Plot summary (story synopsis): The quirky and lovable gang of everyman national serviceman, led by Alex (Tosh Zhang), are now veteran reservists, and are magically reborn as armoured infantrymen. They have to deal with conflicts with civilian life, and a new strict by-the-book female platoon commander Lieutenant Zhang (Apple Chan).
***
(Full disclosure: I have never been in any military unit and am an armchair general.)
The fourth in the fabulously successful (at least in Singapore) Ah Boys to Men franchise, ABTM 4 is surprisingly good considering the quality of the previous movies. (I watched ABTM 1 and 3. I skipped ABTM 2 because the first was so bad.)
The first few movies suffered from preachy "social commentary", overt military propaganda, overlong scenes, a skit-based approach to story structure, and heavy-handed melodrama. Oh, and annoying in-your-face product placement. These weaknesses still exist in ABTM 4 but are greatly reduced. The movie is actually watchable and rarely cringe inducing.
The social commentary arises naturally and believably - foreign employees being favoured over locals because the foreigners don't disrupt corporate operations by having to go back to camp for mobilisation or training. Also covered is the awkward situation of your boss in civilian life suddenly becoming your subordinate in the military.
The military propaganda is balanced, not shrinking from showing the limitations of Singapore's Bionix infantry fighting vehicles, and the officially sanctioned relaxation of requirements for reservists.
Pacing is improved. Only a few scenes - such as the first scene in the canteen - felt draggy. Even the product placement is improved. I counted maybe 50 sponsors at the end credits but noticed only about 10 in the movie.
Unfortunately the verisimilitude-busting retconning of the Ah Boys into a different military unit, continues. They were basic infantry in ABTM 1 and 2, elite naval divers in ABTM 3, and now armoured infantry in ABTM 4. The only reason being to showcase different branches of the military, story logic be damned.
At least they are now veterans and no longer new conscripts (they were new conscripts in ABTM 1, and then again in ABTM 3).
When the first movie came out, I heard a few parents saying that they wanted to watch to see what national service would be like for their sons who would be conscripted soon. Which was strange because the Singapore Armed Forces has a short documentary series on YouTube called Every Singapore Son, that covers the national service experience well.
I guess the movies do give a more behind-the-scenes look at life in the Singapore military, albeit fictionalised and sensationalised yet sanitised. On the other hand, you're not going to learn much about Singapore military doctrine.
Standard American (and presumably Singaporean too) armoured doctrine is for infantry and armour to support each other. Tankers are very much blind and lack situational awareness, buttoned up inside their vehicle.
Armoured infantry act as eyes and ears, dismounting to be an advance guard to warn against enemy infantry and keep them away from the tanks. The tanks can then use their superior firepower to fend off enemy tanks and infantry.
None of this is shown in the movie. Instead, the infantry are shown independently traipsing off to their own objective during an exercise. The only communication shown is between them and their vehicle commander. The tanks (Leopard MBTs) are never shown communicating with the Bionix infantry fighting vehicles.
But this is a concern only to military nuts. For the average Singaporean, what matters are the more daily life aspects of military service. In this ABTM 4 does succeed. Good use is made of army lingo and procedures. Enough is sprinkled around to be authentic and interesting, without being over explained.
The movie's character development is however, lacking. Alex's moral failure and sudden redemption at the end, come out of nowhere. Ah Long had a promising start but his character arc halts in mid air and fizzles out.The whole conflict between Alex and Lieutenant Zhang also fizzles out and amounts to nothing in the end.
ABTM 4 is still a loose collection of unrelated vignettes and comedy skits. For example, the mass Lamborghini convoy at the end is kinda pointless (and actually sucks the air from the real ending), its awesomeness way out of proportion to the minor character point it makes.
While flawed, ABTM does entertain. And Jack Neo's usual dose of sly social commentary doesn't grate so much this time.
Showing posts with label drama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label drama. Show all posts
2017-11-19
2017-04-23
Pop Aye (2017)
Plot summary (story synopsis): Middle-aged architect Thana (Thaneth Warakulnukroh) is experiencing a mid-life crisis. He is being sidelined at his architecture firm by younger architects and his signature project, a large shopping centre, is scheduled for demolition. His sex life with his wife Bo (Penpak Sirikul) isn't going well either. One day he stumbles across Pop Aye, an elephant from his childhood, and decides to buy him. Together they embark on a road trip through rural Thailand.
***
Pop Aye is the first Singaporean film to be screened at the prestigious Sundance Film Festival. It didn't just screen, it also won the World Cinema Dramatic Special Jury Award for Screenwriting. Sundance implies indie/arthouse and Pop Aye certainly lives up to that. It's definitely not a commercial film.
Though writer/director Kirsten Tan is Singaporean, Pop Aye is set in Thailand and features Thai lead actors and mainly Thai dialog. So be prepared to read subtitles if you are not Thai, but hey, that's part of the arthouse experience.
The Thai locations are the best part of the movie. You really feel the authenticity of the locations and get to see a Thailand that you don't see in tourist promos. The rural settings are especially striking in a gritty way.
However, the first two-thirds of the movie is a bit slow and disjointed. Kirsten Tan is following Jeff Nichols' Midnight Special style of withholding information to create audience interest. Unfortunately it doesn't work well in this case.
For half of the movie, we don't even know where Thana is going, or that he even has a destination. But instead of creating interest, it gives the movie the feeling of a lack of purpose. Why the elephant is named Pop Aye, and his earlier relationship with Thana, is later revealed. The problem is that no hints were given that any of this was a mystery, so any opportunity for suspense is wasted.
Befitting an arthouse movie, the ending is hauntingly open ended. Some issues are resolved, and some are not. If only the first half of the movie was this good.
***
Pop Aye is the first Singaporean film to be screened at the prestigious Sundance Film Festival. It didn't just screen, it also won the World Cinema Dramatic Special Jury Award for Screenwriting. Sundance implies indie/arthouse and Pop Aye certainly lives up to that. It's definitely not a commercial film.
Though writer/director Kirsten Tan is Singaporean, Pop Aye is set in Thailand and features Thai lead actors and mainly Thai dialog. So be prepared to read subtitles if you are not Thai, but hey, that's part of the arthouse experience.
The Thai locations are the best part of the movie. You really feel the authenticity of the locations and get to see a Thailand that you don't see in tourist promos. The rural settings are especially striking in a gritty way.
However, the first two-thirds of the movie is a bit slow and disjointed. Kirsten Tan is following Jeff Nichols' Midnight Special style of withholding information to create audience interest. Unfortunately it doesn't work well in this case.
For half of the movie, we don't even know where Thana is going, or that he even has a destination. But instead of creating interest, it gives the movie the feeling of a lack of purpose. Why the elephant is named Pop Aye, and his earlier relationship with Thana, is later revealed. The problem is that no hints were given that any of this was a mystery, so any opportunity for suspense is wasted.
Befitting an arthouse movie, the ending is hauntingly open ended. Some issues are resolved, and some are not. If only the first half of the movie was this good.
2015-09-18
3688 (2015)
Plot summary (story synopsis): Xia Fei Fei (singer Joi Chua in her movie debut) is a 38-year-old meter maid who lives with her aged father (Michael Tan). Her father worked as a Rediffusion salesman and is now beginning to show signs of dementia. He regularly wanders off on his own, trying to sell subscriptions of the defunct wired radio system.
At work, Fei Fei doesn't get along with her team leader Jenny (Rahimah Rahim). But their rivalry is overshadowed by the arrival of an automatic car park payment system which threatens their jobs.
Fei Fei has loved to sing since she was in school, especially the songs of Taiwanese singer Fong Fei Fei. She stumbles across a local singing contest and decides to join.
***
3688 is an enjoyable, sentimental comedy. While the trailer plays up the singing competition in the movie, the competition only appears in the last third of the movie. It's actually the least effective part of the movie.
The two main threads are Fei Fei's mini adventures as a meter maid (saman auntie in local slang) and her father's gradual mental deterioration.
Both work because writer/director Royston Tan (881, 15: The Movie) and rookie writer Fong Wei Lim spend the time to develop these subplots. The situations and characters feel natural unlike with some other local filmmakers (coughjackneocough).
The meter maid shenanigans plays out with a kampong-style feel, where everyone in the neighbourhood knows everybody. It's an Amelie-style parochial fairy-tale that works.
Equally compelling is Fei Fei's father's descent into dementia. It is played out over multiple small scenes, each slowly worming its way into your sympathies. Jack Neo's heavy hand of a few over-the-top dramatic scenes couldn't be further away in terms of style.
The ending of the movie is also done in a tasteful low-key style (stay behind for the post-credits scene).
The use of old Rediffusion radio sets is beautifully nostalgic. It's an example of effective and unobtrusive product placement (the Rediffusion name lives on as an Internet broadcaster). Again unlike Jack Neo.
I'm sorry to keep on comparing with Jack Neo, but the differences are glaring. Another example? Liu Ling Ling as Seafood Auntie is charmingly brash without being annoying. Unlike Irene Ang in Jack Neo's Ah Boys to Men.
There is some singing, especially covers of Fong Fei Fei's classic hits. There's a lone song-and-dance number at the start with the meter maids but strangely enough, this is the only dance number in the movie. So the tone of the movie is a bit uneven.
Another uneven bit of filmmaking is the inclusion of Fei Fei's old school friend, recently returned from New York. He doesn't seem to serve any purpose.
There are a few local details such as a mention of Stomp - the local online citizen-journalism website. There's also a recreation of a real-life local publicity stunt involving two female sunbathers in a car park. Local rapper Shiga Shay makes an appearance and spouts off some delightfully fast raps.
3688 is a way better movie than most other local offerings. Let's see if the public gives it their support. To paraphrase a local opposition politician, The public gets the movies they deserve, so I don't want to hear any more complaints.
At work, Fei Fei doesn't get along with her team leader Jenny (Rahimah Rahim). But their rivalry is overshadowed by the arrival of an automatic car park payment system which threatens their jobs.
Fei Fei has loved to sing since she was in school, especially the songs of Taiwanese singer Fong Fei Fei. She stumbles across a local singing contest and decides to join.
***
3688 is an enjoyable, sentimental comedy. While the trailer plays up the singing competition in the movie, the competition only appears in the last third of the movie. It's actually the least effective part of the movie.
The two main threads are Fei Fei's mini adventures as a meter maid (saman auntie in local slang) and her father's gradual mental deterioration.
Both work because writer/director Royston Tan (881, 15: The Movie) and rookie writer Fong Wei Lim spend the time to develop these subplots. The situations and characters feel natural unlike with some other local filmmakers (coughjackneocough).
The meter maid shenanigans plays out with a kampong-style feel, where everyone in the neighbourhood knows everybody. It's an Amelie-style parochial fairy-tale that works.
Equally compelling is Fei Fei's father's descent into dementia. It is played out over multiple small scenes, each slowly worming its way into your sympathies. Jack Neo's heavy hand of a few over-the-top dramatic scenes couldn't be further away in terms of style.
The ending of the movie is also done in a tasteful low-key style (stay behind for the post-credits scene).
The use of old Rediffusion radio sets is beautifully nostalgic. It's an example of effective and unobtrusive product placement (the Rediffusion name lives on as an Internet broadcaster). Again unlike Jack Neo.
I'm sorry to keep on comparing with Jack Neo, but the differences are glaring. Another example? Liu Ling Ling as Seafood Auntie is charmingly brash without being annoying. Unlike Irene Ang in Jack Neo's Ah Boys to Men.
There is some singing, especially covers of Fong Fei Fei's classic hits. There's a lone song-and-dance number at the start with the meter maids but strangely enough, this is the only dance number in the movie. So the tone of the movie is a bit uneven.
Another uneven bit of filmmaking is the inclusion of Fei Fei's old school friend, recently returned from New York. He doesn't seem to serve any purpose.
There are a few local details such as a mention of Stomp - the local online citizen-journalism website. There's also a recreation of a real-life local publicity stunt involving two female sunbathers in a car park. Local rapper Shiga Shay makes an appearance and spouts off some delightfully fast raps.
3688 is a way better movie than most other local offerings. Let's see if the public gives it their support. To paraphrase a local opposition politician, The public gets the movies they deserve, so I don't want to hear any more complaints.
2015-09-14
The Assassin (2015)
Plot summary (story synopsis): It is China during the Tang Dynasty. Young assassin Yinniang (Shu Qi) doesn't have the heart to kill a target in front of his son. To teach her a lesson, she is sent back to her home province of Weibo to assassinate her cousin Tian Ji'an (Chen Chang) who is now the Lord of Weibo.
Tian Ji-an's court is already in turmoil. There is disagreement over how to handle their relationship with the distant Tang Dynasty. There is also some political intrigue within the court.
***
The Assassin is an arthouse movie. Don't expect anything like Hero or House of Flying Daggers. It won the Best Director prize at Cannes for director Hsiao-hsien Hou.
There's lots of show-don't-tell, so the pace will be slow for some audiences. Fights are few, fast, short, and realistic. Shu Qi isn't made into some kind of superhero, just a skilled fighter.
There are long takes and few close-ups. Many scenes are shot with a single wide-angle take. This is Kurosawa style.
Standard editing advice is to enter the scene late and get out early. Keep scenes short, don't bore the audience. The Assassin does the opposite. Combined with the wide-angle long takes, this gives an effective voyeuristic feel to the movie. You feel like an observer watching from a distance, not some omniscient god floating everywhere like in conventional movies with their close-ups, quick cuts and dolly moves.
The director's voyeuristic intention is confirmed in some indoor scenes. The camera is positioned behind thin veil-like curtains, so the audience feels like they are hiding from the people in the scene.
So this movie is not for everyone. There are reports of some audience members walking out during the screenings at Cannes and at the Toronto International Film Festival.
While the unconventional camerawork is effective to a certain extent, it's also distracting. We are used to today's camerawork and done well, it is invisible to the audience. The Assassin's minimalist camerawork calls attention to itself, throwing the audience out of the movie.
There is high contrast in some scenes - bits of sunlight in a dim interior. This would be considered a mistake in an amateur movie.
Another quirk: the movie is shot in 4:3 aspect ratio, the old PAL and NTSC analog TV format. The decision to not use 16:9, 2.4:1 or some other widescreen format is especially perverse considering the gorgeous scenery in some of the shots.
Perennially youthful Shu Qi plays the twenty-something Yinniang well. But we don't see much of Shu Qi. She's on screen maybe 25% to 50% of the time, and usually not in close-up.
The plot is interesting enough but there are too many characters and the various subplots are difficult to follow (who is the lady who tried to hide her pregnancy? I had to look her up after I watched the movie). The thing with the lady in the gold mask? Very Pink Pantherish - Clouseau versus Cato.
The Assassin gets an A for effort but overall it could have been better.
Tian Ji-an's court is already in turmoil. There is disagreement over how to handle their relationship with the distant Tang Dynasty. There is also some political intrigue within the court.
***
The Assassin is an arthouse movie. Don't expect anything like Hero or House of Flying Daggers. It won the Best Director prize at Cannes for director Hsiao-hsien Hou.
There's lots of show-don't-tell, so the pace will be slow for some audiences. Fights are few, fast, short, and realistic. Shu Qi isn't made into some kind of superhero, just a skilled fighter.
There are long takes and few close-ups. Many scenes are shot with a single wide-angle take. This is Kurosawa style.
Standard editing advice is to enter the scene late and get out early. Keep scenes short, don't bore the audience. The Assassin does the opposite. Combined with the wide-angle long takes, this gives an effective voyeuristic feel to the movie. You feel like an observer watching from a distance, not some omniscient god floating everywhere like in conventional movies with their close-ups, quick cuts and dolly moves.
The director's voyeuristic intention is confirmed in some indoor scenes. The camera is positioned behind thin veil-like curtains, so the audience feels like they are hiding from the people in the scene.
So this movie is not for everyone. There are reports of some audience members walking out during the screenings at Cannes and at the Toronto International Film Festival.
While the unconventional camerawork is effective to a certain extent, it's also distracting. We are used to today's camerawork and done well, it is invisible to the audience. The Assassin's minimalist camerawork calls attention to itself, throwing the audience out of the movie.
There is high contrast in some scenes - bits of sunlight in a dim interior. This would be considered a mistake in an amateur movie.
Another quirk: the movie is shot in 4:3 aspect ratio, the old PAL and NTSC analog TV format. The decision to not use 16:9, 2.4:1 or some other widescreen format is especially perverse considering the gorgeous scenery in some of the shots.
Perennially youthful Shu Qi plays the twenty-something Yinniang well. But we don't see much of Shu Qi. She's on screen maybe 25% to 50% of the time, and usually not in close-up.
The plot is interesting enough but there are too many characters and the various subplots are difficult to follow (who is the lady who tried to hide her pregnancy? I had to look her up after I watched the movie). The thing with the lady in the gold mask? Very Pink Pantherish - Clouseau versus Cato.
The Assassin gets an A for effort but overall it could have been better.
2015-08-07
To the Fore (2015)
Plot summary (story synopsis):
Ming (Eddie Peng) and Tian (Shawn Dou) are rookie professional race cyclists. They join the Radiant team where Ji-won (Si Won Choi) is the lead racer. Ming and Tian fall for the same girl - fellow cyclist Shiyao (Wang Luodan). Shiyao chooses Ming but Ming is unfaithful to her and Tian steps in to pick up the slack. But Tian has problems of his own.
After various successes and defeats, Ming and Tian end up as rivals on different teams and suffer career setbacks. Finally, Ming and Tian team up again and race against Ji-won.
***
To the Fore is a crowd-pleaser. Following the Simpson-Bruckheimer blockbuster formula of action (racing) for the guys and romance for the girls, To the Fore delivers as a date movie. It is 70 percent hardcore cycling pseudo-documentary and 30 percent drama/love triangle.
Writer/director Dante Lam (with co-writers Silver Hau and Fung Lam) shows good judgment by starting off the movie with a quick series of exciting bicycle races, slowly easing in the relationship drama later on. The beautifully-filmed races grab our attention within the first few minutes and helps to establish the authenticity of the movie's world and its characters.
The races aren't just fancy camerawork either. The tactics, training and equipment are shown in detail, lending interest and believability to the proceedings. The race settings are stunning - mountain roads, desert, city streets, indoor and outdoor velodromes. This is the kind of movie you can rewatch in the background on your second PC monitor with the sound turned down low, while you work on your main monitor.
Even when the drama gets started, the scenes are kept short and are inserted in between even more bicycle races, so the movie never bogs down. An example of good storytelling judgment - there's a cute scene where Ming and Tian compete by balancing on bicycles without moving. They bet dinner over who falls first, then the movie cuts away to the next scene and doesn't bother to show who won. Quick and to the point - the point is their friendly but still real rivalry, not who won.
There's also some good-natured (not mean) slapstick humor, which works. The crowd in my theater was happily chuckling along.
I almost gave this movie a miss but was persuaded by the cycling scenes in the movie trailer. The trailer doesn't lie. The movie really does look this good. Given today's improved camera mounts, it actually looks better than director Peter Yates's (Bullitt) classic Breaking Away from 1979. To the Fore's script is more formulaic than Steve Tesich's quirky coming-of-age script for Breaking Away, but it still entertains.
Ming (Eddie Peng) and Tian (Shawn Dou) are rookie professional race cyclists. They join the Radiant team where Ji-won (Si Won Choi) is the lead racer. Ming and Tian fall for the same girl - fellow cyclist Shiyao (Wang Luodan). Shiyao chooses Ming but Ming is unfaithful to her and Tian steps in to pick up the slack. But Tian has problems of his own.
After various successes and defeats, Ming and Tian end up as rivals on different teams and suffer career setbacks. Finally, Ming and Tian team up again and race against Ji-won.
***
To the Fore is a crowd-pleaser. Following the Simpson-Bruckheimer blockbuster formula of action (racing) for the guys and romance for the girls, To the Fore delivers as a date movie. It is 70 percent hardcore cycling pseudo-documentary and 30 percent drama/love triangle.
Writer/director Dante Lam (with co-writers Silver Hau and Fung Lam) shows good judgment by starting off the movie with a quick series of exciting bicycle races, slowly easing in the relationship drama later on. The beautifully-filmed races grab our attention within the first few minutes and helps to establish the authenticity of the movie's world and its characters.
The races aren't just fancy camerawork either. The tactics, training and equipment are shown in detail, lending interest and believability to the proceedings. The race settings are stunning - mountain roads, desert, city streets, indoor and outdoor velodromes. This is the kind of movie you can rewatch in the background on your second PC monitor with the sound turned down low, while you work on your main monitor.
Even when the drama gets started, the scenes are kept short and are inserted in between even more bicycle races, so the movie never bogs down. An example of good storytelling judgment - there's a cute scene where Ming and Tian compete by balancing on bicycles without moving. They bet dinner over who falls first, then the movie cuts away to the next scene and doesn't bother to show who won. Quick and to the point - the point is their friendly but still real rivalry, not who won.
There's also some good-natured (not mean) slapstick humor, which works. The crowd in my theater was happily chuckling along.
I almost gave this movie a miss but was persuaded by the cycling scenes in the movie trailer. The trailer doesn't lie. The movie really does look this good. Given today's improved camera mounts, it actually looks better than director Peter Yates's (Bullitt) classic Breaking Away from 1979. To the Fore's script is more formulaic than Steve Tesich's quirky coming-of-age script for Breaking Away, but it still entertains.
2015-07-20
Monk Comes Down the Mountain (2015)
Plot summary (story synopsis): It is early 20th century China. A time when primitive motorcars and guns coexist with kung fu. Apprentice monk He Anxia's (Baoqiang Wang) mountain monastery falls upon hard times and is unable to support so many monks. He is asked to leave and fend for himself in the big city.
Luckily for him, the sheltered and innocent Anxia ends up as assistant to kindly doctor Cui Daoning (Fan Wei). However his happy new life doesn't last long. The doctor's wife Yuzhen (Lin Chiling) is having an affair with his brother Daorong (Vanness Wu). Daorong poisons the doctor and Anxia kills the two illicit lovers to avenge his master.
He then apprentices himself to kung fu master Zhou Xiyu (Aaron Kwok) who is an enemy of the evil father-son team of Peng Qianwu (Yuen Wah) and Qizi (Jaycee Chan, Jackie's son). Qizi shoots and kills Zhou. Anxia now finds himself paired with Zhou's old friend Boss Zha (Chang Chen) against Peng, Qizi and a mobster (Lam Suet).
***
I'll have to admit that I haven't seen many Chen Kaige movies, but Monk seems rather crude story-wise for a director of his reputation.
Monk is an odd kung fu movie that against all odds, ends up working. It seems haphazard at first, Anxia getting a new master every 30 minutes. But the characters and individual stories work, probably thanks to Xu Haofeng’s source novel. At the end of the movie it's all nicely summed up - Anxia needed to experience human follies in order to become a better monk. So it's not about the plot, but the richness and bitterness of human experience.
The beautiful period sets (especially the doctor's house) and generally good acting help to support the movie.
Baoqiang's Anxia is an unrelatable simpleton with an annoying laugh. But Aaron Kwok and Chang Chen are convincing and sympathetic as serious, mature kung fu masters. Aaron Kwok is detached and enlightened, Chang Chen is passionate and vengeful. As a bonus, Lin Chiling looks absolutely stunning as the doctor's wife. Yuen Wah and Jaycee Chan are deliciously hateful.
Cinematography by Geoffrey Simpson is unremarkable. The fights are many, as is the wirework for the flying kung fu. I'm not a fan of wire fu but in certain cases such as in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon it works as a Fantasy element. It kind of works here. The problem with flying kung fu is that it is so removed from real fighting, that it's closer to dancing than martial arts. So it's all fluff, with no meaning or reality behind each move, nothing you can sink your teeth into.
Speaking of Crouching Tiger, Monk seems to be consciously trying to create a similar epic mythology. It fails because come on, Crouching Tiger is a unique one-off masterpiece. Monk succeeds as decent entertainment, and that's not too shabby.
Luckily for him, the sheltered and innocent Anxia ends up as assistant to kindly doctor Cui Daoning (Fan Wei). However his happy new life doesn't last long. The doctor's wife Yuzhen (Lin Chiling) is having an affair with his brother Daorong (Vanness Wu). Daorong poisons the doctor and Anxia kills the two illicit lovers to avenge his master.
He then apprentices himself to kung fu master Zhou Xiyu (Aaron Kwok) who is an enemy of the evil father-son team of Peng Qianwu (Yuen Wah) and Qizi (Jaycee Chan, Jackie's son). Qizi shoots and kills Zhou. Anxia now finds himself paired with Zhou's old friend Boss Zha (Chang Chen) against Peng, Qizi and a mobster (Lam Suet).
***
I'll have to admit that I haven't seen many Chen Kaige movies, but Monk seems rather crude story-wise for a director of his reputation.
Monk is an odd kung fu movie that against all odds, ends up working. It seems haphazard at first, Anxia getting a new master every 30 minutes. But the characters and individual stories work, probably thanks to Xu Haofeng’s source novel. At the end of the movie it's all nicely summed up - Anxia needed to experience human follies in order to become a better monk. So it's not about the plot, but the richness and bitterness of human experience.
The beautiful period sets (especially the doctor's house) and generally good acting help to support the movie.
Baoqiang's Anxia is an unrelatable simpleton with an annoying laugh. But Aaron Kwok and Chang Chen are convincing and sympathetic as serious, mature kung fu masters. Aaron Kwok is detached and enlightened, Chang Chen is passionate and vengeful. As a bonus, Lin Chiling looks absolutely stunning as the doctor's wife. Yuen Wah and Jaycee Chan are deliciously hateful.
Cinematography by Geoffrey Simpson is unremarkable. The fights are many, as is the wirework for the flying kung fu. I'm not a fan of wire fu but in certain cases such as in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon it works as a Fantasy element. It kind of works here. The problem with flying kung fu is that it is so removed from real fighting, that it's closer to dancing than martial arts. So it's all fluff, with no meaning or reality behind each move, nothing you can sink your teeth into.
Speaking of Crouching Tiger, Monk seems to be consciously trying to create a similar epic mythology. It fails because come on, Crouching Tiger is a unique one-off masterpiece. Monk succeeds as decent entertainment, and that's not too shabby.
2015-07-17
Our Sister Mambo (2015)
Plot summary (story synopsis): Cinema executive Mr. Wong (Moses Lim) is a mild-mannered father of 4 daughters, and husband to a loud-voiced property agent (Audrey Luo).
We follow their misadventures such as Wong coming to terms with the public not caring about Singapore's movie past, Mrs. Wong not getting along with a colleague, Mambo (Michelle Chong) quitting her job as a lawyer and becoming an apprentice chef, Grace (Ethel Yap) dealing with a divorced suitor from China, Rose (Oon Shun An) dating a series of jerks, June (Joey Leong) dating an Indian.
***
Our Sister Mambo is one of the best Singapore films I've seen. Everything works.
The script by Michael Chiang (Army Daze) is tight, flows well and never devolves into melodrama. We get a light-hearted, good-natured peek into the life of the Wong family through the details of their daily life, family squabbles, love life, and professional struggles. Marketed as a rom-com, it's more a comedy/drama. And despite its title, it's not really about Mambo. Equal emphasis is placed on all family members.
There are no boring dead spots. The scenes are short, smart and full of energy. Its all done in Ilo Ilo's show-don't-tell style, but in a more fun and accessible way. However the general public might have the same complaint as they did with Ilo Ilo - But nothing happens!
Cathay's 80th anniversary celebrations (Cathay produced the film) are nicely integrated into the storyline and don't come across as forced or crass (Jack Neo could learn something from this). The same goes for corporate supporters such as DWG (where Mrs. Wong works) and chef Willin Low (Mambo's boss).
Cameos by celebrity blogger Xiaxue, black-and-white movie stars Grace Chang and Dato Maria Manado Abdullah, and the obligatory muhibbah multi-racial supporting characters (Siti Khalijah, Rani Singam), also fit together naturally.
Michelle Chong puts in a nicely restrained performance and doesn't try to steal the show. (Everyone knows that she could have if she had wanted to.) Ethel Yap, Oon Shun An and Joey Leong handle themselves well. Coming across as distinct, realistic, likable personalities.
Moses Lim also gives a nicely toned-down performance compared to his Under One Roof days. Audrey Luo expertly balances her character's brash persona, pushing her to the edge of being unlikable but never quite going over the line.
Lighting by cinematographer Yoke Weng Ho (supported by top-notch color grading) is stunning, better than most Hong Kong and even Hollywood films. It's even more impressive considering that OSM is an urban comedy/drama that has everyday locations for its scenes.
It's almost too pretty. I found myself being distracted by how well each scene was lit.
Outdoors, high-rise office backlit against window, bedroom, kitchen, home garden at night, lift (elevator), moving car interior, indoor car park, night club. It doesn't matter. Yoke Weng Ho exercises total control over each environment.
There's lots of soft light. Everything is clearly seen. There are no blown highlights or muddy shadows. Skin tones are good and light sources look natural (not obviously from off-camera studio light).
There's no ugly greenish tint from fluorescent bulbs, and it looks better than a color grading fix - the colors are rich. Makes me wonder whether they replaced the ceiling lights with high CRI lights. (Even for a short scene in an indoor car park? That's a high level of perfectionism.). All this was shot on an Arri Alexa - the camera that a lot of the big Hollywood movies use.
Camera movements are kept minimal and don't call attention to themselves. One rare miss-step being an extended Steadicam shot at the end. It was unnecessary and distracting.
If there's one weak spot in the movie, it's the use of the classic song Jajambo. It's one of those annoyingly brash songs that gets stuck in your head.
For everything else, director Wi Ding Ho and the rest of the crew and cast, should take a bow.
We follow their misadventures such as Wong coming to terms with the public not caring about Singapore's movie past, Mrs. Wong not getting along with a colleague, Mambo (Michelle Chong) quitting her job as a lawyer and becoming an apprentice chef, Grace (Ethel Yap) dealing with a divorced suitor from China, Rose (Oon Shun An) dating a series of jerks, June (Joey Leong) dating an Indian.
***
Our Sister Mambo is one of the best Singapore films I've seen. Everything works.
The script by Michael Chiang (Army Daze) is tight, flows well and never devolves into melodrama. We get a light-hearted, good-natured peek into the life of the Wong family through the details of their daily life, family squabbles, love life, and professional struggles. Marketed as a rom-com, it's more a comedy/drama. And despite its title, it's not really about Mambo. Equal emphasis is placed on all family members.
There are no boring dead spots. The scenes are short, smart and full of energy. Its all done in Ilo Ilo's show-don't-tell style, but in a more fun and accessible way. However the general public might have the same complaint as they did with Ilo Ilo - But nothing happens!
Cathay's 80th anniversary celebrations (Cathay produced the film) are nicely integrated into the storyline and don't come across as forced or crass (Jack Neo could learn something from this). The same goes for corporate supporters such as DWG (where Mrs. Wong works) and chef Willin Low (Mambo's boss).
Cameos by celebrity blogger Xiaxue, black-and-white movie stars Grace Chang and Dato Maria Manado Abdullah, and the obligatory muhibbah multi-racial supporting characters (Siti Khalijah, Rani Singam), also fit together naturally.
Michelle Chong puts in a nicely restrained performance and doesn't try to steal the show. (Everyone knows that she could have if she had wanted to.) Ethel Yap, Oon Shun An and Joey Leong handle themselves well. Coming across as distinct, realistic, likable personalities.
Moses Lim also gives a nicely toned-down performance compared to his Under One Roof days. Audrey Luo expertly balances her character's brash persona, pushing her to the edge of being unlikable but never quite going over the line.
Lighting by cinematographer Yoke Weng Ho (supported by top-notch color grading) is stunning, better than most Hong Kong and even Hollywood films. It's even more impressive considering that OSM is an urban comedy/drama that has everyday locations for its scenes.
It's almost too pretty. I found myself being distracted by how well each scene was lit.
Outdoors, high-rise office backlit against window, bedroom, kitchen, home garden at night, lift (elevator), moving car interior, indoor car park, night club. It doesn't matter. Yoke Weng Ho exercises total control over each environment.
There's lots of soft light. Everything is clearly seen. There are no blown highlights or muddy shadows. Skin tones are good and light sources look natural (not obviously from off-camera studio light).
There's no ugly greenish tint from fluorescent bulbs, and it looks better than a color grading fix - the colors are rich. Makes me wonder whether they replaced the ceiling lights with high CRI lights. (Even for a short scene in an indoor car park? That's a high level of perfectionism.). All this was shot on an Arri Alexa - the camera that a lot of the big Hollywood movies use.
Camera movements are kept minimal and don't call attention to themselves. One rare miss-step being an extended Steadicam shot at the end. It was unnecessary and distracting.
If there's one weak spot in the movie, it's the use of the classic song Jajambo. It's one of those annoyingly brash songs that gets stuck in your head.
For everything else, director Wi Ding Ho and the rest of the crew and cast, should take a bow.
2015-06-10
Good Kill (2015)
Plot summary (story synopsis): It is 2010. Major Thomas Egan (Ethan Hawke) is an experienced F-16 fighter pilot. He has finished multiple overseas combat tours of duty in America's war on terror. He is now a drone pilot, surrealistically killing Taliban halfway across the globe from the safety of his control station in Nevada, then going home at the end of the day to his suburban home and his wife Molly (January Jones) and kids.
He misses the joy and danger of flying for real and begins to feel guilty over the civilian casualties his missile strikes create. He drinks and his marriage begins to suffer even more than when he was overseas, away from his family for months, flying an F-16.
His boss Lieutenant Colonel Jack Jones (Bruce Greenwood, doing the wise and compassionate leader shtick he did in Star Trek) has no such qualms and handles Egan's drone team with a steady hand. The team includes Zimmer (the hunky Jake Abel) and new pilot Suarez (Zoe Kravitz - Lenny's daughter, who has been getting a lot of plum supporting roles recently - Divergent, Mad Max).
Things become worse when the team works with the CIA to kill suspected Taliban, working based on the CIA's new and looser Rules of Engagement. Their only CIA contact is the mysterious Langley (voiced by Peter Coyote, who sounds deliciously like the late John Forsythe as Charlie) who they only hear over the speaker phone. Morale plummets as the team is forced by Langley to carry out what Suarez considers to be illegal, war crime, strikes.
***
Writer/director Andrew Niccol does mainly SF (Gattaca, In Time, The Host - underrated movie based on Stephenie Meyer's novel with a beautiful performance by Saoirse Ronan) and military (Lord of War) movies, though not military SF. He also wrote but did not direct The Terminal (Tom Hanks is a stateless man stuck in an airport), S1mOne (Pacino in a comedy is a fail) and The Truman Show. Whatever the subject material, he's good at pushing your buttons.
Good Kill is similar to Lord of War (Nicolas Cage is a freelance arms dealer after the collapse of the Soviet Union). Andrew Niccol did a lot of research for Lord of War and wrote a technically accurate and dramatic script (with some over-the-top visuals that work).
He does the same for Good Kill, this time on the US drone war. In Time showed him to be an economics-illiterate bleeding-heart liberal, probably because he didn't feel the need to research economics and just went with his gut. From what little I know about real drone warfare, he has painted a relatively accurate picture (super accurate by Hollywood standards) in Good Kill.
He has obviously researched drone warfare and like Lord of War, Good Kill is technically believable and has a good storyline. Unlike In Time, his handling of the issues is quite balanced, though still left of center.
I do have some complaints. For one thing, no lawyers are shown. I'm pretty sure lawyers are heavily involved in drone operations, and the movie does address legal issues (which the soldiers amateurishly try to figure out on their own).
But overall Andrew Niccol succeeds in pushing his agenda because he plays it cool and almost neutral, not overtly propagandistic. Which is how effective propaganda works. And is probably why the media hasn't made a big fuss over the movie. It's too neutral for them. Both sides of the argument are shown (though I feel there are strong arguments for drone warfare that were not presented).
And like with Lord of War, Andrew Niccol definitely has an agenda. Unfortunately for him, Good Kill has been overtaken by events. Specifically ISIS. After ISIS, you can't convincingly argue that drone strikes are a significant cause of militant Islam (cycle-of-violence theory).
Andrew Niccol uses music well, almost as well as Michael Mann. Gattaca and The Host had effective, evocative and memorable soundtracks. Good Kill is mainly soundtrackless, and that works too. It's an interesting choice.
And like Michael Mann, he also has a strong visual style. Halfway through The Host (I went in not knowing who the director was), I thought, Hey this looks like an Andrew Niccol movie! Like the soundtrack, he has also dialed back the visuals on Good Kill.
He lets the strong New Mexico (standing in for Nevada) desert sunlight dictate most of the look. No fancy Lord of War time-lapses here. Again, it works. A few strong images do stand out. In The Host it was the aliens' mirror-skinned vehicles and elegant white clothes, in Gattaca it was the Art Deco architecture.
In Good Kill, it is the geometric rows of wheeled shipping containers that serve as drone control stations. It's a simple but strangely powerful image that you will not forget.
It's good to see Ethan Hawke in an Andrew Niccol movie again. Bruce Greenwood does his Star Trek fatherly shtick well. January Jones and Zoe Kravitz also handle their roles well, and look pretty while doing so. Jake Abel (who to my surprise has less of a following than Channing Tatum, but then I'm not a teen girl) has a small role as a callous, racist, gung-ho member of Egan's team and is suitably hateful.
The acting is good but it is Andrew Niccol's script that makes the characters come alive.
Langley is the silver-tongued devil with his polished justifications for his morally questionable orders, Suarez is the team's conscience (superego), Zimmer is the ugly American who delights in killing (id), Jones is the adult (ego). Egan is all three - ego, superego, id - rolled into one, the classic Ethan Hawke sensitive new-age hero.
Pay attention to the ending. On the surface it's a feel-good ending. I found it very disturbing. I wonder if Andrew Niccol meant it to be. Other Hollywood directors, I would have assumed that they missed the implications. Not this guy.
He misses the joy and danger of flying for real and begins to feel guilty over the civilian casualties his missile strikes create. He drinks and his marriage begins to suffer even more than when he was overseas, away from his family for months, flying an F-16.
His boss Lieutenant Colonel Jack Jones (Bruce Greenwood, doing the wise and compassionate leader shtick he did in Star Trek) has no such qualms and handles Egan's drone team with a steady hand. The team includes Zimmer (the hunky Jake Abel) and new pilot Suarez (Zoe Kravitz - Lenny's daughter, who has been getting a lot of plum supporting roles recently - Divergent, Mad Max).
Things become worse when the team works with the CIA to kill suspected Taliban, working based on the CIA's new and looser Rules of Engagement. Their only CIA contact is the mysterious Langley (voiced by Peter Coyote, who sounds deliciously like the late John Forsythe as Charlie) who they only hear over the speaker phone. Morale plummets as the team is forced by Langley to carry out what Suarez considers to be illegal, war crime, strikes.
***
Writer/director Andrew Niccol does mainly SF (Gattaca, In Time, The Host - underrated movie based on Stephenie Meyer's novel with a beautiful performance by Saoirse Ronan) and military (Lord of War) movies, though not military SF. He also wrote but did not direct The Terminal (Tom Hanks is a stateless man stuck in an airport), S1mOne (Pacino in a comedy is a fail) and The Truman Show. Whatever the subject material, he's good at pushing your buttons.
Good Kill is similar to Lord of War (Nicolas Cage is a freelance arms dealer after the collapse of the Soviet Union). Andrew Niccol did a lot of research for Lord of War and wrote a technically accurate and dramatic script (with some over-the-top visuals that work).
He does the same for Good Kill, this time on the US drone war. In Time showed him to be an economics-illiterate bleeding-heart liberal, probably because he didn't feel the need to research economics and just went with his gut. From what little I know about real drone warfare, he has painted a relatively accurate picture (super accurate by Hollywood standards) in Good Kill.
He has obviously researched drone warfare and like Lord of War, Good Kill is technically believable and has a good storyline. Unlike In Time, his handling of the issues is quite balanced, though still left of center.
I do have some complaints. For one thing, no lawyers are shown. I'm pretty sure lawyers are heavily involved in drone operations, and the movie does address legal issues (which the soldiers amateurishly try to figure out on their own).
But overall Andrew Niccol succeeds in pushing his agenda because he plays it cool and almost neutral, not overtly propagandistic. Which is how effective propaganda works. And is probably why the media hasn't made a big fuss over the movie. It's too neutral for them. Both sides of the argument are shown (though I feel there are strong arguments for drone warfare that were not presented).
And like with Lord of War, Andrew Niccol definitely has an agenda. Unfortunately for him, Good Kill has been overtaken by events. Specifically ISIS. After ISIS, you can't convincingly argue that drone strikes are a significant cause of militant Islam (cycle-of-violence theory).
Andrew Niccol uses music well, almost as well as Michael Mann. Gattaca and The Host had effective, evocative and memorable soundtracks. Good Kill is mainly soundtrackless, and that works too. It's an interesting choice.
And like Michael Mann, he also has a strong visual style. Halfway through The Host (I went in not knowing who the director was), I thought, Hey this looks like an Andrew Niccol movie! Like the soundtrack, he has also dialed back the visuals on Good Kill.
He lets the strong New Mexico (standing in for Nevada) desert sunlight dictate most of the look. No fancy Lord of War time-lapses here. Again, it works. A few strong images do stand out. In The Host it was the aliens' mirror-skinned vehicles and elegant white clothes, in Gattaca it was the Art Deco architecture.
In Good Kill, it is the geometric rows of wheeled shipping containers that serve as drone control stations. It's a simple but strangely powerful image that you will not forget.
It's good to see Ethan Hawke in an Andrew Niccol movie again. Bruce Greenwood does his Star Trek fatherly shtick well. January Jones and Zoe Kravitz also handle their roles well, and look pretty while doing so. Jake Abel (who to my surprise has less of a following than Channing Tatum, but then I'm not a teen girl) has a small role as a callous, racist, gung-ho member of Egan's team and is suitably hateful.
The acting is good but it is Andrew Niccol's script that makes the characters come alive.
Langley is the silver-tongued devil with his polished justifications for his morally questionable orders, Suarez is the team's conscience (superego), Zimmer is the ugly American who delights in killing (id), Jones is the adult (ego). Egan is all three - ego, superego, id - rolled into one, the classic Ethan Hawke sensitive new-age hero.
Pay attention to the ending. On the surface it's a feel-good ending. I found it very disturbing. I wonder if Andrew Niccol meant it to be. Other Hollywood directors, I would have assumed that they missed the implications. Not this guy.
2015-03-12
Run All Night (2015)
Plot summary (story synopsis): Jimmy Conlon (Liam Neeson) is a drunk has-been mob killer who is estranged from his son Mike (Joel Kinnaman). Mob boss Shawn Maguire (Ed Harris) is Jimmy's boss and childhood friend.
Shawn's no-good son Danny (Boyd Holbrook) gets into trouble and Mike witnesses him killing a man. Danny tries to kill Mike, and Jimmy kills Danny to protect his son.
Shawn swears revenge on Jimmy and Mike. He sets his whole gang on them, including ace hired gun Price (rapper Common), and frames them for multiple murders. The entire New York police force is now after them, including Jimmy's old nemesis, detective Harding (Vincent D'Onofrio, looking more and more like Brian Dennehy).
***
Run All Night is a mix of Road to Perdition, John Wick, and 16 Blocks (underrated Bruce Willis movie). However it's an old-fashioned, macho crime thriller that lacks the stylishness of John Wick or the quotable quotes of Taken.
Story-telling is conventional and effective. You get the character build-ups and arcs (Jimmy begs Danny for money at the start of the movie), with interlocking plot points (for example - the crooked cops are nicely foreshadowed at the start) all neatly tied-up in the end (Jimmy's confession list of his past kills, Mike keeping out of his father's world).
This makes for an engrossing but not enthralling experience. It's no blockbuster but it's certainly worth your time. It doesn't break any new ground (the characters are cliches) but its basics are good. It's as much a character movie as it is an action movie. Jimmy's relationships with Shawn and with his son are believable and don't degenerate into melodrama.
Ed Harris is, as expected, solid as the kind friend and honorable mob boss but vengeful father. Liam Neeson is just as good as the washed-up-and-underestimated-but-still-tough killer with a conscience. Liam Neeson is probably one of today's premier movie tough guys, surpassing even Bruce Willis. Run All Night will add to, but not greatly enhance, his studly superstar image.
On a technical note I found the image quality to be poor. The shadow detail was murky, which is annoying considering that most of the movie takes place at night. Guys, it's 2015. You have no excuse for this.
Ridley Scott fans will want to look out for Bruce McGill as Pat Mullen, Shawn's right-hand man.
2015-02-22
Ah Boys to Men 3: Frogmen (2015)
Plot summary (story synopsis): In an alternate timeline (seriously, this is explained in a voiceover in the movie), the army conscripts in the movie Ah Boys to Men are sent to the Singapore navy's elite Naval Diving Unit (NDU, US Navy SEALs equivalent) instead of the army.
There, they have to survive the tough training, personal conflicts, family problems back home, and finally the dreaded 5-day Hell Week qualification.
***
Writer/director Jack Neo's popular folksy, low-brow, social-commentary, comedy-sketch-based, melodramatic, tell-don't-show, lovable-local-stereotypes, crowd-pleasing style is well known. You either love it or you don't. I won't waste your time criticizing his style in Frogmen except to point out that it is toned down (and therefore less annoying) compared to Ah Boys to Men. Yes, that includes Ken Chow's (Joshua Tan) mother, played by Irene Ang.
What I will do instead is look at Frogmen from a storytelling viewpoint. One fatal flaw in the conception of Frogmen, is the wholesale transfer of the average army conscripts into the elite NDU. It doesn't work.
The "lovable" every-man gang of misfits made sense as generic army conscripts. However it is difficult to believe that such screw-ups are accepted into an elite navy unit. This completely destroys your voluntary suspension of disbelief. Even worse, it gives a false view of the type of men who do join the NDU.
From a dramatic viewpoint, you lose the chance to see the military training of highly-motivated volunteers, instead of your reluctant conscript (if Ken Chow is a skiver, why would he volunteer for a siong special forces unit?). So Frogmen becomes a rehash of the first movie.
Jack Neo should have taken a chance and written in entirely new characters for Frogmen. Instead, he took the easy and safe route by re-using the proven, popular cast from the first movie. (There is one new character in Hei Long (Wesley Wong), a gangster who was brought up in Hong Kong.)
Having made this artistic choice, Jack Neo fails to exploit the audience's familiarity with the characters. Screen time is saved by not having to introduce the characters to the audience. But Jack Neo squanders the saved time by not using it to develop the characters much, except for feeble attempts with Ken Chow, Lobang (Wang Wei Liang) and Hei Long - all in his standard Korean drama style.
Rich-kid Ken Chow's sub plot seems out of place. Lobang's family problems are melodramatic. Hei Long's street gang and parent problems are ridiculous. Aloysius (Maxi Lim) has a satisfying confrontation with bully Hei Long, but the groundwork for it was not properly prepared (Aloysius's surprising reaction is not foreshadowed) and the confrontation therefore feels contrived.
Aside from having misfits enter the NDU, Frogmen further compounds this technical error by having their entire group of 80 men survive and graduate Hell Week. A quick Google search shows that the real pass rate is 30 percent. So instead of showing how tough and elite the NDU is, Jack Neo undersells its selectiveness. It's another missed dramatic opportunity - such a low pass rate would dominate the thoughts and actions of all the men.
Frogmen also doesn't show much about NDU training aside from a first-aid CPR session and a boat-capsize drill. The rest is mainly physical training. While you might not want to publicize any secret techniques, Frogmen doesn't even show the conscripts undergoing scuba diving training (a diving exercise is shown, one that doesn't use scuba equipment). Instead, we only see them as already fully-capable divers at their underwater graduation ceremony. Weapons training? Zero. Communications, navigation, tactics, demolition, escape and evasion, hand-to-hand combat, sky diving, rappelling? Nope.
Bonus gripe: In the action-packed flash-forward at the start of the movie, the terrorists that hijacked a commercial ship and took its crew hostage, are an unnamed group of "international terrorists" whose leader is an American. Nice cop-out to political correctness, Jack.
There, they have to survive the tough training, personal conflicts, family problems back home, and finally the dreaded 5-day Hell Week qualification.
***
Writer/director Jack Neo's popular folksy, low-brow, social-commentary, comedy-sketch-based, melodramatic, tell-don't-show, lovable-local-stereotypes, crowd-pleasing style is well known. You either love it or you don't. I won't waste your time criticizing his style in Frogmen except to point out that it is toned down (and therefore less annoying) compared to Ah Boys to Men. Yes, that includes Ken Chow's (Joshua Tan) mother, played by Irene Ang.
What I will do instead is look at Frogmen from a storytelling viewpoint. One fatal flaw in the conception of Frogmen, is the wholesale transfer of the average army conscripts into the elite NDU. It doesn't work.
The "lovable" every-man gang of misfits made sense as generic army conscripts. However it is difficult to believe that such screw-ups are accepted into an elite navy unit. This completely destroys your voluntary suspension of disbelief. Even worse, it gives a false view of the type of men who do join the NDU.
From a dramatic viewpoint, you lose the chance to see the military training of highly-motivated volunteers, instead of your reluctant conscript (if Ken Chow is a skiver, why would he volunteer for a siong special forces unit?). So Frogmen becomes a rehash of the first movie.
Jack Neo should have taken a chance and written in entirely new characters for Frogmen. Instead, he took the easy and safe route by re-using the proven, popular cast from the first movie. (There is one new character in Hei Long (Wesley Wong), a gangster who was brought up in Hong Kong.)
Having made this artistic choice, Jack Neo fails to exploit the audience's familiarity with the characters. Screen time is saved by not having to introduce the characters to the audience. But Jack Neo squanders the saved time by not using it to develop the characters much, except for feeble attempts with Ken Chow, Lobang (Wang Wei Liang) and Hei Long - all in his standard Korean drama style.
Rich-kid Ken Chow's sub plot seems out of place. Lobang's family problems are melodramatic. Hei Long's street gang and parent problems are ridiculous. Aloysius (Maxi Lim) has a satisfying confrontation with bully Hei Long, but the groundwork for it was not properly prepared (Aloysius's surprising reaction is not foreshadowed) and the confrontation therefore feels contrived.
Aside from having misfits enter the NDU, Frogmen further compounds this technical error by having their entire group of 80 men survive and graduate Hell Week. A quick Google search shows that the real pass rate is 30 percent. So instead of showing how tough and elite the NDU is, Jack Neo undersells its selectiveness. It's another missed dramatic opportunity - such a low pass rate would dominate the thoughts and actions of all the men.
Frogmen also doesn't show much about NDU training aside from a first-aid CPR session and a boat-capsize drill. The rest is mainly physical training. While you might not want to publicize any secret techniques, Frogmen doesn't even show the conscripts undergoing scuba diving training (a diving exercise is shown, one that doesn't use scuba equipment). Instead, we only see them as already fully-capable divers at their underwater graduation ceremony. Weapons training? Zero. Communications, navigation, tactics, demolition, escape and evasion, hand-to-hand combat, sky diving, rappelling? Nope.
Bonus gripe: In the action-packed flash-forward at the start of the movie, the terrorists that hijacked a commercial ship and took its crew hostage, are an unnamed group of "international terrorists" whose leader is an American. Nice cop-out to political correctness, Jack.
Triumph in the Skies (2015)
Entrepreneur/pilot Branson (Louis Koo) has just taken over Skylette Airlines. (Unbelievably) he has the time to fly one of its regular commercial routes, where he bumps into old flame Cassie (Charmaine Sheh) who is a flight attendant on his flight. They continue to bump into each other on subsequent flights and they rekindle their old romance. But will Cassie be able to trust him after he had dumped her in the past?
Meanwhile, Branson tasks his trusted pilot friend, Captain Samuel Tong (Francis Ng), to be the technical consultant for a music video advertising Skylette. The music video stars pop-star TM (real-life pop-star and experienced actress Sammi Cheng). The odd couple find themselves slowly falling for each other.
There's also former Skylette pilot Captain Jayden Koo (Julian Cheung), who now flies private business jets. He meets the lively, care-free, slutty Kika (Amber Kuo) who is hiding a dark secret.
***
Triumph in the Skies is a visually gorgeous but lightweight romance/drama. It's a good way to pass your time but it carries little emotional punch. It's like watching a series of beautiful music videos with adult-oriented pop songs.
It's based on a TVB Hong Kong TV series, which I haven't watched, so I won't be drawing any comparisons with the TV series.
In the movie, nothing much happens. Unlike real show-don't-tell movies like Lost in Translation, Triumph's laid-back style isn't engaging because it's mainly repetition. The three couples go through the same motions over and over again, so we don't learn anything new with each interaction.
The movie is basically an anthology of three short films, only loosely linked together by the Skylette Airline backstory. So you have one third the screen time for each couple, compared to a normal feature. Add the repetitive interactions and you inevitably get a shallow understanding of the characters.
Still, it's one of the most beautiful movies I've seen in a while. Jason Kwan's (The Last Tycoon) cinematography is world-class. A mixture of prime-lens blurred-out-backgrounds, saturated colors and even old-school tobacco graduated filters for the outdoor scenery. Jackie Chan needs to grab this guy for his next movie. The songs aren't too bad either and the six leads look good on screen. If that's good enough for you (and it is for me), by all means go enjoy yourself.
Aside from the visuals, what struck me was how at ease director Wilson Yip (Ip Man) and writer/director Matt Chow were with the England setting of the movie. Instead of showing cliched English landmarks (one exception being the White Cliffs of Dover); they chose quirky, bohemian, hipster locations.
Maybe I'm reading too much into this but I think that shows an insider's cosmopolitan familiarity with England. Sure, they probably used local English location scouts, but the decision to avoid tourist staples must have come from them. They aren't The Jeffersons, needing to show off Chinese wealth ("look ma, we're shooting a movie in front of Buckingham Palace!"). They are comfortable in their own skin, not needing any external validation or token White actors (cough, Jackie Chan, cough). Just like Taiwan's "Cafe. Waiting. Love," this makes me feel that Triumph shows how much some Hong Kong filmmakers grok Western/global culture, consider it their own. They aren't swa koos.
No matter how rich or well-traveled Jackie Chan is, he'll always be a working class hero, his movies lacking the effortless yuppie sensibility of movies such as this.
2014-11-13
Sayang Disayang (2014)
Plot summary (story synopsis): Murni (Aidli Mosbit) is from a small village in Aceh, Indonesia. She works in Singapore as a domestic helper, looking after recently crippled widower Harun (veteran Malaysian actor Rahim Razali).
No matter how hard she tries, she is unable to satisfy the grouchy Harun. He constantly complains about her cooking, especially her sambal belacan - chili fried with shrimp paste and lime.
Will Murni be able to please Harun? And why is he so particular about sambal belacan anyway?
***
Sayang Disayang (love is loved) is Singapore's entry for the 2015 Academy Awards Foreign Language Film. It's not going to win. It's main shortcoming is that it's a short film stretched out to feature length. There isn't enough material for its long run time.
The scenes of Murni pounding chili, and carp swimming, quickly become repetitive. The beautiful gamelan and flute music becomes wearying too.
Just as bad is the lack of clarity in the proceedings. Sayang Disayang does try to use show-don't-tell storytelling technique. However for most of the movie it's not clear that Murni is even trying to modify her cooking to please Harun. We see her cheerfully singing and ignoring Harun's rants, making it look like she doesn't care what he thinks about her cooking.
Her cooking technique looks the same too (at least to me). It's only towards the end of the movie that we notice her doing something different - using a food blender instead of mortar and pestle.
It's not just the shifts in her cooking. Even the changes in her relationship with Harun are not clearly developed. They seem abrupt and unconvincing.
The few side stories are similarly unpolished. Harun's visit to his mosque seems out of place, as are the hints of politicking within the mosque's leadership (I didn't get this part, writer/director Sanif Olek had to explain it to me when I asked him about it after a screening).
Murni imagining her mother talking to her also seems out of place. It is confusingly shown. We don't know who she is at first, and it's not clear if Murni is imagining her or not.
This is Sanif Olek's first feature film (he works as director for TV productions). He shows promise but has a way to go. I don't think the Oscar selection will go to his head. He seems like a sensible, humble guy. I actually feel bad, writing such a negative review. He's a very friendly guy - I met him once at a library talk and once at a Sayang Disayang screening.
No matter how hard she tries, she is unable to satisfy the grouchy Harun. He constantly complains about her cooking, especially her sambal belacan - chili fried with shrimp paste and lime.
Will Murni be able to please Harun? And why is he so particular about sambal belacan anyway?
***
Sayang Disayang (love is loved) is Singapore's entry for the 2015 Academy Awards Foreign Language Film. It's not going to win. It's main shortcoming is that it's a short film stretched out to feature length. There isn't enough material for its long run time.
The scenes of Murni pounding chili, and carp swimming, quickly become repetitive. The beautiful gamelan and flute music becomes wearying too.
Just as bad is the lack of clarity in the proceedings. Sayang Disayang does try to use show-don't-tell storytelling technique. However for most of the movie it's not clear that Murni is even trying to modify her cooking to please Harun. We see her cheerfully singing and ignoring Harun's rants, making it look like she doesn't care what he thinks about her cooking.
Her cooking technique looks the same too (at least to me). It's only towards the end of the movie that we notice her doing something different - using a food blender instead of mortar and pestle.
It's not just the shifts in her cooking. Even the changes in her relationship with Harun are not clearly developed. They seem abrupt and unconvincing.
The few side stories are similarly unpolished. Harun's visit to his mosque seems out of place, as are the hints of politicking within the mosque's leadership (I didn't get this part, writer/director Sanif Olek had to explain it to me when I asked him about it after a screening).
Murni imagining her mother talking to her also seems out of place. It is confusingly shown. We don't know who she is at first, and it's not clear if Murni is imagining her or not.
This is Sanif Olek's first feature film (he works as director for TV productions). He shows promise but has a way to go. I don't think the Oscar selection will go to his head. He seems like a sensible, humble guy. I actually feel bad, writing such a negative review. He's a very friendly guy - I met him once at a library talk and once at a Sayang Disayang screening.
2014-10-25
Laggies (2014)
One day, Anthony proposes to her. Thrown for a loop by this unexpected development (as well as seeing her dad make out with another woman), she ends up hiding from Anthony and her friends. She crashes with Annika (Chloe Grace Moretz) - a teenage girl that she had just met - to get away from her regular life and get her head together.
Annika's single dad Craig (Sam Rockwell) is exasperated by his uninvited guest but soon grows to enjoy the company of the free-spirited Megan. A week passes and Megan has to return to Anthony and her regular life.
***
Laggies is Reality Bites meets Lost in Translation, a movie for today's directionless millenials who are drifting in their career and personal life. Despite its roster of mainstream stars, Laggies is an indie film from indie director Lynn Shelton (it premiered at Sundance 2014) and freshman writer Andrea Seigel.
The movie's trailer highlights the comedic bits, and emphasizes Keira Knightley's scenes with Chloe Grace Moretz and Sam Rockwell. But this is more a light drama with Keira Knightley front and center - Moretz, like Sam Rockwell, plays a supporting character.
And it works, though in an art-film kind of way. We enjoy the journey as we watch Megan bumble through her life and has minor misadventures. But this is the extreme show-don't-tell storytelling technique of Lost in Translation - effective if you're a movie buff, but which will cause the general public to complain, But nothing happens!
An interesting pattern is beginning to emerge from Keira Knigtley's movie choices. Laggies has the same feel (though very different plot) from Begin Again and Seeking a Friend for the End of the World. It's a combination of light romance, light drama and light comedy. All done in a simple, intimate, upper middle-class setting.
Laggies seems to the kind of movie that Keira Knightley makes for fun, in between paycheck blockbusters such as Pirates of the Caribbean and Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit. I'm still not big fan of hers, but considering her track record in choosing scripts, I'll be looking out for her movies.
2014-10-19
The Judge (2014)
Plot summary (story synopsis): Hotshot defense lawyer Hank Palmer (Robert Downey Jr.) returns to his small hometown for his mother's funeral.
He hasn't been home for years because he can't get along with his father Joseph (Robert Duvall) who is a judge there. Hank had crashed a car when he was in school, injuring older brother Glen's (Vincent D'Onofrio, strangely looking like Brian Dennehy) pitching arm and destroying what might have been a promising baseball career. Joseph has never forgiven Hank for his recklessness.
During his few days home, Hank continues to argue with Joseph, but manages to rekindle his friendship with old school sweetheart Samantha Powell (Vera Farmiga).
After the funeral, Joseph is arrested for the hit-and-run murder of a man who had just been released from prison. A man that Joseph had previously sentenced too leniently and had gone on to kill the man's girlfriend.
Hank extends his stay and insists on defending Joseph but Joseph chooses an inexperienced local lawyer instead, thinking that Hank's big-city tactics are dishonest. The local lawyer is no match for prosecutor Dwight Dickham (Billy Bob Thornton) and Joseph is forced to let Hank defend him.
***
The Judge is On Golden Pond meets courtroom drama. It's an engrossing mix that works, with maybe two-thirds family drama and one-third courtroom drama.
The first 30 minutes or so of the movie are all about Hank and his family. It is only after this extended introduction that the courtroom drama kicks in. And even after that, Joseph's legal problems never overshadow Hank's attempts to reconnect with his family and hometown.
There is some detailed and believable legal sparring between Hank and Dwight Dickham, but this serves more to shore up Hank's credentials as a skilled, ruthless lawyer than to serve as the main course.
This means that The Judge is more family drama than courtroom thriller, in spite of what the publicity material might imply.
The script - from Bill Dubuque, writer/director David Dobkin (Jack the Giant Slayer) and Nick Schenk (Gran Torino) - is solid. Despite a 141 minute run time, the movie never feels slow.
The movie has a modern sensibility and avoids cliches. There are few simple resolutions. Father and son do manage to reconcile somewhat, but not fully. Joseph's and Samantha's renewal of their relationship is not fairytale-perfect. It all feels very real.
But the main reason to watch The Judge would be the cast. Robert Downey Jr. is enough for me to want to watch. Robert "I love the smell of napalm in the morning" Duvall too? That moves the needle up to Must Watch. Vera Farmiga, Billy Bob Thornton and Vincent D'Onofrio? Icing on the cake.
Not to be forgotten is cinematographer Janusz Kaminski - Spielberg's go-to guy. Today's standards are so high that you don't need a big name like Kaminski to get great lighting. The reason cinematographer stars like him are significant (at least to me) is that they have the clout to choose their projects, ensuring a certain level of quality in the scripts that they do choose.
Allow me to pat myself on the back for noticing something special about the lighting. I didn't know who the cinematographer was until I saw the end credits, but I did notice that the lighting was good. Soft, directional light, raking the actors' face almost parallel to the planes of their face. This gives a 3D modeling effect. It's a subtle effect. Most people won't notice it.
When I saw that it was Kaminski, I went "woo hoo!" because I was right - someone exceptional had lit the movie. You get beautiful lighting that looks natural. Except maybe for the courtroom. It's too dark. Looks good, but a real courtroom would be nice and bright - flat, ugly lighting.
For another recent example of a star cinematographer at work, look at Dwayne Johnson's Hercules. That's Dante Spinotti's work. He has lit five Michael Mann movies. I also noticed something special about the lighting in Hercules before knowing who the cinematographer was - subtle fill light in the shadows, revealing details of the actors' body and clothes.
The Judge is a good movie, getting a 7.8/10 on IMDB. The strange thing is that it only gets a 45% critics' average on Rotten Tomatoes.
2014-08-26
The Giver (2014)
Plot summary (story synopsis): In the future, a small society lives in peaceful isolation atop a mountain plateau. There is no war, crime or even bad behavior. This is partly maintained by having everyone receive a daily injection of medicine that mutes their emotions. Drones patrol the skies, looking out for misbehavior. A council of Elders makes decisions for everyone. Including what clothes they wear, what time they have to be at home, their occupation and whether or not they receive babies.
Teenager Jonas (Brenton Thwaites) is assigned to be the new Keeper of Memories at his coming-of-age ceremony. Unlike everyone else, he will be exposed to Earth's rich, wonderful, and violent history; so that he can advise the Elders. He receives one-on-one training from The Giver (Jeff Bridges).
Alternately delighted, shocked and overwhelmed by the history of mankind, he illegally shares his knowledge of fun with friend Fiona (Odeya Rush) and sister Lilly (Emma Tremblay). This worries his father (Alexander Skarsgård), mother (a no longer baby-faced Katie Holmes), and Chief Elder (Meryl Streep).
Jonas then realizes the horrific truth behind his ostensibly peaceful society, and decides to leave.
***
The Giver is a decent but unremarkable mix of THX-1138 (medicated, docile population) and Pleasantville (young rebel brings emotions to repressed Stepford Wives society). You can also throw in Logan's Run - secret euthanasia, and a reverse of The Village - high tech instead low tech road to paradise. Unfortunately The Giver is inferior to all of these movies.
Its plot is linear, with no major surprises - you can pretty much guess what is going to happen next, including the ending. Worse, its futuristic society is badly thought out and does not withstand serious scrutiny.
Based on the Young Adult novel by Lois Lowry, the movie has a target teen audience that probably won't mind. But it lacks the star power and action of Hunger Games or even Divergent. It probably isn't going to pull in much of a crowd. I have seen zero marketing for it. The first I heard of it was when a friend recommended it to me. Looks like the Weinstein Company isn't betting heavily on it.
The Giver's schmaltzy emotionalism and shallow social commentary is worthy of Andrew Niccol (Gattaca, The Host) but lacks Niccol's refined touch and glossy visuals. It looks more like a TV movie.
The cast is not the problem, with Brenton Thwaites and Odeya Rush looking good on screen and managing to gain the audience's sympathy. Jeff Bridges is convincing as the troubled, gentle and wise Giver. It's the sort of role he can play in his sleep. Meryl Streep is a bit understated as the evil Chief Elder, but then she usually is.
Verisimilitude and the voluntary suspension of disbelief, are big deals to me. The Giver fails in this because little thought was spent on designing a realistic scenario for its future society.
It falls into the common science fiction trap of having all sorts of cool futuristic gadgets, but lacks a population that is large enough to sustain the industries necessary to produce them. From the aerial shot of the settlement, there are at most 100,000 people (probably closer to 10,000) living in isolation. Yet they have electric bikes, drones, holographic projectors, solar panels - all the normal cliches of a futuristic society.
They also live in seemingly self-sufficient economic autarky, not needing to trade with anyone for raw materials or food.
SPOILERS AHEAD
Okay, let's accept the society as a given. Even then, the plot is full of holes. Why does passing the Border of Memory, automatically zap people with emotions and mankind's lost memories? Especially since they are still on medication? Why haven't any outsiders ventured into the border, or even right up to the settlement?
The best stories work because they are believable. Force-fitting a morality play onto an arbitrary science fiction future world isn't going to cut it. Director Phillip Noyce (Salt, Patriot Games, Rabbit-Proof Fence) should have passed on the script.
2014-08-03
The White Haired Witch of Lunar Kingdom (2014)
Jade Raksha is part of the gang of irregulars that holds Lunar Fort, a small but strategic border outpost that controls a mountainous trail between the Han (Chinese) and Jin armies.
Traitorous general Jin Duyi (Vincent Zhao) kills the Governor (who is also Zhuo Yihang's grandfather) during a skirmish with Jade Raksha, and frames her for the murder.
Meanwhile, the red pills turn out to be poisonous and Zhuo Yihang is blamed for the emperor's death. He ends up in Lunar Fort, where he uses his medicinal skills to stop a typhoid outbreak, furthering his friendship with Jade Raksha along the way.
Some political intrigues later, Jin Duyi takes over Lunar Fort by treachery and holds Zhuo Yihang prisoner. Jade Raksha comes to his rescue but is captured too. There is a spell she can cast to break free, but only at a terrible personal cost.
***
Chinese movies are like a box of chocolates. With WHWLK, what you get is an odd mix of political intrigue, action-adventure and romance. The first two thirds of the movie is a disjointed mix of events that aren't really interesting, convincing, or integrated well with each other.
It's only in the third act, the fight at Lunar Fort, that the movie finally gets into gear. But it's too little, too late. It doesn't help that Lunar Fort itself, looks like a cheap stage set.
There are some interesting details of imperial Chinese customs - the red pills, "top scholar cookies" from the chief eunuch. But without an engrossing plot, these stand out more as curiosities and don't really make you feel like you are stepping into ancient China.
The wirework flying kung fu and slashing sword fights are okay, I guess. Quite standard, not too shabby, but not particularly outstanding either. There are battle scenes with hundreds of armored infantry, that do help to establish an epic scope, but what we are really interested in is the relationship between Zhuo Yihang and Jade Raksha, and there's precious little of that.
Acting is decent, given the limitations of the script. I'm not a Fan Bing Bing fan but she looks pretty good here.
Most reviewers seem to prefer Ronny Yu's 1993 version, The Bride With White Hair, which starred Brigitte Lin and Leslie Cheung. I haven't seen that movie.
If you want to watch a Chinese kung fu historical romance, I'd suggest 2012's Painted Skin: The Resurrection, instead. (http://pisang-movie-recommendations.blogspot.com/2012/07/painted-skin-resurrection-2012.html)
2014-07-10
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014)
The humans are running low on fuel. Malcolm (Jason Clarke) leads an expedition into the forest to restart a hydroelectric power generator. They stumble onto some apes and shoot one out of fear. An enraged Caesar lets them go but warns them to never come back.
Desperate for electricity, Malcolm returns and manages to convince Caesar to allow the humans to restart the power generator. Koba (Toby Kebbell) still hates the humans from his years in captivity, and tries to convince Caesar to stop cooperating with the humans. Caesar refuses to change his mind, causing Koba to take matters into his own hands.
***
Dawn is an entertaining but ultimately shallow sequel to 2011's Rise of the Planet of the Apes. The characters are just as rich and sympathetic as Rise's, making it an engaging drama, but not much more.
There's a new director - Matt Reeves (Cloverfield, Let Me In, Felicity) replaces Rupert Wyatt. But Rise's writers Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver, together with new writer Mark Bomback (Live Free or Die Hard), worked on Dawn too. This probably accounts for the continuity in feel from the first movie. If you liked Rise, you'll like Dawn.
Most people would classify Dawn as a science fiction action/adventure but it's more of a drama. It's about Caesar as the non-violent leader, reluctantly dragged into war. It's a character study. It's a good character study, but that doesn't change the fact that the movie is not really about apes.
One test of a "real" science fiction story, is to take out the science fiction element and then see if the story still works. Dawn still works as a story if the apes were replaced by an oppressed racial minority. That's because the story doesn't explore the consequences of intelligent apes - for example how apes come to terms with human technology, or how apes regard their less intelligent predecessors, or how apes relate to their former masters (Dawn touches on this shallowly), or how presumably inferior apes could defeat humans (the two sides fight, but again, the apes could be replaced by a racial minority and the story would be the same).
Like too many movies, Dawn uses its post-apocalyptic premise mainly as cool background. It doesn't think through its ramifications and the scenarios are not convincing:
- They need electricity mainly to power their radio, to contact other survivors. You need at most a few kilowatts for that. You can get that from a single car engine - which they do have. You don't need a freaking hydroelectric dam. That's megawatts.
- You can't so easily restart a hydroelectric power station that has been abandoned for 10 years. It's not just the power station. The electrical distribution system to the city will also be a complicated mess.
- They can't run their cars on methanol or ethanol? Sure, ethanol corrodes some engine parts, but this is fixable. Or at least address this option in the story.
- The human survivors are shown crowded in a few large buildings. They aren't out in the fields, growing food or hunting animals or scavenging for leftover technology?
- The apes are shown to easily start using guns, even out-shooting the humans. All without any training. In reality, even untrained humans will have difficulty shooting straight and keeping their guns working. Yet Koba is shown expertly shooting his automatic rifle in short bursts (without being startled by the sound or recoil), and switching to single-shot (semi automatic) mode when necessary.
It's not just this lack of science fiction and technical rigor that makes Dawn feel shallow. There is no arc for the characters. The good guys (both ape and human) are consistently good, and the bad guys (both ape and human) are consistently bad. Even Dreyfus, who acts more unexpectedly than the other characters, doesn't change in the course of the movie.
Call it a formula if you will, but this lack of a character arc makes Dawn feel like a kiddie movie. Caesar is an interesting character. The audience is kept wondering whether or not he will turn to the dark side. But in the end Caesar's big insight is that apes are too much like humans - they can be evil and violent too. That's trite.
I'm not saying that Caesar should have turned to the dark side. I'm saying that at least one of the characters should have changed.
Don't get me wrong. This is an entertaining movie. But it mainly engages your heart, not your head.
Visuals from Director of Photography Michael Seresin (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, Mercury Rising) and Production Designer James Chinlund (The Avengers) are good - the ruined buildings where the humans hide out, the apes' peaceful hillside village.
Andy Serkis is fun to watch as the brooding Caesar. Jason Clarke is also convincing as the decent, brave, pacifist Malcolm. But he's too plain vanilla. He's like some mild-mannered TV sitcom dad. Too unbelievably nice.
Dawn is mainly about these two and their relationship of trust. Keri Russell (Felicity) makes an appearance as Malcolm's girlfriend, but she's barely supporting cast. Gary Oldman, also in a small role, is as good as always but he doesn't have much to do.
Rise was released 3 years ago. I liked it, but I'll have to admit that I don't remember the details. Did the apes ride horses at the end? I can't remember. They do ride horses in Dawn, which is cool because one of the strongest images from the old Charlton Heston Planet of the Apes movie, is apes riding on horses.
2014-07-03
Begin Again (2014)
Plot summary (story synopsis): Talented songwriter Greta (Keira Knightley - Pirates of the Caribbean, King Arthur, Atonement, Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit) doesn't take her work seriously, preferring to live in the shadow of her famous singer boyfriend Dave (Adam Levine - Maroon 5's lead singer). They break up after she finds out that he had an affair.
Meanwhile, formerly-successful music producer Dan (Mark Ruffalo - Bruce Banner in The Avengers) is fired from the recording label that he started. He is divorced from Miriam (Catherine Keener - Being John Malkovich, Captain Phillips) and living in a rundown apartment.
He stumbles across Greta singing one of her songs in a bar and is impressed by her talent. He tries to sign her up, but his former boss Saul (Mos Def - 16 Blocks, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy) back at his old label wants them to record a demo tape first.
Low on cash, Dan decides to use volunteer musicians, and record along New York's streets to make use of their ambient sound instead of renting a studio. Over the course of a few days, Dan and Greta get to know each other better as they record the demo album, roping in Dan's daughter Violet (Hailee Steinfeld - True Grit, Ender's Game, 3 Days to Kill) to play guitar.
***
Begin Again is an effective mix of Before Sunrise and The Commitments. It's a slow but entertaining show-don't-tell love story with some decent music, shot against the backdrop of the less glamorous part of New York. A part that isn't often seen in movies. We see the cosy backstreets New York, with the Empire State Building being the only major landmark shown.
The story sounds a lot like Once, writer/director John Carney's 2006 movie, which I haven't seen.
Mark Ruffalo is convincing as the down-and-out producer. Keira Knightley is even better as the sweet but tough, perceptive and talented songwriter. This is one of her best roles. I haven't been a fan in the past - she's competent, but there's something missing. However this movie might have changed my mind. The supporting cast, as might be expected from their past work, is excellent.
The chemistry between the two leads, works. John Carney's script allows them to believably get to know each other. Their interactions don't feel fake or forced. Most of it is low-key. There are a few dramatic moments but these aren't melodramatic or overwrought.
It's less "talkie" than Before Sunrise, closer to Lost in Translation's casual unhurried approach. It lacks Lost in Translation's mesmerizing dreamlike atmosphere but it's still a pleasant ride for the audience.
Like Before Sunrise, the ending isn't a conventionally romantic one and might not satisfy the general public that likes neat endings. Hopefully, like Before Sunrise, there will be a sequel too.
Meanwhile, formerly-successful music producer Dan (Mark Ruffalo - Bruce Banner in The Avengers) is fired from the recording label that he started. He is divorced from Miriam (Catherine Keener - Being John Malkovich, Captain Phillips) and living in a rundown apartment.
He stumbles across Greta singing one of her songs in a bar and is impressed by her talent. He tries to sign her up, but his former boss Saul (Mos Def - 16 Blocks, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy) back at his old label wants them to record a demo tape first.
Low on cash, Dan decides to use volunteer musicians, and record along New York's streets to make use of their ambient sound instead of renting a studio. Over the course of a few days, Dan and Greta get to know each other better as they record the demo album, roping in Dan's daughter Violet (Hailee Steinfeld - True Grit, Ender's Game, 3 Days to Kill) to play guitar.
***
Begin Again is an effective mix of Before Sunrise and The Commitments. It's a slow but entertaining show-don't-tell love story with some decent music, shot against the backdrop of the less glamorous part of New York. A part that isn't often seen in movies. We see the cosy backstreets New York, with the Empire State Building being the only major landmark shown.
The story sounds a lot like Once, writer/director John Carney's 2006 movie, which I haven't seen.
Mark Ruffalo is convincing as the down-and-out producer. Keira Knightley is even better as the sweet but tough, perceptive and talented songwriter. This is one of her best roles. I haven't been a fan in the past - she's competent, but there's something missing. However this movie might have changed my mind. The supporting cast, as might be expected from their past work, is excellent.
The chemistry between the two leads, works. John Carney's script allows them to believably get to know each other. Their interactions don't feel fake or forced. Most of it is low-key. There are a few dramatic moments but these aren't melodramatic or overwrought.
It's less "talkie" than Before Sunrise, closer to Lost in Translation's casual unhurried approach. It lacks Lost in Translation's mesmerizing dreamlike atmosphere but it's still a pleasant ride for the audience.
Like Before Sunrise, the ending isn't a conventionally romantic one and might not satisfy the general public that likes neat endings. Hopefully, like Before Sunrise, there will be a sequel too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
