. The Thesaurus has no adjective to describe the murder: Cold-blooded is too mild a word. Salieri uses Mozart’s guilt of neglecting his father by his exploit of the former’s party-attire, commissioning Mozart to write his own Requiem mass. “Asking him to write the requiem was easy… The killing was the difficult part. How do you kill a man?” is what Salieri narrates to a petrified Priest. Mozart drinks, drains himself, and overworks to lead to his own death, which instills guilt in Salieri. “32 years of torture”, he says.

THE MOTION PICTURE: AMADEUS is a cinematic idol. It’s perfection in every sphere clogged into an opera for the screen: The cast enact the opera with absorbing performances from Berridge (As Stanzie, Mozart’s childish wife), and Jones (As the stone-facedly animated Duke), while the crew compose, conduct, and sing the chorus. The film swept the 1984 academy awards with 8 right-royal wins, including Director, Actor, Film, Sound Editing and of course, Music along with adapted screenplay and two others. The only combat might’ve been the inside one between the two leads: The sole victory for Salieri to cheer for…

CLASSIC MOVIE: KES (1969)

CLASSIC MOVIE
TRUE MEANING OF POIGNANCY
BEAUTIFULLY TRAGIC

MOVIE: KES (1969)
DIRECTOR: KENNETH LOACH (Based on a book by BARRY HINES)
CAST: David Bradley, Collin Welland, Freddie Fletcher, Lynne Perrie
RATING: *****

Based on ‘A Kestrel for a Knave’, KES is about Billy Casper (David Bradley), a working-class’ teenager in the mining areas of Yorkshire. Bullied by a gambler brother and a selfishly-dating mom, Billy is carefree and lives to the present. The discovery of the dreamer in him comes in form of a Kestrel named, and a book on falconing, ‘borrowed’ from the town library. The catalysis is also undertaken by an English Teacher Mr.Farthing (Welland), which ultimately leads to a climax that’s a thorn in your conscience.

Self discovery is what KES’s all about, and it certainly is the best flick at that. Living lives in front of a mere 16mm camera, and imparting the soul to it from behind make this a dream of Wordsworth’s. Full credit to the cast, an unbelievably soulful musician in form of John Cameron, and a maverick director in Ken Loach. Freshness in camerawork makes you shiver in the cold, feel the wet black soil, and smell the pastures of Barnsley – DOP Chris Menges is truly a Mozart at that!

The heavy heart in you groans for a positive end to the movie even when your mind knows it's not going to happen. Not when you see through Loach’s eyes, where there’s a Stephen Spender type of agonizing reality in play. A reality where dreaminess is condemned: One that holds you firm to the ground without any unworldly hope. There’s celebration when Billy flies high with Kes; there’s happiness when you see him live his life as he wants it to be. But the final piece of reality is a crash-land indeed: A kind of victory you attribute to a Shakespearean tragedy…

Though hailed by critics, KES never got the laurels it needed to have got: BAFTAs for lead and supporting performances (Bradley and Welland), and something for Loach to show off thanks to a couple of film festivals. Probably the 16 mm camera used was a drawback and so was the meagre budget. But still its lack of records never made KES a movie lesser than a classic, and any movie admirer would love it at first sight.
Catch it on DVD folks! The subtitles may help you tide over some difficult Yorkshire english.

A LONG STORY!

MOVIE: ANJAADHE
DIRECTOR: MYSSKIN
CAST: NARAIN, PRASANNA, AJMAL, VIJAYALAKSHMI, PANDIARAJAN, LIVINGSTON, M.S.BHASKAR
RATING: ***

It might seem vague, but it sure is a lot sensible to compare Mysskin’s ANJAADHE, with another movie on the ghetto, namely Vetrimaran’s POLLADHAVAN. Doing so, adds a lot more credibility to your work, for both the movies have the same flaws, being the heroine, and certain songs. While in Polladhavan it was the whole album, in Anjaadhe, it’s just a single number in the form of ‘Kathaazha Kannala’ (Surprise, isn’t it?), which is the only song this year to be promoted to the anthem level. The heroine are mere extra additions in both movies for both are male dominated, despite Anjaadhe dealing with women-nappers, since performers are strong men in both cases. Polladhavan showcased some of tamil’s finest muscles, while in Anjaadhe, mental spunk was the main aspect, amidst the flabs.

So what really let the serious Anjaadhe drop down below a completely commercial Polladhavan, that lost all sensiblity but delighted us all the same in a riveting climax? Ahhhh…. There it is: The climax. That’s the problem with Anjaadhe. Though lot more engrossing than Polladhavan, this piece of cinema has the worst last half-hour the director could ever have in store, and yes the climax in itself is nearly a half-hour. When you’ve created a steam that blazes one second and sparks in another, you’d expect a blast in the climax, with all the darkness in the movie turned into a violent explosion. City of God had that and so did Reservoir Dogs. But that’s exactly what Mysskin’s Anjaadhe failed miserably in, for the climax was a faithful reminder that this was for the tamil audience to watch.

That doesn’t mean Anjaadhe is worthless: It just means it lets you down, for you always increase your expections a million-fold when you’re viewing a movie already elevated to the zenith. The director made me exclaim with glee a lot of times, the longest being a song-sequence, a whole 10-minute scene that told me perfectly that the female lead was in love with the male, without any subsequent hints at it. He also took my breath away for a moment by the way in which he had treated a scene in which Kripa (Ajmal) sees his lungi wrapped around a victim of Daya’s (Prasanna) with a battalion of policemen watching. The scene was in slowmo, devoid of any music but the sound of the movie’s overactor hitting hard on the helmet he wore in agony. Touching really is the scene when M.S.Bhaskar hits Narain with his slippers after an untidy brawl in the middle of a religious celebration. The whole sequence with a couple of Vijay’s numbers in the background is stupendous and the editor needs to be given a special applause for not using any jump-cuts through the whole length of the movie, that’s a fad nowadays…

Dark cinematography, great camera angles, some really good cinematic exploits make Anjaadhe a visual delight: A delicacy rather. Mysskin knows his ethics too, when he makes his protagonist change after the insulting encounter with his dad, when he makes Ajmal change heart after seeing his gift on his friend’s (Narain) chest, and when he knows which way to choose to kill off a smiling Prasanna that would have made Krishna from the Mahabharatha proud. He also knew what he was doing when he chose his last film’s music director again, for the background score is a huge asset for the movie. The extensive use of the violin, and rather sober melodies of the score confirms the director’s craze for Jap movies. The duet is fantastic, and is one of the best contemporarily, thanks to some phenomenal music, and great choreography and art direction.

Which brings us to the climax – An unnecessary drag that really kills your overall respect for the movie. Halfway through it, you start hoping the movie ends the next minute, and get terribly infuriated when it goes on for eternity. Cliché is the ruling term for the climax consulting a dictionary of cinematic abuse terms, for the director fails to let go of the hero-villain barehand fight, or the usual I’m-not-going-to-kill-you-when-I’m-a-policeman act of the hero, or a more infuriating cliché when Ajmal kills unwantedly a very active performer in the one-armed Kuruvi, by shooting right on a T-shirt that has the symbol of peace on it. Also a potent good movie-killer is the hero living up to what he said in the end and nothing surplus. Some other enigmas of the movie are the casting and also the character of Pandiarajan as Logu, and a Motta who is called the same, whose face is deliberately not shown throughout the movie! But inspite of it’s cliché, one positive aspect of the climax is that it lives upto all it’s predispositions, and without doubt, all the happenings of the climax are predisposed.

Underplay rules the movie, the exceptions being an annoying Pandiarajan, and to some extent and in some scenes, the young new Ajmal. Though lifting your adrenalin levels in promo shows, the Kathazha Kannala number, with some great camerawork, and fantastic choreography is the film’s Heroin, depressing the pace set up already, and wasting a very valuable 5 minutes.

Overall, Anjaadhe is a new tint to Tamil Cinema in which people used to belive good cinema was all about soap-operas and dramas. An intense action thriller, with a little lenghty climax: that doesn’t bring it a lot down, does it?

P.S. I know my review drags on and on, but who can blame me? I saw Anjaadhe, didn’t I? ;)

WHAT LIFE'S ALL ABOUT...

As i had mentioned in my earlier post about HORTON HEARS A WHO, my review about the movie has been published in the hindu's supplementary Nxg. And people should think i'm utterly delighted at this prospect, which i'm totally not!
As per the paper's restrictions, it took me a whole of 3 hours to cut my page-long review short to a mere 300-words, and while doing so, i had to ensure i don't alter the meaning, the concepts i outlined, or the overall poeticity of the review (Yes it was poetic!). But what do i get, when i see it in form of the print media? Shock?
yes it was shock, and not a pleasant one to the least. I was devastated to see my review short by an arm and a leg, and as i dig deeper, i see that they've eaten it's heart out too! I do not say i'm not happy to see my name in print for the first time, but anyone who had taken so much pains to construct such an elaborate review would agree with me, that whatever the reason maybe, it really is terrible for an artist to see his work spoilt: It can be metaphorically compared to the shock a mother would feel when she sees a doctor eating away her delivered baby's limbs, and slowly nudging towards its heart, saying simultaneously "Congratulations, madam". (Boy that was creepy enough wasn't it?)
Anyway, if the excuse of lack of space was convincing enough, i wouldn't have gone on a rant about this, but to my horror, i saw that a companion review of mine (A rival actually!) had a full 293 words in it, with mere description of what she saw in its story (Yes it's a girl!). 293 words without a touch upon how emotional an experience the movie gave her, for the movie was targeted for your heart, since no one in their right minds would make a fantasy drama for any other purpose. And she happily discards the 71 mark rated movie (on a 100) as a waste of time, unless you're under 12. Then what's Roger Ebert? A kid in primary school???

I know a good artist doesn't touch upon others' work while he moulds his own, but when you've been kid upon, you don't sit flat on your back, saying, "Wow i'm atleast glad my review made it"! Read the review guys in Nxg, and compare it with what's been posted two posts previously in my blog: You'll be able to spot a mutation, and a nelson been transformed into the title of Ryan fleck's flick...

THAMIZHUKKE KEDAIYYA NEE!!!

Katradhu Thamizh, a.k.a Thamizh M.A. is a movie that contradicts itself. Being a movie that has been regarded highly by acclaimed critic Madhan (Madhan’s Thiraipparvai on Vijay TV) Katradhu Thamizh fails miserably if you have high expectations about it, and fails yet, even I you don’t have expectations at all.

Let’s start from the theme. It’s supposed to be a film that deals with the sufferings of any man who is a graduate in Tamil. Though people may argue that Tamil graduates can be well placed with an M.Phil, it still is reality, that a lot of Tamil Graduates are unemployed, or work for meagre wages, in unrelated jobs. But Katradhu Thamizh most certainly cannot deal with the toil of a tamil Graduate! Not when the protagonist is actually a psyche, who’s mental stability has been hampered right from his childhood by a car accident that lost him his mother and grandparents, and a rail accident that lost him his dog. Violence has always been a part of his life since then, and he is a person who can be provoked by a slight disturbance. This is ceratinly not the case of studying Tamil, or hailing from a lower section of the society.

Next is the incidents of the movie: It’s a mix of the real and surreal, which itself is a blunder as silly as Matrix without graphics or Sci-fi. It doesn’t connect really, the real and the surreal, and that’s what is a major letdown of the movie. The reality portrayed in the relationships of the movie, particularly between Prabhakar and Anandhi, and between Teacher and pupil, is hampered by the surreal part that is actually supposed to be the storyline: Prabhakar’s angst against the society being vented out as he kills, assaults, gets a cameraperson to express himself on tape, and even escaping a lot of times from the police. Believe me, this is as surreal as the stuff superman comes up with, and certainly, Prabhakar is no superman, for he actually tries to kill himself.

The film has positives scattered, outnumbered by negatives in the ratio of millions. But certainly, it has its pluses. The first fifteen minutes of the movie for example, is remarkable as it quickly tells us why the protagonist wants to die, and what stops him from dying at the same time. Then, honestly, all the scenes of the movie are quite good, with some actually getting your heart, such as the fact that a school teacher (Azhagamperumal), who is Prabhakar’s Gabriel, speaks like every other person you’d meet with no senti-dialogues. Also, Anandhi’s is an extraordinary character, and I have got to say, the girl Anjali is the best actress I have ever seen in a tamil movie. Next, the screenplay, the music (Yuvan!), the editing, the camera, and the lighting are all good, with the locations providing a boost to the movie.

As a summary, Katradhu Thamizh for me, is a huge two-thumbs down, thanks to a story that contradicts itself, and a director who clearly shows that the story is about a psyche, but still claims that his story is that of every Tamil Graduate living in the city. Though the scenes in the movie, particularly the realistic ones, are quite good, the movie as an overall entity is a failure to invoke anything except a longing for the intermission, that actually comes quite late. A good ploy perhaps…

MY RATING: *1/2 (Just for performances and music, for there was no movie otherwise)

Horton lives life on anime

This is actually a review that i have attempted to send to a newspaper, another first on my list, and i don't know whether i'm gonna be successful. But i'm still satisfied all the same, for i've expressed what went through my mind, totally.

Personally i think, and i know that hollywood's anime movies are way better than our own tamil crap. So, i venture to see any anime movie, ahead of any buzzing new release (Dasavatharam, for that matter). I frankly have got to say, i was looking at a dreamer, someone who is an exaggerated version of myself, (both in mind, and of course, in size!!!) in horton the elephant. The questions he asks, and the things he thinks, and of course, the depiction of everything in the film can be drawn parallel to an everyday occurence. It's a fantasy, a marvellous adaptation of human life to be portrayed by animals and other creatures. And of course, the animation is fantastic, and the overall effect of the movie is bittersweet, though initially hilarious.

One thing i didn't like in the movie was the sense of Americanism that ran throughout the movie. A Kangaroo villain, a vulture named Vlad, that speaks English with a Russian accent.

Come on! Russians ain't vultures!!!

LIFE ON ANIME

FILM: Dr.Seuss’ Horton hears a who
DIRECTOR: Jimmy Hayward, Steve Martino
CAST: Jim Carrey, Steve Carell, Carol Burnett, Will Arnett, Isla Fisher, Seth Rogen
RATING: ****

20^th Century fox’s Horton Hears a Who is a refreshing break from the monotonous life we lead, as it provides a journey through the triviality of life, and those silly little enigmas that are often brushed aside by us.

A piece of cinema that takes you into it seldom makes you look for credibility: Flaws show nowhere when you ingest a movie totally, and Horton is one such. Horton (Carrey) an elephant, comes across a speck that speaks to him, and he comes to know that the voice belongs to a rather grumpy Mayor (Carell) in a world called Whoville which is subjected to strange climatic changes, and must be taken to a safe place at once. Horton volunteers, but is confronted by a vulture called Vlad along with a battalion of apes, hired by a power-mongering lady Kangaroo (Carol). Whether he manages to save Whoville, and whether he manages to convince the wicked Roo is the plot.

Horton is a refreshing movie, particularly noteworthy because of a narration that actually rhymes, and some extreme digital animation that makes the first ten-minute sequence of the speck’s journey a marvel. Equally awing are Horton’s acrobatics, and a sequence in a gigantic clover field that is so lush, you can smell it.

It has a refrain in the narration, and also in Horton’s quotes: “A person’s a person, however small”. It lives up to it, interestingly, for in no place is a meander from the main stream. The movie is feel-good stuff, no doubt, but it still is quite deep, exploring the nuances of truth, belief, godliness, and the power innocence has in this world.

A must watch to quench this summer’s thirst for good movies. And of course, Horton is for all ages; After all, a person’s still a person, however small!!!