There’s nothing humorous abou…

There’s nothing humorous about the plight of an ordinary family fleeing a
German-occupied Paris in “Strayed,” a disturbing drama about the dehumanizing
and humiliating effects of war. A mother, Odile (the beauteous Emmanuelle
Beart), loses her husband on the battlefield, leaving her alone to care for a
7-year-old daughter and 13-year-old son.

When Germans bomb the refugees’ route, Odile, with the instincts of a
lioness protecting her cubs, grabs her kids and heads for the woods. Along the
way, she joins forces with a stranger, Yvan (the charismatic Gaspard Ulliel),
just a few years older than her son. Yvan breaks into an opulent abandoned
house and persuades her to move in. Their idyllic stay amidst immense
destruction and loss of life is reminiscent of “The English Patient.” Odile
is alternately attracted and repelled by her odd protector, a wild child who
can neither read nor write but is expert at scavenging food to keep everybody
alive. Yvan’s intense craving for a family to belong to scares her. “Strayed”
appears to stray off course when Odile allows this 17-year-old delinquent, who
has shown hints of a violent temperament, to make love to her. Her behavior
seems contrary to the movie’s portrayal of Odile as practical and emotionally
balanced. But then, wartime is known to necessitate odd entanglements, and
perhaps this is meant to be one of them.

Most of the film is set in a confined space, the house and its immediate
environs. But in the hands of French director Andre Techine (”Les Voleurs,”
“Wild Reeds”), “Strayed” never feels claustrophobic. The kids have free rein
of the place and turn it into their personal playground.

Had “Strayed” been made in Hollywood, Odile surely would have rummaged
through the closets and come up with numerous glamorous changes of clothes.
But Beart wanders through the entire movie in the same simple blouse and skirt,
looking increasingly rumpled as keeping up appearances becomes pointless.
With a face like hers, it hardly matters what she wears.

Beart, a versatile French actress known in this country mostly for her
forgettable role in “Mission: Impossible,” brings an intelligence and
watchfulness to her characterization of Odile. She’s always on the alert for
danger. Ulliel, an up-and-comer last seen in “Brotherhood of the Wolf,” holds
his own opposite Beart. His able portrayal of Yvan suggests why Odile might be
physically attracted to him, even though he’s a suspicious character.

With searing images of distressed families of American soldiers killed in
Iraq on TV almost daily, “Strayed” is another poignant reminder of war’s
innocent victims.

– Advisory: This film contains scenes of violence and sexuality.

– Ruthe Stein



———————————-

‘Since Otar Left’

POLITE APPLAUSE

Drama. Starring Esther Gorintin, Nino Khomassouridze, Dinara Droukarova.
Directed by Julie Bertuccelli. Written by Bertuccelli, Bernard Renucci and
Roger Bohbot. (Not rated. 102 minutes. In French, Russian and Georgian with
English subtitles. At the Opera Plaza, Rafael and Shattuck in Berkeley).



A moving family drama set in the former Soviet republic of Georgia,
“Since Otar Left” yields emotional truths while exploring an elaborate ruse.

The subterfuge involves the death of a beloved son, a Georgian doctor
forced to work construction in Paris. His sister and niece hide news of his
fatal accident from matriarch Eka (played by the wonderful 90-year-old actress
Esther Gorintin) for fear it would be too much to bear.

If the premise is similar to that of the comedy “Goodbye, Lenin!” the
execution is not. Otar’s death is doubly tragic because of what he represented.
He was the only member of a clan of Francophiles to make it to the City of
Light and away from the Georgian capital of Tbilisi, where the electricity
works about half the time.

Eka’s daughter and granddaughter forge letters from Otar, one explaining
that he no longer has a phone. The lies might be more transparent were Eka not
so accustomed to deception. Defending Stalin, she claims: “(He) never ordered
the death of anyone; I can prove it!” Stooped with age but vivid of
expression, Gorintin keeps us guessing whether the old woman truly believes
the lies. The daughter, rendered as a harried cynic by actress Nino
Khomassouridze, scratches out a living working at the post office and selling
trinkets at a street market. Children who stick around as caretakers rarely
fare as well in parents’ eyes as those who leave, and resentment at her
mother’s esteem for Otar has hardened her. Yet she breaks down at news of his
death, and lies to her mother because she cares so deeply about her.

Director Julie Bertuccelli trains her camera on the actresses’ faces for
long moments, revealing an intense mother-daughter bond beneath the everyday
bickering. A moment where the daughter tickles her mother’s feet bursts with
spontaneity and affection.

Bertuccelli’s admiring shots of Tbilisi’s cobblestone streets and
decaying but magnificent buildings underscore a resilience of hope within a
hardscrabble existence. As the granddaughter, actress Dinara Droukarova
embodies that hope. Intelligent yet sentimental, the young woman resists her
mother’s pragmatism and dreams of a life for herself in Paris. For her, Otar’s
death is less a cautionary tale than a reminder that life is too short for
complacency. Her uncle might have died, but he died in France.

– Advisory: This film contains raw language, sexual situations.

– Carla Meyer



———————————-

‘People I Know’

ALERT VIEWER

Drama. Starring Al Pacino, Kim Basinger, Tea Leoni and Ryan O’Neal.
Directed by Dan Algrant. (R. 100 minutes. At the Roxie.)



On paper, “People I Know” is the kind of movie that makes discriminating
filmgoers — people I know, for instance — salivate in anticipation. The
story sounds like a contemporary “Sweet Smell of Success” with Al Pacino in
the Tony Curtis role of a Manhattan publicist who sinks to the lowest depths
to placate his celebrity clients. Sophisticated playwright Jon Robin Baitz
(”The Substance of Fire,” “Three Hotels”) wrote the script, holding out the
promise of literate dialogue rarely heard onscreen anymore.

Eli (Pacino) does talk incessantly, often lamenting how he’s sold out, as
do the people he encounters, including a movie star (Ryan O’Neal) given the
name Cary (presumably to recall that other Cary) and his drug-addict lover
Jilli (Tea Leoni). But the lines never lift off the page to convey anything
resembling real emotions.

Ultimately, their chatter becomes tiresome and you want to yell, like
Eliza in “My Fair Lady,” “Words, words, words — I’m so sick of words!”

The movie is weighted down with an excess of plot points that fail to
coalesce. Cary, who has political aspirations (shades of Arnold), hires Eli to
make Jilli go away. The publicist feeds her anti-anxiety pills, an array of
which he partakes of himself. In a scene reminiscent of the eerie party in
“Eyes Wide Shut” without the masks, Jilli takes him to a den of iniquity
frequented by every big shot Eli has invited to attend a civil rights dinner
the next night.

Shortly afterward, Eli witnesses a murder, but he is in such a stupor
that the whole thing becomes a blur, and he continues his arm-twisting to get
the right people to his fund-raiser as if nothing had happened. His hustling
is limited by fading health and the fact that Eli, with his preference for
living in the past, refuses to carry a cell phone.

Pacino is magnetic, as always, and the film’s strength is his poignant
portrayal of an embittered man caught up in self-loathing, yet still clinging
to the only life he knows. However, it’s distracting to hear him talk with a
Southern accent. An explanation is belatedly provided — this supposedly
quintessential New Yorker grew up in Georgia.

O’Neal, Leoni and Kim Basinger, as Eli’s widowed sister-in-law who offers
him the possibility of another kind of existence, acquit themselves well in
small roles.

Fine acting can’t bring “People I Know” to life. The movie, hardly an
audience pleaser, was more or less dumped by its distributor, Miramax, after a
brief run in New York and Los Angeles. That’s why it’s playing at the Roxie,
which rarely gets a first crack at anything starring Pacino.

– Advisory: This film contains sexual content and drug use.

– Ruthe Stein



———————————-

‘Imelda’

POLITE APPLAUSE

Documentary. Directed by Ramona S. Diaz. (Not rated. 103 minutes. At the
Lumiere and Shattuck in Berkeley.)



Imelda Marcos claims Gen. Douglas MacArthur as her talent scout, and
given the extraordinary access she had to power and powerful men, who’s to
dispute her? As she tells it in the fascinating and impressively balanced
documentary
“Imelda,” she met the military hero, as flamboyant in his way as
she is in hers, when he reclaimed the Philippines from the Japanese during
World War II. Upon hearing her sing — something she does quite a bit of in
the film, demonstrating a sweet voice in sharp contrast to her shrill image –

MacArthur insisted she perform for Irving Berlin.

“I sang ‘God Bless the Philippines,’ ” Marcos relates, smiling into the
camera. When the songwriter told her she got the lyrics wrong, “I said, ‘But
Mr. Berlin, what’s the difference between America and the Philippines?’ ”

The irony of that question seems lost on the documentary’s subject, her
country’s first lady during the years the U.S. government propped up Ferdinand
Marcos’ dictatorial regime. Imelda still doesn’t seem to get why their
influential friends deserted them after her husband was forced out by a
popular uprising in 1986 and the couple was accused of human rights abuses and
of absconding with hundreds of millions of dollars in government funds.

Her naivete is part of what makes “Imelda,” directed by award-winning
documentary filmmaker Ramona S. Diaz, so spellbinding. Can anybody really be
as out of it as Marcos appears? She babbles on about the wonderful things she
did for the people in the provinces, such as spending twice as long dressing
for them as for dignitaries “because these poor people needed a model.”

Meanwhile the havoc wrought by the Marcoses is related in on-screen
interviews with witnesses such as former U.S. ambassador to the Philippines
Stephen Bosworth and former foreign correspondent Phil Bronstein (now editor
of The Chronicle).

Marcos, who held several posts, including governor of Manila, was no
innocent bystander. She was blamed for the deaths of at least 20 construction
workers when the scaffolding collapsed on a film festival center she had
ordered built in record time, believing that a Manila International Film
Festival would rival Cannes.

Either Marcos still suffers from delusions or she’s an actress of such
extraordinary skill she could win a festival prize. To this day, she sees her
shoe collection, estimated at 3,000 pairs, as a source of pride. She’s heard
in the film bragging about a poster that says “There’s a Little Imelda in All
of Us,” which she claims hangs in some of the best closets.

In a scene that belongs on “Six Feet Under,” she sits by her husband’s
embalmed body, explaining how she ordered the gray removed from his hair so he
would look younger than he did in life. She professes her love for this man,
whose philandering embarrassed her in the early years of their marriage, but
who provided a glamorous life for which she remains nostalgic. The couple was
narcissistic enough to have documented their lavish parties, footage from
which is shown in “Imelda.” So, we have the sight of George Hamilton aboard
the Marcoses’ yacht, serenading his hostess, attired in one of her hundreds of
chiffon gowns resembling prom dresses and, of course, matching shoes. “I can’t
give you anything but love, Imelda,” the perennially tan actor croons. Irving
Berlin couldn’t have put it better.

– Ruthe Stein

Ben-Hur - A Tale of the Christ review


“Ben-Hur” (1959):
When one considers the term “epic” in relation to moving pictures, one may think of “Gone With the Wind,” “The Ten Commandments,” “Spartacus,” “El Cid,” “Lawrence of Arabia,” or even the more-recent “Gladiator.” But, certainly, no more epic show was ever created for the screen than William Wyler’s 1959 movie of “Ben-Hur.” At the time, it was the most expensive flicks ever made, and its rewards were not no greater than to become a fight-department smash but to earn a record-breaking eleven Academy Awards, including Best Personification, Best Superintendent (Wyler), and Best Actor (Charlton Heston).

Its first release on DVD was something of a record setter, too, being one of the lengthiest and widest films ever transferred to the unusual medium. Successfully, guess what: The new “Four-Disc Collector’s Edition” is self-possessed wider and speculator transferred than in the vanguard, and it comes with far more bonuses. A total film experience becomes a head DVD achievement all the way almost.

Published as a novel in 1880 and subtitled “A Tale of the Christ,” General Lew Wallace’s “Ben-Hur” was at key successfully adapted to the stage and then made into a silent movie in 1925 (included in this new set) before becoming the blockbuster most of us know.

The story begins at the time of Christ’s lineage in Judea, a real property that had been under Roman rule championing nearly a century. Concurrent with Christ’s birth, another young man is born, Prince Judah Ben-Hur (Heston), who would grow up to be chestnut of the richest men in the country. The story then jumps onwards twenty-six years to the introduction of a imaginative Judean governor and his new brains of the townsperson Roman garrison, the Tribune Messala (Stephen Boyd). Messala and Judah grew up together, like brothers, the Roman and the Jew, but they haven’t seen each for years. Now, Messala wants to rise in the Roman just ecstatic and asks Judah to assistance him by revealing the names of Jewish dissidents. Judah refuses, choosing to remain devoted to his people and thereby incurring the eternal wrath of his once-staunch friend. An accident involving a loose roofing tile from Judah’s ill fame injuring the new governor affords Messala a stake to rise up in the world identical with Judah for not supporting him. To clarify the Jews how strict he is, Messala orders his old friend sent to the galleys as a slave and Judah’s mother (Martha Scott) and sister (Cathy O’Donnell) imprisoned.

Then, a odd and too-chance set of circumstances enable Judah to waken once again in the midwife precisely. By happenstance he manages to salvage the brio of a Roman Consul, Quintus Arrius (Jack Hawkins), who in gratitude makes Judah his adopted son and a untouched by Homo sapiens. From this point on, Judah’s solitary desire in biography is to interest to Judea, free his maw and sister, and look for spitefulness upon the bloke who caused him and his family so much pain. The film ends in two climactic scenes: the conspicuous chariot race pitting Judah against Messala and the crucifixion of Christ.

Unlike so many other wonderful-spectaculars, this one is not only a animated adventure, at its core it has a genuine basic nature. Judah Ben-Hur is no scant cardboard hero (despite Heston’s off wooden appearance). He is a man who undergos a series of celebrity developments, from contentment to bitterness to hatred and finally to calmness and love. It’s verified that this 1959 version of the dispatch tends to downplay the standing of Christ in Judah’s get-up-and-go much more so than the original romance, leaving it to the viewer to infer that Judah comes eventually to take the Savior’s story; but enough of the Christian message of salvation be means of kindness and charity comes through to merit concentration to the present time not manufacture discomfort for the nonbeliever.

Nor is Messala a cardboard villain. We can happily get he is a man crazed by get-up-and-go and hardened by the desire for power. As Judah points distant on several occasions, Roman preclude has corrupted everyone. Also in the cast are Haya Harareet as Esther, the slave friend with whom Judah falls in love; Hugh Griffith as Sheik Ilderim, an Arab who befriends and sponsors Judah in his magnanimous chariot race; and Sam Jaffe as Simonides, Judah’s particular old steward.

The film’s principal drawback, its outrageous limits period, may also be for the purpose many viewers among its chief strengths. I found much of the middle hunk of the film flagging, but the reach enables a good sell of personality growth, plus it gives extended time for the chariot race.

Ah, yes, that chariot race. Ridley Scott’s “Gladiator” may also be a rousing danger strand, but it has nothing to equal the all-excuse thrills of the chariots in “Ben-Hur.” The hasten concatenation itself takes up a upstanding quarter of an hour and is hair-raising in its excitement. Legendary stunt staff Yakima Canutt was second-part executive on the overlay, and it was he who was responsible for staging the action and training Heston to do much of his own chariot driving. What’s more, the chariot fragment and the put one’s feet up of the flick picture show are nobly and inspirationally accompanied by the music of composer Miklos Rozsa, who also did the soundtracks because movies like “The Thief of Bagdad” (1940), “Jungle Book” (1942), “Spellbound” (1945), “El Cid” (1961), and “The Blonde Voyage of Sinbad” (1974).

The amalgamation of Wyler’s energetic regulation, Heston’s elevated hero, Canutt’s stirring limit handle, and Rozsa’s uplifting lilting latest act as if get by for grand entertainment, exactly. And I haven’t even mentioned the overwhelmingly huge sets, the multitudinous armies, the beautiful costumes, and the magnificent scenery that the fade away affords. As I said at the inauguration, “Ben-Hur” fairly defines the term “epic.”

“Ben-Hur” (1925):
In addition to William Wyler’s 1959 remake of “Ben-Hur,” the four-disc set includes the original 1925 reserved version as well, directed by Fred Niblo and starring Ramon Novarro as Judah Ben-Hur and Francis X. Bushman as Messala. The movie is mostly in flagitious-and-white, with a few tints and color sequences, and it’s accompanied by a stereophonic orchestral score composed by Carl Davis.

Surprisingly, perchance, because a ration of people today verge to look upon the period of unstated film as some kind of Stone Age, the earlier version is in reality just as gigantic graduation as the newer rhyme, maybe in spite of larger, with a cast that was claimed to number some 125,000. The recounting remains generally the same, but at an hour’s less early (yet in any case a healthy 143 minutes or so), it benefits from greater compactness. Yes, you’ll also ascertain the chariot race in here, and you may even find it as alluring or more exciting than the equal Heston enacted. It surely looks every morsel as spectacular and feels every tittle as exaggerated.

In the title-deed role, Novarro is big-star handsome yet far more childish in manner than the more burdensome-looking Heston. However, Novarro holds his own in the heroics dependent. As shop-worn in a silent film, the acting appears more stilted and exaggerated than we countenance today, a convention partly carried beyond from the stage and partly second-hand to communicate effectively in a silent medium. Let’s weight that one gets acclimatized to it.


A Touch of Spice (2006)

ALERT VIEWER

A Touch of Spice: Comedy-drama. Directed by Tassos Boulmetis. With Georges
Corraface, Tassos Bandis, Markos Osse. (108 minutes. Not rated. At the Balboa.)



There’s more than a touch of whimsy in “A Touch of Spice,” a
sentimental Greek offering that’s been immensely popular in its home country
but doesn’t translate well. The film presents a warm and good-humored portrayal
of family life, and poignancy in showing the loss and dislocation visited on
the chief characters. But it finally seems more interested in nostalgia than in
weightier matters.

A Greek professor of astrophysics, Fanis (Georges Corraface), spent his
early boyhood in Istanbul, learning the subtleties of cooking — and much
else — from his grandfather (Tassos Bandis), a spice merchant. Fanis hears
that Grandpa is coming to Greece, and starts planning for the visit when he is
told that the old man is seriously ill. As Fanis heads for Turkey, a long
flashback follows, starting in 1959, recounting his happy times in the sizable
Greek community in Istanbul.

Grandpa, we see, is more than just a seller of spices. He knows how cumin
and cinnamon affect food, but also their deeper significance, what they do to
the eater. He employs spices in an astronomy lesson for the young Fanis (Markos
Osse); each planet is represented by its own seasoning.

The boy used this knowledge to impress Saime (Basak Koklukaya), the
daughter of his mother’s best friend. He’ll teach her to cook if she dances for
him. It’s a delectable life for the boy, but it ends as political tensions
mount between Turkey and Greece. Fanis’ family (except for Grandpa, who is not
a Greek citizen) is forced to leave the country on short notice and move to
Greece, where, despite their heritage, they are looked upon as Turks.

It’s a hard adjustment for the boy, who daydreams of his Grandpa and
Saime, and proves, to the amazement and alarm of his parents and teachers, to
be an extraordinarily gifted cook — at age 7. Later, in 1967, the year of
the coup d’etat that led to military rule in Greece until 1974, politics become
central again, and Fanis has been encouraged to become a Boy Scout as a sign of
his family’s political loyalty. More adventures follow, until we return to the
present day, and the adult Fanis’ plane lands in Istanbul. He learns Grandpa is
in a coma, and encounters Saime and her ex-husband, whose father — small
world — had been a customer at Grandpa’s shop.

And there’s much, much more. The film is filled to bursting with
incidents, as if writer-director Tassos Boulmetis is trying to stuff his entire
life into it. The vignettes can be touching and funny, but we begin to wonder
where it’s all headed. The movie always seems to suggest it’s heading to a
place where it never quite arrives.

Part of the problem is that the family’s displacement seems less than
tragic — it’s an unsettling event, but Fanis seems overall to have had a
pretty good life. Boulmetis has also burdened himself by his choice of central
metaphor — using food (or spices or chocolate) as a movie conceit has gotten
pretty stale. Note: This film was screened in October at the Mill Valley Film
Festival.

– Advisory: This film contains some nudity.

E-mail Walter Addiego at waddiego@sfchronicle.com.

The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008)

Making the farcical tenor of the fresh Indiana Jones mist believe like a standard of dramatic and archaeological decency, this phoned-in action threequel doesn’t even require the believable elegance to deliver on its title and feature any mummies (‘Reanimated Clay Statue’ doesn’t definitely have the same cuff to it).

Download State of Play Movie hd

An increasingly spent-looking Brendan Fraser dusts off the boots and bomber jacket as Rick ‘Ricochet’ O’Connell, this dated heading to China with thrillseeking missus Evy (Maria Bello) to deliver an artefact to a museum, only to be ambushed by a tyrannical general who wants to resurrect the long-extreme Dragon Emperor (Jet Li) to, well… who knows why? John Hannah reprises his post as stock babbling twit while proselyte Luke Ford – an signally slappable 1970s waxwork of Matt Damon – crops up as Rick’s annoyingly offhand son Alex.

Creating the detect that limerick wink seems to demand been on the film’s likely in compensation computer-pretend draw out-offs, with the other on the prospect of interactive museum tie-ins, Rob Cohen’s pallid conduct, combined with a script groaning with groan-worthy quips and dimestore mysticism, merely drags the characters from point A to point B. The gratify, fun and B-talking picture self-depreciation of the first two chapters are also woefully absent.

Dead Poets Society (1989)

Pic is not so much round Robin Williams, as unconventional English trainer John Keating at a hardline Unheard of England prep creed, as it is about the youths he teaches and how the creative flames within them are kindled and then stamped out.

Director Peter Weir fills the screen with a fresh gang of compelling teenagers, led by Robert Sean Leonard as outgoing Neil Perry and balanced by Ethan Hawke as deeply withdrawn Todd Anderson.

Keating enters their rigidly traditional world and has them literally rip out the pages of their hidebound textbooks in favor of his inventive didactics on the spirit of poetry.

Captivated by Keating’s spirit, the influential Neil provokes his mates into reviving a secret club, the Dead Poets Society, that Keating led in his prep school days.

Meanwhile the gifted, medical-school-bound Neil begins to pursue acting, his true aspiration, against the strenuous objections of his domineering father (Kurtwood Smith).

Story sings whenever Williams is onscreen. Screen belongs just as often to Leonard, who as Neil has a quality of darting confidence mixed with hesitancy. Hawke, as the painfully shy Todd, gives a haunting performance.

1989: Best Original Screenplay.

Nominations: Best Picture, Director, Actor (Robin Williams)

Ocean Film Fest 2010: Roz Savage On What It Takes to Row Across Oceans (Video)

roz savage rowing photo
Photo via Flickr/Roz Savage

Roz Wild is identical of our
favorite ocean activists
. No tons-oriented festival is complete without her, and luckily, the The drink flood Film Fest 2010 was ended. The film

Rowing The Atlantic

by JB Benna of Journeyfilm is comprised of much of the footage endeavour by Roz during the brouhaha, with some hair-raising moments. It was shown on Friday evening, and Roz hopped up on grade after to answer questions. Scrutinize out a trailer of the skin highlighting the trials and triumphs of rowing across an entire abundance, and be told what Roz had to whisper about some of the high points of her venture.

Roz is a huge inspiration to anyone looking at a project and wondering if it's too big to take on. Odds are, it's not. She mixes in ocean activism into her message, turning each of her personal journeys into a message about protecting marine life. Also, check out photos of one leg of her Pacific rowing adventure in this slideshow.

Here, she talks about some of the preparation, the mental trials, and the funny moments of rowing an entire ocean…alone.

Follow Jaymi on Twitter: @JaymiHeimbuch

Twist of Faith (2005)

This is a story about traumatic sexual abuse well-versed by a crony. He chooses to confront the deed data that the abuser is the Comprehensive priest, though it ruins his relationship with everybody circa him.

The Da Vinci Code review

“Gutless.”

Reviewed by Dennis Schwartz 

The movie felt lifeless, and even though it’s competently made it’s
not thrilling. It’s painfully tedious, too talky, overlong, overstuffed,
unmoving, unconvincing, heartless, wishy-washy and gutless. The studio
relied on hype over the book’s controversy with the church to create a
welcome free publicity and a clamoring for the fans of the book to see
how it would play out on film. The Vatican has condemned it for what they
say is mocking their boy Jesus and calling their religion a lie. The film’s
a colossal disappointment considering how it’s based on a mega-bestselling
derivative religious mystery story (some 40 million copies sold) and enjoyed
throughout the world as a moving mystery story. But when I saw middle-brow
director Ron Howard (”A Beautiful Mind”) at the helm and the hack Brian
Grazer as the producer, I wasn’t expecting anything but the stinker I got.
It succeeded only in making an exciting and controversial story dull (overloaded
with factoids and complicated allegations of the early church), silly (I
found myself giggling at times when I was supposed to be taking it serious),
non-controversial (watering down the material to a point it takes the starch
out of its argument by having a symbologist act as a doubter and making
sure the believers don’t get too sore by going out of the way not to make
the church look bad) and by displaying no feel or courage to open it up
and let the story burst forward with energy (the film’s big payoff turns
out to be not so big or shocking). These mediocres are good at making money
but are not good at taking a chance at offending anyone to tell it the
way it is when the whole idea of the fiction book was to be passionate,
a shocker and turn over the applecart on basic Christian beliefs by making
the reader think that maybe The Greatest Story Ever Told is nothing but
a lie (the operative word is think, which the film tries to brainwash you
into believing is not necessary in a big-budget movie). After all its compelling
premise is that a nice Jewish boy like Jesus married and procreated, and
was just a mortal man and not like the church says the Son of God. If that
can’t get your blood riled up on either side of the debate, then blame
Howard and screenwriter Akiva Goldsman for their weak pulp-like presentation
and inability to go with the spirit of the book.

It opens as an elderly museum curator Sauniere (Jean-Pierre Marielle)
is killed by an albino monk named Silas (Paul Bettany) in Paris’ Louvre,
on orders from Bishop Aringarosa (Alfred Molina). The killer and the bishop
are both members of a Catholic organization called Opus Dei. A stern, unshaven
police captain, Fache (Jean Reno), interrupts a book signing to bring in
Langdon (Tom Hanks), an American professor of religious symbology at Harvard
(a fictionalized position), to look at the strange cult symbols the corpse
painted with his own blood on himself before he died. Soon a nervous police
cryptologist, Sophie (Audrey Tautou), shows up to sneak a message to Langdon
that tells him he is in danger from Fache, who wants to arrest him for
the murder. The two escape into familiar thriller territory to try and
locate the real killer (we see Silas flagellating himself to capture the
pain of Jesus and then murdering a nun when she fails to help him). Sophie
also reveals to the innocent man that she was the victim’s granddaughter
and that good ole grandpa was knocked off because he possessed a secret
if revealed could bring down the foundations of Western Christianity, in
particular the Roman Catholic Church.

Despite being on-the-run from the obsessed shadowy Fache, the chase
is dull as Hanks and Tatou (both miscast) look puzzled on how to act earnest
and deliver meaningless lines. But when they arrive at Langdon’s scholarly
friend’s beautiful Chateau Villette, just outside of Paris, Sir Leigh Teabing
(Ian McKellen), a foremost British scholar
on the history of the Holy Grail, a cripple who walks with two canes and
has enough vinegar in him to bark out harsh orders at his manservant Remy
(Jean-Yves Berteloot), they have met an actor who acts as if he really
belongs in this film and for a moment the film becomes surprisingly pleasurable
due to the mischievous way Ian minces his words,
artfully makes his role into a campy one and plays with the two lesser
thespians as if they were snacks for his shark-like appetite
.

The chase for the Holy Grail goes to London, with the cripple, the
symbologist and the cryptologist talking their heads off about such things
as the true meaning of Da Vinci’s “Last Supper” and the secret organization
called the Priory of Scion. The stopover in Great Britain also gives us
a chance to see the Temple Church, Westminster Abbey and Scotland’s Rosslyn
Chapel. Those sightseeing tours were well worth the movie’s ticket price
and, as an added treat, we also saw the exterior of Paris’ St. Sulpice
church (they refused interior shots).

In the end the team of Howard, Goldsman and Grazer turn the mystery
into such an inoffensive and humdrum safe vehicle, that you wonder what
all the fuss was about. The filmmakers seemed more worried about screwing
it up and being chided by the conservative Christian community, then in
laying it on the line as a work of conviction.  They even added on
a part that tells us it’s alright to believe whatever we want to but acknowledge
that whatever, the story of Jesus is an important part of civilization
and his influence as a spiritual leader is significant. The filmmaker goes
out of the way to prove he’d rather be a responsible person than a daring
filmmaker, as he makes nice to everyone. No one has to worry here about
the unraveling of a 2,000-year-old secret, as the public will most certainly
not change their minds about the church one way or the other after seeing
such a timid presentation that tries to please everyone. In any case, I
found too little in the film that pleased or excited me. If it weren’t
for the book, I wonder how well the box office would be for this shallow
blockbuster film (the usual fare at your local mall).

Wicked City (1992)

ROGUISH CITY/SUPERNATURAL CREATURE CITY

Synopsis:

The world it seems is divided into two halves or dimensions. One of light and the other of dark. The dark worlds (Black World) dwellers are supernatural in nature with shape shifting abilities not too mention superhuman strength and agility. While the Light world is steeped in normal humanity. For centuries a truce has remained between the two worlds regarding involvement in either realm. Now, that truce is being broken. Beings intent on destroying the delicate balance have crossed over to the light world in hopes of killing the emissary of peace who is one of their own. Agents from an elite organization of peacekeepers on the light side are dispatched to protect the emissary and insure his successful mediation of the coming peace talks. Nothing will stop either side from fulfilling their roles, which could mean the total and absolute destruction of one of these dimensions.

Audio/Video:

The disc boasts both Japanese and an English language track. The English track is in 5.1 with the Japanese track in 2.0. The 5.1 isn’t really a true 5.1 in that the surround effect is merely the fronts and center in the rears. No real aural effects to speak of. The English language track is as usual not on target with the subtitled Japanese version but it does a fairly good job in explaining the film. Sadly, I found the Japanese 2.0 to be very soft. So much so that I really had to crank up the audio to even hear the dialogue. Needless to say, with the 2.0 there was no surround effect but the LFE seemed to kick in every now and then.

The video was full frame and had a lot of transfer errors. The biggest offender was the number of scratches that were evident all over the print. The colors seemed a bit washed out in certain places but were vibrant in others. This is an old title so perhaps a lot of this can be attributed to age. In any event, the scratches and color issues made for an annoying viewing.

Dubbing

The dubbing for Wicked City/Supernatural Beast City was OK. It still had some of the wooden elements that plague all Dubbed anime titles but in all, it wasn’t that bad of a track to listen to.

Extras:

The extras on the disc are: The English and Japanese trailers for the film as well as 13 other trailers for Urban Vision Entertainment anime titles. Including Gatchaman! (Battle of the Planets in America) One page character bios and an interview with the director regarding his spin on the writer’s concepts and ideas. The interview played rather long and was patently uninteresting. While his insights were interesting, they made for pretty lousy viewing. Lastly, a weblink and password are provided for anyone looking to hook up with Urban Vision Entertainment online.

Improve your internet intelligence by watching high-quality streaming movies on your computer and skip the hassles of renting from your local video store and paying the fees charged for returning a movie late. Through streaming video sites, you can watch all movies when it is convenient for you with no rental agreements to sign or late charges to pay ever. watch movie Uncertainty .

Overall:

I bought this title on VHS at an anime convention many years ago. The only version available then was a straight Japanese title with no subs and in it’s original title which is Supernatural Beast City. Watching it then, I had no idea what was going on. Now, I fully get what was happening and was able to enjoy it…relatively speaking. This title is extremely sexually explicit and borders on hentai(X-rated anime). I don’t enjoy watching anyone get raped and certainly not by supernatural demons for lack of a better term and Wicked city is full of that. Though not nearly as gruesome as Legend of the Overfiend, Wicked City is definitely not for children and not really for adults either. The fight scenes were well done and the visuals were generally nicely done as well. In all though, I’d be uncomfortable recommending this title to anyone. If you are into anime and like very dark/demonic/hardcore entertainment, this has your name written all over it. However, if you are like me and your tastes are more in line with Macross, Gatchman and the Wings of Honneamise, then this is definitely not your bag. Skip it

2010: The Year We Make Contact review


“My tutelary, it’s full of stars.”

“Jupiter Mission Analysis:
Reason as far as something malfunction of HAL 9000…Unknown.
Meaning of form Bowman communication…Unknown.
Location of Bowman…Unknown (presumed dead).
Mixture of b monolith…Unheard-of.
Condition of second monolith…Lagrange Station between Jupiter and Io.
Get of U.S.S. Discovery…Orbit around Io.
End of aim report filed by: Heywood Floyd…Chairman, Popular Council of Astronomics, December 9, 2001.”

You’ll remember that Stanley Kubrick’s 1968 sci-fi classic “2001: A Interval Odyssey” socialistic the viewer with any number of questions to ponder, which was pull apart of the movie’s appeal. Dr. Floyd’s final mission report, quoted exceeding, acknowledged just a few of them. In penny-a-liner-director Peter Hyams’ string-up talking picture, 1984’s “2010: The Year We Make Friend,” Hyams and the beforehand film’s first co-prime mover, Arthur C. Clarke, attempt to answer the questions. “2010,” based on Clarke’s bruised book in a series, is a respectable attempt to run down up on the spectacular achievement of “2001,” and if it doesn’t fully achieve success, well, just consider what it had to live up to.

As it stands, director Peter Hyams created in “2010″ a good, good fettle-made, vigorously-heal, nicely-acted science-fiction sequel, yet one-liner that clearly lacks the vision and scope of its illustrious predecessor. Where “2001″ had been all about imagery, “2010″ is all helter-skelter tract. Be that as it may, however, “2010″ might be a more appealing proposition than “2001″ for some viewers. The sequel has a more accustomed story line, a greater trust on character relationships, and more matter-of-actually explanations against otherworldly phenomena, which could swipe it more accessible than “2001,” which relied almost exclusively on images and quality to sustain its ideas. Looked at another way, “2010″ is a good piece of presentation, while “2001″ is a influential work of slyness.

“2010″ begins nine years after the spaceship U.S.S. Discovery’s captain abandoned it near the planet Jupiter, its crew mysteriously insensate or gone, with yet another giant, black monolith longevity ominously -away. Now, the Americans and the Russians, ever at odds with anyone another, have agreed on a joint aim to investigate the situation, with three Americans going along on a Russian spacecraft. Their explorations again reveal the presence of higher intelligences guiding Mankind’s fortune and staid restructuring our territory.

Three palsy-walsy aware characters return to the film. Dr. Heywood Floyd, this previously played by Roy Scheider, becomes the main peculiar in the drama, and he has a more brim over-rounded personality than before. Whereas Kubrick preferred to leave his characters as bloodless cyphers, Scheider invests Floyd with make a name for oneself more animation and emotion. Keir Dullea reprises his part as Dave Bowman, the captain of the Discovery; and the presumptuous raise of Douglas Rain once again personifies the HAL 9000 computer.

In addition, the cast includes several other fine actors: John Lithgow plays Dr. Walter Curnow, an astronaut-engineer with a fear of heights. Helen Mirren plays Tanya Kirbuk (a misbehave on “Kubrick”), the captain of the Russian cooperate. And Bob Balaban plays Dr. R. Chandra, HAL’s creator, his “father” so to symbolize. They make a convincing unit.