jonahwp

While was unaware of Funny Games prior to watching it over 20 years after its release, I am not disappointed that I chose to view Michael Haneke's psychological thriller.

A number of factors sold this film to me as one of the better thrillers that I have seen in a while. The most notable of these factors are Ulrich Mühe (Georg) and Susanne Lothar's (Anna) performances. Both of these actors displayed their devastation brilliantly and stayed on the proper side of the fine line between an upset character and an annoying character. Never did the emotions of these two characters get on my nerves or give me a headache, so coo-dos to that. At points, however, I did feel as if these two characters were not reacting realistically to a specific event that occurred in the second act of the film (which I shall not get into because it is a spoiler... oh no).

Additionally, I believe that Haneke's choice to not show much of the violence actually take place on camera was wise. Haneke's message behind this movie was to highlight the dark nature behind violence, a subject which is often exploited and glorified in movies. Funny Games does not treat the viewer to a video of a shotgun exploding a guy's head that makes the audience turn in disgust. Instead, the film focuses on the emotions that violence causes and the darkness that it brings to the lives of many. It was the deterioration of the film's protagonists that was caused by violence that I found truly disturbing.

Finally, (I felt the need to comment on this as it is often brought up in forums about this film) there is a certain character in that breaks the fourth wall. Does this work for the movie? Sort of. I believe that it worked well at times to provide relief from the heavy load of this film. However, I felt as though this character often removed from the realistic and captivating features of this film when he spoke directly to the audience.

Overall, Funny Games is a hidden gem that will not make you shut your eyes due to the blood and gore on the screen, but disturb you in a different way. It will make you stay up the night and think about the themes and messages that you observed. It will make you question the true nature of violence and (perhaps) look down upon certain films that glorify it. While Funny Games is not without its issues, it is an above average psychological thriller that I would recommend.

Rate: 8.4/10

Walking into Quentin Tarantino's New Beverly Cinema in Los Angeles with a bunch of other 18-35 year old males, I had never even heard of the movie that I was about to watch; John Woo's Heroes Shed No Tears. In fact, the only reason I went to the movie at all was because it was selected by Mr Tarantino. Tarantino encompasses the fantasies of the male mind in every movie he makes, and surely, would recommend a movie that has a similar impact on my testosterone levels. With this in mind, I expected a fun Hong Kong action film. What I drew from the movie was more than this mindless action I expected.

The film's plot, as with most films directed by John Woo, is just an excuse to film long action scenes. It follows the campaign of a group of Chinese Soldiers who are tasked with capturing a drug lord and bringing him from China to Thailand. Such an open plot allows Woo to get away with over-the-top action scenes and marvelously ridiculous plot twists.

Yes, I know what you are thinking, "so it is just another movie that is one massive shootout. Might as well go back to watching my 'important' American drama TV series". Sure, this movie does have these scenes, but they are all quite special. First of all, as this is John Woo's first film, he says he was less cautious with the amount of violence and gore. His lack of caution is apparent in the scenes where Chan Chung (Eddy Ko) guns down endless waves of drug dealers. All of these scenes are doused in over-the-top practical effects and unnecessary gore. This gives them a special feel. This is Eddy Ko's unrestricted, pure, and gritty film making style. This style was also an inspiration to some of Tarantino's action scenes, notably, those in the Kill Bill franchise.

Secondly, Woo's action scenes are all entertaining as hell. Whether it is the the acting that is sometimes so bad it's funny or the direction of John Woo that enthralls the audience right into the action, there is rarely a dull moment in the action scene's of Heroes Shed No Tears.

I vividly recall the whole audience bursting out in laughter and joy every time another body exploded or compound was lit on fire by the Chinese Mercenaries. A movie that has this effect on an audience deserves reverence.

While the scenes between action sequences have much to be desired in terms of capturing audience emotion, I am always one to judge a film for what it is. Few people expect the sadness and deep psychological depth of a movie like The Elephant Man in a Hong Kong action flick from the 80's. If you do, well, I am sorry that Heroes shed no tears disappointed you.

The dialogue scenes did a few things nicely, however. Firstly, they provided a nice explanation to the plot that makes the action scenes feel at least somewhat deserved. They also allowed the audience to laugh at some of the blatantly terrible acting that would rarely be permitted in today's cinema. John Woo includes some humor of his own in these scenes as well. I recall a sex scene that Woo takes a comedic approach to. This really hit the audience with a boom. Finally, the dialogue of the characters taught me aspects of Chinese culture and cinema. I can honestly admit that some of John Woo's other films are on my future watch list after being inspired by this film.

So, is it worth taking time out of your busy schedule to watch Heroes Shed No Tears? Firstly, be quiet, your schedule is not that busy. Second, if you are in the mood for a radical, over-the-top Hong Kong action film that brings the charm of John Woo's direction to the floor, watch it. If you are in the mood for a funny film that delivers both witty and deadpan humor (while sometimes not doing so purposely), watch it. If you are interested in what Hong Kong action films are like, this movie is a good reference. I reiterate, however, this is a movie filmed on a limited budget in the 1980's so it will not deliver the special effects or great acting expected in today's films. It is a fun film to be watched by a non-critical eye. Basically, watch the film if you can have any fun and do not mind subtitles!

Grade: B+ (7.7/10)

I came into the theater to watch Batman V. Superman knowing very little of it. I had only seen one trailer (that was not the infamously revealing trailer containing the whole plot of the film) and done basic research on the comics. This lead me to a very pleasant but off putting experience.

As I did enjoy many parts of this film, I shall start with the positives. One surprising element of this film was Batman (duh). Ben Affleck gave a stellar performance as the caped crusader and captured the love and pain in the complex character of both Bruce Wayne and Batman. Jeremy Irons, likewise, captured the wit of Alfred. Henry Cavill's performance as Superman was passable, and so was Gal Gadot's as Wonder Woman. The action sequences were also fun, fast paced, and lacked the notorious shaky cam.

For the first act and a half of this film, I was genuinely impressed. It almost felt as if Zack Snyder directed this as a part superhero part law drama film. That element brought something new to the genre, proposed the moral dilemma of both Batman and Superman's characters, and made the action sequences feel quite well deserved and satisfying. Had this continued throughout all of this movie, I would have been considered this an A+ grade movie; but it didn't.

After a certain very thrilling battle that I shall not delve into the spooky realm of spoilers about, the film took a turn for the worse. Character after character were forcefully introduced into this movie and it completely abandoned its original plot. To follow were many (while still fun; I guess) cliché fight sequences and so goes the average superhero movie. While I definitely have nothing against this clichéd style, I can't help but feel this film has much lost potential.

Some other major turn offs in this film were that one, Batman murdered people. This undermines the whole moral dilemma of The Dark Night with no explanation. Two, while I like Jesse Eisenberg as an actor, I think it was a mistake casting him as Lex Luthor. Finally, a minor detail, but the CGI in one scene featuring Superman was notably unrealistic and cringe worthy.

So would I recommend that you go see this film in theaters? Yes, actually. While I do have major complaints, this movie manages to bring some of our favourite superheros to the big screen once again, in a fun and at moments enthralling film. Moreover it makes me all the more excited for the Justice League movie!

Grade: C

War is a tough time for any nation, and especially any child. War can be an even more brutal affair if this child is left to fight in it. Beasts of No Nation tries to depict this and does so quite well. From its disturbing visuals to its increasingly touching dialogue, Beasts of No Nation depicts an African Civil war near perfectly; except for a few crucial aspects. Beasts of No Nation poorly displays its characters and gives them an unrealistic mindset. I will touch on this and many of the things that director Cary Joji Fukunaga does magnificently in this review. (note: this movie isn't a casual Saturday night film to watch drunk in your fraternity house eating cold cuts off of your stomach, it is quite deep and VERY disturbing.)

This film follows a young African boy named Agu (Abraham Attah). His village gets attacked, and he finds himself in the middle of a full out civil war. He joins the anti-government rebels (which don't fly X-wings) and becomes a child soldier in a battalion led by the malicious yet caring character of "Commandant" (Idris Alba).

While Attah's acting was above adequate, certainly for a child, I found that in certain scenes he lacked the drama and raw emotion that a young child would have during a war. He does, however, deliver very touching narration. In some films, narration is the director's cheap way of telling a story. In this one, it really added some much needed emotion to Agu. Alba, while not being as likable or witty a character as in The Wire, still delivers as Commandant in this film. Towards the start of the film he is portrayed as a legend, immune to danger or fear. However, as this film progresses, Commandant's flaws begin to show, and Alba captures this perfectly (and rocks that African accent).

The action sequences are fine. They really brought nothing new to the table, but instead of seeing Bruce Willis taking down bandits left and right, we are shown fearful children with guns fighting for what they believe in, which was refreshing. Additionally, not every action scene was intended to gather pity, which I liked. If you are going to include an action scene in something described as a "war movie", it better be adrenaline filled. Beasts of No Nation delivers on this front.

This brings me to my favourite aspect of this film: the "in between" scenes. In between the large and tough battles that Agu's battalion goes through, Fukunaga does us the favour of showing us how these "soldiers" live life. Here we are exposed to what hints at slight character development (something this movie really lacks), the disturbing atrocities committed by both Commandant and the rest of the battalion, and the brilliant narration given by Agu.

With all of this in mind, it will be shocking to know that my biggest complaint with this film is it is hard to care about many of the characters. I don't mean to sound like a heartless Sith Lord, but I really couldn't get invested enough in Agu's character to truly sympathize with him. I did indeed wonder why I had this mindset, and even worried at one point. Then I came to a conclusion. Fukunaga's focus on creating disturbing scenes and decent action sequences led him to neglect character and context of the story.

I feel that had act one been slightly longer, we could have gotten to know Agu and his family a lot more. As a result we care for them a lot more. Had Agu's thought process been slightly more childish and innocent towards the start of the war, it would better highlight his loss of innocence as the war unfolded. I also feel that had we been given more historical background and information on the war being fought, we would better understand the situation of this African country (which I don't even remember having a name the movie!).

So do I recommend you watch this? Sure, if you are willing to excuse unrealistic character and accept it as more of a war story and less of a drama. (which I don't mind!) Hey, maybe I am a Sith Lord and have no heart, so if you enjoy the drama in this movie, I am jealous of you!

Grade: B+ (7.3/10)

With the brilliant acting of Jean Reno and a young Natalie Portman, and with the brilliant direction of Luc Besson, Léon: The Professional is sure to please any action fanatic or drama lover. From the opening scene of this movie, you can tell that every take was thought out and every take has a unique mood. Léon: the Professional isn't without its flaws, however, which I will outline later in the review.

One aspect that Besson really put his back into was the characters, and it shows. A young Natalie Portman plays Mathilda, a down on her luck kid who craves revenge and a parental figure to guide her through a tough part of her life. Léon, played by Jean Reno, truly is the star of this film. Léon is a notorious Italian assassin who travels on a path of self discovery throughout this whole film. With every word that Léon speaks you can sense a deep and daring combination of optimism, pessimism, and darkness. Though he is a rather quiet character, just the tone in Léon's voice shows that he is a true striking mafia man. Finally, the villain in this film, played by Gary Oldman, is a devious character. As the film progresses, your hate for him builds up inside. My one issue with Oldman's character, however, is that you cannot relate to him. All good villains should have a reason for what they are doing and something in common with the protagonist, in this case Léon. This was not present in Oldman's character. Aside from this one minor flaw, great, realistic but still awesome characters made this film what it is.

As great as the characters are, when I think of this movie I will always first think of its incredible score, composed by John Altman. Every step of the way the score perfectly accompanies the mood of the scene. It is a perfect example of how symphony music doesn't just appeal to the wide arrange of 80 year old's throughout the world, but can also appeal to many more people if executed correctly, which it was.

As my title would suggest, Léon can't be fit into one genre, but many. The action aspect of this film is incredible. With near complete use of practical effects and Besson's history in directing great action films, you really marvel at how certain scene's were created (particularly the end of act three, like holy crap!). The drama and emotional conflict in this film is also substantial. You can understand and relate to many of the characters in this movie, and really feel what they are feeling for a lot of the film (aside from the large number of people in this film that get shot, that would hurt like hell and as a result Besson didn't include that aspect for viewers). There is also a strange feeling of romance in this film, but that gets into spoiler territory so I should shut up!

One slight issue that I have always had in this film is not what is present, but what is not, for the majority of the film. Unlike most other films, my favorite moment in Léon: the Professional is the first act. There is a deep feeling of darkness and actual fear throughout the whole first act. You get the horrendous feeling that something awful will happen, and it does. I would've liked to see that feeling of darkness a bit more throughout the film. Not the whole time, but I think that feeling could have added a lot to a few scenes.

In conclusion, Léon the Professional is a gorgeous, musical, grim, witty, and brilliantly put together film. For this reason it deserves an A- (8.3/10).