Change Your Image
ckrebs-1
Reviews
What a Girl Wants (2003)
So bad it isn't even funny
This must be one of the worst movies I have ever seen. It is a shame that Colin Firth agreed to appear in it, although at least we came to see a lesser known part of him: that of the leather-clad arm-swinging Angus-Young-style-jumping former rock musician.
Sorry, but Amanda Bynes can't act. This would not be so noticeable in your average teen flick; the problem here is that her "charm" supposedly makes her be the object of attraction for a whole bunch of lads - even a cranky old princess gets fond of her, although the lady seems to like no one else, apart from her lapdog. Mmm...
I immediately distrust any movie in which the transformation of a character is shown not by virtue of the plot or acting skills, but simply by a change of wardrobe and hairstyle. Scene #1: Amanda Bynes in jeans and T-shirt - the "free, fun and relaxed" teenager. Scene #2: Amanda Bynes in long evening dress - the composed young miss with a circumspect expression on her face. She has changed! Has she? Mmm...
This brings to mind a previous comment by another user: "why does Amanda Bynes insist on one of those crap 'dancing like a berk while trying on clothes' montage scenes in every film she's ever made?" Yes, in fact, why are these 'trying on clothes' scenes in so many teenage films? Probably it has to do with the 'transformation of character' I mentioned before: the theory of filmmakers is that, as a teenager, you express yourself through what you wear. And since teenagers are still building their personality, this is symbolized with rapid, successive changes of clothes. Convinced? OK, right, maybe it is just because you need 90 minutes of film and only have material for 80.
Oh, and those awful "everything fits perfectly" parts of the plot: mom appears at the ball exactly when she has to, perfectly dressed for the occasion; sudden boyfriend Ian is ubiquitous and has 'chosen' to perform all kinds of low-profile jobs, although he attended the best schools and therefore (very convenient) has at least a piece of the necessary substratum to be rightfully considered a peer by "Britain's snobbish upper class"; etc.
Better see something else.
Le roi et l'oiseau (1980)
Truly unforgettable
I saw this movie only once in a cinema, as a child, shortly after it was released. I still remembered scenes and bits of it more than 20 years later! I recall feeling particularly moved by the poor people kept captive underground, which evidences that children's stories must not necessarily be devoid of suffering and injustice. On the contrary: this kind of plot may feed children's sense of indignation and thus ultimately contribute to a better world.
This film is one of those rare pieces of art that are a true explosion of fantasy that will capture a child's imagination completely, combined with an underlying message that will also fascinate adults.
I bought the superbly produced "Édition Collector 2 DVD" set (Zone 2) through Amazon France about a year ago and it has become one of the favorite movies of my 5-year-old son, too, although neither of us speaks a word of French...
Open Water (2003)
Fear of the unknown... the worst kind!
I found this movie to be very well written, directed and acted. Perhaps the best proof of the movie's quality is that it completely grabs your attention despite the fact that it is filmed in DV format. We are so accustomed to celluloid that during the first few minutes you feel a little distant watching it. In fact, at the start I discovered myself deliberately trying to concentrate on the plot regardless of the home movie atmosphere (although the images are very beautiful and the image quality fabulous). Very soon, however, no effort at all was needed anymore. And that is surely what makes great movies (and novels likewise) great: you forget the format and directly suck in the substance. And an excellent substance it was! I could truly relate to both characters and am sure that I would have gone through very similar reactions and phases.
The fear in that situation must have been terrible, because you do not know at all what to expect: are the people of the boat aware of the fact that you are missing or not? Are they already looking for you? Are the sharks really to be feared or is this mostly a myth? Are you drifting away rapidly in the ocean's currents? Should you try to swim or stay still? And then, at some point, you actually have to start asking yourself: are you really in a situation that could pose a threat to your life? This sort of situation has become so rare in our lifestyles that it must be very shocking to be forced to face such questions.
In my opinion, the details and editing of the movie, the choice of what is shown and what not, very much contributed to the sense of fear. In this regard, a "water movie" is perfect, because you can either look at what is going on above or below the surface, but not at both at the same time. And, as Susan puts it at some point, it is hard to say what is worse: to see or not being able to see all that is happening around you. A scene very well done in this respect was (perhaps some will find this disgusting) when Susan vomits in the water after getting seasick. We do not see her, but Daniel instead, who at that moment is diving around her. Suddenly, the very clear water in which he is swimming under the surface changes, and you (as must have Daniel) immediately ask yourself: what is wrong? Where did this come from? A perfect example of how a minor incident, adequately treated, can become a significant part of the mood of the story.
Highly recommended. Had very good newspaper reviews in Chile, by the way.
A High Wind in Jamaica (1965)
Thank God for the Internet!
As many times before, the IMDb has proven to be such a valuable resource. Like others who have written their comments here, I also saw this movie as a child and could never forget it. Besides, I fell completely in love with the little girl's character and somehow retained the actress's name in my memory for over 20 years: Deborah Baxter. In fact, that is how I found the movie again, because I had completely forgotten its title. The only other actor I remembered for sure was Anthony Quinn, so I began looking at the casts of all of his films whose title suggested pirates or ocean, until I arrived here and --to my own astonishment-- discovered that my memory had not failed me: the girl's name actually is Deborah Baxter! It seems that she only ever acted in two movies; what became of her? Anyway, I am happy to announce here that the movie has finally been released on DVD. I'm definitely buying it.
Magnolia (1999)
A fundamental film about the fundamental things
(Warning: this comment contains spoilers)
It has been a good many months now since I saw this movie, a circumstance that I find interesting after having read other user's comments, which often mention aspects of the plot that I had forgotten. Time tends to extract the details from our memory, and to leave behind only the fundamentals. And the fundamental aspects of this movie that I distinctly remember, and which --in my opinion-- make it such a valuable movie, are:
It is deeply moving. This is a rare quality nowadays, when movies are so filled with visual effects and noise, in a desperate effort to thrill and catch the viewer's attention, that they are achieving quite the opposite effect: the audience gets number every day. 'Magnolia' is everything about humans and humanity, and precisely this is what makes it so interesting. I remember sitting and watching it without even breathing, as if I had been in a trance. I did not 'notice' the three hours at all!
It has wonderful music. Apart from the songs, I liked the constant background music very much. It helped building up a wall of tension, which kept growing and growing during the entire movie, parallel with the development of the character's conflicts -- until it reaches a point when heaven falls down in the form of frogs.
It is one of the most religious films ever. There may be some who like this aspect, and some who don't; as may be some who see the movie in this way, and some who don't. But I think that religion is everywhere in this movie, in every effort of the characters to overcome their worries and find true love (they are ALL in search of it, not just William H. Macey, who says so aloud), and of course in the symbolic 'frog rain'. Religion isn't really about intolerance and prejudice: it has to do with the search for happiness, the urge for transcendency -- and, yes, with morality, which in the end is nothing more than choosing 'good' over 'bad'. Why, if not for moral reasons, would Julianne Moore's character cry over the fact that she had 'had other men's c***s in my mouth'? After finding the love she had been searching for with whom she less expected --her own husband-- she repented for her past actions. And since such past actions obviously had been pleasurable, the one reason for repenting was a spiritual comparison between sheer sexual pleasure and the deeper joy of true love. I found this moral framework in Anderson's 'Boogie Nights', too: near the end, a title appears, which read something like 'the final step on the long way down' (I don't remember the exact wording anymore). But this little hint clearly revealed that Anderson is, indeed, very aware of what is 'up' and what is 'down'. Many people might say that there is no objective 'good' and 'bad', but I think that, if one sits down quietly (hard nowadays) and looks down to the bottom of one's soul, the difference will become evident -- and (maybe surprisingly to some) such conclusions will not differ that much from one person to another. For me, 'Magnolia' is in its entirety about a soul-search of this kind.
It is a desperate movie. This is the one word that comes to my mind when trying to describe the film: 'desperate'. Everybody is drowning in remorse, in guilt, in fear, in the unbearable desire of breaking loose from pain and finding peace of mind. I felt like being on a ship that is fighting all the way through a thunderstorm, trying to arrive at a sunny, warm and quiet harbour (again a religious metaphor?). Maybe this is why it rains so much all the time.
It has an encouraging ending. Unlike what some viewers think, this movie has a very clear ending. It doesn't just unexpectedly come to a halt. I experienced it like this: after the tension of the plot has raised to an almost unbearable point, the frogs start falling out of the sky. For me, this represented the turning point, the purging punishment for everybody's sins, after which one can start anew. The slowly developing smile on Claudia's face (the last scene) is nothing but a sign of hope. After all, if it wasn't for hope, would the world still be worth living in, with all of its troubles?
I sincerely wish to congratulate and thank Mr. Anderson for bringing out such an excellent film. It touched my very soul.