True Grit (2010)

Starring: Jeff Bridges, Matt Damon, Josh Brolin

Directors: Joel and Ethan Coen

IMDb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1403865/

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True_Grit_(2010_film)

They got it right this time. Remakes are usually frowned upon by critics and the general public, and for good reason: they have a tendency to either fall short of the standards set by the original films or are just seen as a waste of a film altogether. However, there are occasions when they turn out well, especially when the said original film needed to improvements in the first place (http://docuniverse.blogspot.com/2010/12/true-grit-1969.html). So how did the Coen Brothers manage to take on a western made famous by John Wayne himself? Like this:

Once again based upon the book of the same name by Charles Portis, the story starts out with a young girl named Mattie, who's father is murdered and she goes on a quest to find his killer. The character of Mattie as played by Kim Darby was the part of the original movie that I really hated above anything else, but the Coen brothers thankfully helped change that around. First of all, she actually looks like a real girl from the 1870s, as opposed to a weird Justin Bieber clone. Secondly, the actress who plays her, Hailee Steinfeld, can actually, well, act. She comes across as a girl who is tough and certainly able to hold her own. While she has a bit of a self-righteous streak and a prim-and-proper manner that can turn people off, Steinfield is still able to reveal Mattie's warmth and personal conviction, making her very likable character. This is in stark contrast to Darby, who acted more like a monotone robot trying to give the illusion that she was tough but ends up looking like a deer in headlights.

Anyway, Mattie eventually comes across a one-eyed U.S. Marshall named Rooster Cogburn, played by Jeff Bridges, whom she asks to help her capture her father's killer. Bridges does a great job as Cogburn; he is gruff and is not afraid to take on the bad guys when necessary, even if some complain that he over does it. At the same time, he is shown to have some flaws due to his age and alcoholism. Fans of "The Big Lebowski" may notice some hints of The Dude when Cogburn is a little...disoriented, but as much as I love that character, I think Bridges and the Coens were smart not to try and force their creation into this particular film; it would not have be right. My complaint is that his accent is so thick that I could not understand about half of the stuff he said, but I am willing to give that a pass because I get the idea of what he is saying and I guess that it makes Cogburn more memorable.

The rest of the story is pretty straight forward: the two of them, along with a Texas Ranger named La Boeuf (Matt Damon), begin their journey as they come across a pair of outlaws, a hanged body, and a man dressed as a bear. Okay, it is not entirely straight forward, but come on, its the Coen brothers, you got to expect a little weirdness! Anyway, generally speaking, the film moves at a productive paste and keeps you intrigued to until the end, using both action, humor, and good dialogue.

I did not have to much to complain about, but if I have to nit-pick...There is a part at the beginning when Mattie is arguing with the man her father had sold horses to before his murder. I disliked this part in the original movie because I thought that it was a pointless scene that did not need to be done on-camera, and while the Coen brothers make it a tad better, it still seems like a time waster. The film also has a tendency to marginalize its supporting characters. Damon does well with his role, but he is mostly absent from the picture; he just has his little bouts with Bridges (which are pretty amusing), but then gets annoyed and leaves not once but twice. James Brolin is good as the murderer Tom Chaney, someone who is somewhat stupid but can be intimidating when he needs to be. However, he is on screen for barely five minutes and his impact is lacking. A nearly unrecognizable Barry Pepper also does a decent job as the outlaw Ned Pepper, but is also underused. To be fair, these characters were not on-screen that much more in the 1969 version, but I guess they were so unimpressive in that version that it kind of did not matter. By making them interesting, the Coen's have been hurt by their own success. Another part of this may have to do with the 110 running time, about 18 minutes shorter than the original. Overall, I am glad this was shorter because it made the movie more concise, but it was not without its draw backs.

Despite that admittedly bloated paragraph I just wrote, it is still a very enjoyable film that shows that not all remakes turn out bad, and I recommend it.

Gremlins (1984)

Starring: Hoyt Axton, Zach Galligan, Phoebe Cates

Director: Joe Dante

IMDb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087363/

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gremlins

Don't you hate it when all you want for Christmas is this...

...and you end up with this?

Well, that is pretty much what happens in "Gremlins," the 1984 classic produced by Steven Spielberg and written by Chris Columbus of later "Home Alone" fame, that introduced everyone to the fury little creatures that become a big problem.

The movie starts off with Randall "Rand" Peltzer (Hoyt Axton) shopping around for a Christmas gift for his son in a sketchy area of Chinatown (I guess Macy's is closed at that hour). He ends up in a shop where he finds a strange creature called a Mogwai. He is told that there are three important rules that must be followed in order to care for the creature:

1) It cannot be exposed to bright light

2) It cannot come into physical contact with water

3) Most important of all, it cannot be fed after midnight

Gee, I don't see any of these rules being broken during of the course of the movie, do you? He nicknames it Gizmo and the cute creature is a hit with his teenage son Billy (Zach Galligan). However, when Gizmo is accidentally exposed to water (what a shock), five new Mogwai are formed from him and are much more devious in nature. Using sneaky tactics, they manage to get a hold of food after midnight (double shock), and multiply into a whole army of Mogwai, now called Gremlins, who go about terrorizing the town.

The movie is, in short, fun. While technically classified as a horror comedy, it is more the latter than the former. The Gremlins are not so much scary as they are obnoxious (in a good way). While they do attack people and cause a few deaths, they spend most of their time trashing the places they go to and partying. For instance, they sabotage a local bar by drinking, smoking, throwing things around, shooting each other (yes, they have guns, don't ask me why), and acting generally very rowdy. It is actually more of a dark comedy than anything else, with the Gremlins and their victims dying in several gruesome yet funny fashions (which are fair tame by today's standards). I think my favorite part is when they tamper with the stairlift of the Scourge of the town, Mrs. Deagle (Polly Holiday), sending her flying out the window of her house. Yes, that sounds a bit cruel, but believe me, its funny when you see it.

The most stark example of this type of format is the now infamous scene where Billy's love interest, Kate (Phoebe Cates) tells about a tragedy from her past that explains why she dislikes Christmas. This scene was very controversial, with apparently both studio executives and even Spielberg himself being very unhappy with it, but director Joe Dante fought to keep it in and that is where it remained. To be honest, I thought the scene was a little out of place; most of the humor comes from cartoon violence, not from a girl's childhood trauma of losing a parent. But I guess that is why it works: it comes almost out of nowhere to hit you over the head and then it is never spoken of again. So even though it is a rather bizarre scene to include in a movie about creatures that look like an 80s version of Furby dolls, I am glad they kept it.

Despite the viciousness, the movie also has a bit of heart to it. The characters are all generally very likable; I especially liked the mom (Frances Lee McCain) for her ability to take out three of the little bastards all by herself. And the innocent Gizmo helps bring a level stability to the madness as the one Gremlin who tries to stop his evil counterparts. Despite his problems with the "Kate scene," it becomes quite clear upon viewing that Spielberg had influence over the making of the film. It has a strong "E.T."-like atmosphere, and at least two scenes make a referencing to that particular Spielberg picture. Overall, I say the movie does a good job of juggling the different emotions of happiness, creepiness, and hilarity all within a single story.

Well, I can't think of anything else to say, so I'll just leave it at that. It's a good movie, for the holidays or otherwise, and I recommend it.

Bad Santa (2003)

Starring: Bill Bob Thornton, Tony Cox, Brett Kelly

Directed by Terry Zwigoff

IMDb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0307987/

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Santa

Here is your Christmas movie. And it seems fitting that this "honor" goes to one of the more popular holiday favorites of recent years, 2003's "Bad Santa".

The movie stars Billy Bob Thornton as Willie Stokes, the definitive example of a bad department store Santa. He loves booze, he loves women, and he hates his life. He is also a crook. Along with his dwarf friend Marcus (Tony Cox) as "Santa's Little Helper," he goes around year after year working at different department stores as a Santa before breaking into them and skipping town. The problem with all this is that he ends up blowing everything he "earns" on sex, alcohol, and lottery tickets. So when he gets a call from Marcus about a possible scheme in Phoenix, he jumps at the opportunity.

While there, he runs into a host of interesting characters. First is a dumb but sweet-hearted kid named Thurman Merman (Brett Kelly), who's name is not revealed until very late in the film because Willie never bothers to learn it, instead referring to him as "kid". Treating him like every other human being he encounters, Willie berates him with an endless stream of insults and obscenities, but the blank-eyed Thurman seems immune to his criticisms and he eventually warms up to him. Willie also forms a relationship with a sexy bartender (Lauren Graham) who takes an interest in him because she has a thing for Santas. Yes, that is exactly what it sounds like. However, she also finds him charming as a person...for some reason...and she and Thurman both help him turn his life around. He must also contend with the meek mall manager Bob Chipeska, played by John Ritter, who died before the film was released and whom it is dedicated to. Chipeska rightfully does not trust Willie, and secretly tries to dispose of him with the assistance of the store's tough head of security Gin Slagel, played by Bernie Mac (Jesus, the mortality rate the film's supporting cast is really low, isn't it?). However, Slagel has alternative motives for finding out about the scheme. Willie and Marcus must deal with this while the former also teaches Thurman about being tough, which concludes with Willie postponing his suicide attempt in order to physically attack a teenage bully. Nice guy.

This film is funny. Thornton has the appearance and the attitude of a guy who is at the bottom of the barrel and is the antagonist of all the qualities that he is supposed to represent as Saint Nicholas. At the same time, he manages to remain likable enough so that he does not become completely unsympathetic as a character, nor does it look entirely realistic when he inevitable becomes a nicer person as the movie progresses. The other characters are also amusing and there is also a lot of good back and forth banter between them, particularly between Thornton and Ritter, as well as Ritter and Mac.

Do I have any criticism for the film? Not a lot. I guess you can say that it is not really a sophisticated comedy; generally speaking, it really is Thornton getting drunk, yelling and swearing for almost two hours. That did not really bother me that much since I was more or less expecting that, though it did get a tad old after a while. The only other issues I had: some minor plot holes here and there and that the ending was also a little over-the-top.

All that being said, it was still a funny and enjoyable movie and I recommend it.

The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader (2010)

Well, I'm back. Sorry for my long absence from this site; I have been pretty busy as of late. However, now that things have calmed down for me, I have decided to make a return. I can't promise that I will be doing this frequently, but if something comes along that I feel deserves to be reviewed, I will make an effort to do so.

Anyway, it's the season to be jolly, and you are probably curious about whether there will be a Christmas-themed review. Well, that's not going to happen...at least not at the moment (we still have 13 more days after all). However, I can give you the next best thing: a fantasy movie with blatant Christian overtones. That's right, you guessed it:

Starring: Georgie Henley, Skandar Keynes, Will Poulter

Directed by Michael Apted

IMDb:

Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chronicles_of_Narnia:_The_Voyage_of_the_Dawn_Treader

Okay, before we begin, I should make a few things clear. I did not really read the "The Chronicles of Narnia" book series when I was younger, and I have only seen the first of the three films that have come out so far. I have also not seen that particular movie since it first came out in theaters. Therefore, if I make any assumptions that come from my lack of knowledge of the books or the previous films, I apologize ahead of time. That being said, let's dive right in...no pun intended. You know, because it takes place at sea...okay, anyway....

The plot starts off with Edmond and Lucy (Skandar Keynes and Georgie Henley respectively) staying at their cousin Eustace's (Will Poulter) house while their older siblings are off doing different things. However, they soon find themselves transported to Narnia and reunited with Prince Caspian (Ben Barnes), who is on a mission to find a group of men known as the Seven Lost Lords of Narnia. As the plot develops, they come across mysterious green mist that is causing trouble throughout the different islands they encounter. It is then established that they must unite the seven swords of the different Lords, bring them to Aslan's table, and vanquish the evil presence.

No, not like that.

Mmm, close, but that is besides the point.

Okay, enough with the summery; let's get to the analysis. Here are the positives: the visuals, while nothing special, are very good. Lucy, my favorite character from the first film, remains a charming presence as she struggles to find her place in life as she enters adulthood. Edmund has also matured a bit since that time and though he has his own troubles of being in the shadow of Prince Caspian, he still comes across as likable. I guess I kind of liked the rat, Reepicheep (Simon Pegg, imagine that) as well, even if he did remind me of the Geico Gecko at one point. Not sure how that happened.

The biggest problem I had with the movie: Eustace. He is soooooooooooooo annoying, so so so annoying! Now, I understand that he was probably supposed to be this way in the books and to be fair Poulter does a geat job of bringing out the character's smart-ass behavior. That being said....he is still soooooooooooooo annoying! At one point, he is held at knife point and the other characters were told to drop their weapons or his throat will be slit...CALL HIS BLUFF! IT'S A WIN-WIN SITUATION! UGH! Well, I guess it does not really matter; as expected, he eventually gets becomes more likable (or at least more tolerable) as the film goes on because an amazing thing happens to him, he finds his inner courage, blah, blah, blah...

While I do not really have any specific problems with the film, though I do have general ones. Besides the ones I mentioned above, I thought the rest of the characters were kind of bland, particularly Prince Caspian. I do not know why, but he just did not impress me that much as a leader. There were also times when it felt like the film itself was more like a junior "Pirates of the Caribbean" movie in the same way that the first film felt more like a junior version of "The Lord of the Rings". That might be a little unfair given my lack of knowledge about the books and the timing of this films release, but that is just the way it turned out. As a result, these factors end make the film seem much longer than its nearly two hour running time.

*WARNING: MINOR SPOILER ALERT*

Despite what I said up above, the Christian overtones are kept to a minimum in this third-go-round, only being hinted at when the characters are discussing their faith that something good will come out of a tire situation. It becomes a lot more obvious at the end with the appearance of Aslan (a wonderful voice performance by Liam Neeson once again)and a gateway toward "his country". Obviously, one's personal beliefs may play a part in how you may view this scene. Although I am not personally a religious person, I thought it was well done; it was not in-your-face, but it was enough to get the message across concerning believing in one's self and the possibility of another world beyond our own.

*SPOILERS END HERE*

All that being said, this was a pretty good film. It was not as good as the first movie and there is nothing fantastic about it on a technological or substantive level. Still, it is a fairly enjoyable family movie that will leave you with feeling happier than when you entered. I do not strongly recommend it, but if you happen upon it at some point, either in theaters or elsewhere, I will not try to stop you.

My Fellow Americans (1996)

Starring: Jack Lemmon, James Gardner, Dan Aykroyd

Directed by Peter Segal

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Fellow_Americans

IMDb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117119/

"My Fellow Americans" is a film about two ex-Presidents and longtime rivals, Russell Kramer (Jack Lemmon) and Matt Douglas (James Gardner), who reluctantly put aside their differences in order to uncover a plot against them set up by the current man in the Oval Office (Dan Aykroyd).

This is a really good movie. The main laughs come from Kramer and Douglas fighting with one another over their various professional and personal shortcomings. I feel that if the lines that they deliver would not have worked with other actors, but screen veterans Lemmon and Gardner are such professionals that their delivery is very natural and sincere (even if their characters are actually being very insincere). There are also a number of funny parts where they end up in awkward situations while dealing with the common folk, as well as small yet humorous supporting roles like a vice-president who keeps making inappropriate remarks at the wrong time (Joe Biden, I mean...John Heard).

The plot itself is very interesting because it explores the mindset of a former commander-in-chief: what it is like to be the most powerful man in the world, the feelings of disapproval, and the little quirks that develop while in office (Kramer and Douglas both have their own personal versions of "Hail to the Chief"). In the end, this is what really brings the two together (though they never truly stop competing with one another): the fact that they are the only ones who know what it is like to hold the highest office in the land, only to fall from grace and find themselves dancing with a panda. That last part will make sense if you watch the film.

The story-line also has a lot of twists and turns, and almost ends on a bit of a downer, but then perks right back up again. The only problem I have with watching the movie is the fact that a lot of what is discussed are problems that, 14 years after its release, we are still dealing with (or rather not dealing with) today, which is a little disheartening. However, I do not blame the film itself, but rather [insert unfavorable institution here].

Anyway, it is an enjoyable film and I recommend it.

Network (1976)

Starring: Faye Dunaway, William Holden, Peter Finch, and Robert Duvall

Directed by Sidney Lumet

IMDb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074958/

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_(film)

 

“I’m as mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore!!!”

-Howard Beale (Peter Finch)

 

“Network” is an excellent movie. Pardon the cliché, but this is one of those films that get better with age. This is good news for itself, not so good news for our society. The great Sidney Lumet’s satire on the modern media predicted what was eventually going to come: a world dominated by a media that produces cheaply produced garbage where people can say or do anything they want with it having any sort of factual, artistic, or in anyway meaningful value. Many of the elements of the film have eerie similarities to “contemporary” cable-news programs and reality shows; this can also be extended to the content on the radio and Internet as well. In other words, it is so relevant that it is scary.

The film starts out with a brief to the struggling United Television Network, which is taken over by a major corporation. When the evening news anchor Howard Beale (Peter Finch) is fired, he announces that he will kill himself on his final broadcast, causing a sensation around the country. As events unfold, Beale not only finds himself keeping his job, but also becomes the centerpiece of a new programming schedule set up by Diana Christenson (Faye Dunaway), a new producer at the network. These new developments worry the UTN News president Max Schumacher (William Holden), who not only thinks that his friend is being taken advantage of, but that the fate of his entire profession is at sake.

Terrific acting and writing hold the intriguing plot of the film together. Holden and Dunaway play excellent as their respective contrasting characters, the old guard who wants to keep the dignity of broadcast news and the new up-and-comer who is only concerned with making a profit. At the same time, both of them admit to having flaws, which brings a certain human element to their roles. However, the best character of this whole thing is Beale himself, in what would be Finch’s last role in a feature film (he died not long after it was released in theaters and became the first posthumous Oscar winner for Best Actor, which he rightfully deserved). As he descends more and more into his own madness (he has a mental disorder which is never disclosed, though if I had to guess I would say he has schizophrenia or bipolar disorder) as well as the madness created by those around him, he makes the transition from anchorman, to prophesier, to corporate hack all within relatively short period of time. This is mostly thanks to a number of “well-crafted” rants, brought to the screen by Paddy Chayefsky (who also won a rightfully-deserved Oscar for his work on this movie, in his case for Best Screenplay). As a matter of fact, all of the dialogue that comes out of everyone’s mouths in this film is memorizing and really takes the picture to a whole new level of sophistication. Some of the speeches go on a long time, but it is all worth it.

So there you have it. “Network” is a film that remains vivid reminder of the dangerous path that a society can take when it starts to lose track of its ideals and humanity, a path that we may be lead down right now. In today’s hostile environment, it is a little hard not to watch Beale’s now-famous (or rather infamous) “Mad As Hell” speech without being a little disturbed by the idea that feelings held by those in the film are still being echoed almost thirty-five years later by many of us in real life who feel that we are losing control over our own lives and our whole world in general…and that we do not want to take it anymore. Nonetheless, this is one of my favorite movies of all time and I strongly recommend it.

Once Upon a Time in the West (1968)

Starring: Henry Fonda, Claudia Cardinale, Jason Robards, Charles Bronson, Gabriele Ferzeti

Directed by Sergio Leone

IMDb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0064116/

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Once_Upon_a_Time_in_the_West

"Once Upon a Time in the West" is the kind of movie you fall in love with. It shows all the aspects that people have come to enjoy about the western genre, and through the eyes of complex characters as they struggle, fail, and prosper in a live-or-die environment.

It starts off with a group of robbers standing around at a train track. And that is it; they just stand there, drinking water and investigating the actions of a fly for about 5-10 minutes. And yet it is fascinating to watch. They are then confronted by Charles Bronson, who plays a role similar to the one played by Clint Eastwood in Sergio Leone's other "Spaghetti westerns": he does not have a real name, is generally a loner, and does not talk very much. Unlike Eastwood's character, however, his is motivated by personal reasons rather than money. He is also different in the fact that he frequently plays what has to be one of the creepiest harmonica ever (and he is consequently refereed to as "Harmonica" as the film progresses). Its haunting sound does not always spell doom...but sometimes it does.

In the following scene, a family by the surname of McBain is about to welcome their matriarch, who is arriving from New Orleans at a nearby train station. However, they are brutally murdered on their farm by a gang of outlaws lead by Frank, portrayed by the legendary Henry Fonda in a role where he plays against type. His calm demeanor and soft blue eyes that brought a sense of humility to his other characters make this role even more sinister. Although his action show that he posses a certain level of intelligence, he is too cold-blooded to be anything more than a killer.

When Jill McBain (Claudia Cardinale) first arrives, she observes the town around her in what is one of the best shots of the whole film. It shows everyone just going about their daily lives before entering the outskirts, revealing the beautiful mountains of Monument Valley in Utah where it was filmed. It is set to the brilliant score by Ennio Morricone, who is basically to Leone what John Williams is to Spielberg. On a side note, the whole soundtrack to this film is brilliant, from the aforementioned harmonica tune, the main theme which I just mentioned and even the humorous "trotting" music that is played later on. It just really sets the tone for the movie and this scene is the perfect example of it.

Before arriving home, she goes into a shop where she meets Harmonica, as well as Cheyenne (Jason Robards), a crude outlaw who nonetheless has a heart and ends up. When she finds that her family is dead, her mourning is brief and her tough personality makes her decide to remain where she is in order to make a new life for herself, becoming a symbol of self-reliance and individualism that helped propel the West into a established part of American culture.

It turns out that her family was killed because her husband had refused to hand over his land to a railroad baron named Morton (Gabriele Ferzeti) who is in collaboration with Frank. Morton is a surprisingly sympathetic villain because, although he does posses a sense of monetary greed, his real goal is to have is railroad reach the Pacific Ocean before he succumbs to tuberculosis, which is slowly crippling him. It is interesting to see him and Frank interact with each other because even though they are technically partners, they have different goals and ways of getting things accomplished...and they do not get along very well. Frank thinks that he is physically and emotionally weak, while he believes that Frank is a wild man who is too dangerous to be associated with. As a result, the uneasy relationship slowly but surely deteriorates.

On the other side of the conflict, Jill, Cheyenne, and Harmonica, despite not always being on the best of terms themselves, manage to form an alliance in order to defend the farm. Meanwhile, Jill discovers her late husband's (Frank Wolff) plans and decides to pursue them. I will not say what they are, but they continue the whole theme of a new beginning for the people who live in the West.

In short, this film is a masterpiece. The great acting, fantastic music, and wonderful story all come together into this wonderful work of art. Almost needless to say, It is one of my personal favorite movies of all time. I definitely recommend it.

The Wolfman (2010)

Benicio Del Toro, Anthony Hopkins, Emily Blunt

 

 

Inspired by the classic Universal film that launched a legacy of horror, The Wolfman brings the myth of a cursed man back to its iconic origins. Oscar-winner Benicio Del Toro stars as Lawrence Talbot, a haunted nobleman lured back to his family estate after his brother vanishes. Reunited with his estranged father (Oscar-winner Anthony Hopkins), Talbot sets out to find his brother...and discovers a horrifying destiny for himself. [Note: this synopsis was shamelessly stolen from Flixster on Facebook].

 

This is a very good movie. While it is not spectacular in anyway, it is an intriguing film that supplies decent action sequences while exploring the hidden demons of man and the beast within.

 

De Toro does a good job as Talbot, who must simultaneously stop his own murderous rampage while also confront his unfortunate past. His transformation into the Wolfman is pretty cool, and the final result is fitting as well. He also runs really fast; I mean he is like Taz the Tasmanian devil from the Looney Tunes at times. Hopkins drifts through the first part and barely seems to be acting at all, but as his character develops more, he appears to become more involved in the role. And, not surprisingly, he is really crazy. Emily Blunt, as the semi-love interest of the story, plays a relatively minor role (except at the end), but she does well with what she has. Hugo Weaving also did a good job as a snobby but determined detective.

 

More of an action than a horror film, it nonetheless has fun showing off the gruesome deaths of the wolfman’s victims, which can be both bloody and pretty funny at the same time (and for those who are concerned, do not worry, it is not done in a campy fashion). I personally like the parts that take place in the woods, but the London scenes are pretty good as well, especially when all of the prim and proper English guys freak out when Talbot transforms.

 

The movie does have its flaws. Some of the scenes at the beginning are a bit choppy: the characters will be talking and then all the sudden it skips to the next part for no reason. I guess the filmmakers were trying to speed things up a bit so it did not drag out too long, which they should be given credit for, but they should have been a little more careful when it came to the editing. I also did not care much for the dream sequences; they were just too random, though it was kind of amusing to see Talbot have a double nightmare that each last but a few seconds.

 

None of this really matters in the last thirty minutes or so, which I think is the best part of the movie. It shows the violent struggle between a father and son, which perfectly illustrates the internal battle that man must fight in order to “defeat” his evil nature, though as the climax reveals, it never really goes away entirely.

 

Overall, it is an enjoyable time. For those who are wondering how this compares to the original 1940s film, I am afraid I cannot say since I have yet to see it, though I am now encouraged to do so after seen this new version. Anyway, I recommend this movie.

Review: Slumdog Millionaire (2008)

Dev Patel, Frida Pinto, Madhur Mittal

The story of how impoverished Indian teen Jamal Malik became a contestant on the Hindi version of "Who Wants to be A Millionaire?" -- an endeavor made without prize money in mind, rather, an effort to prove his love for his friend Latika, who is an ardent fan of the show. (This synopsis was shamelessly stolen from Facebook.)

Great movie. Every answer that Jamal tells reveals another piece of difficult upbringing and it all comes together to tell an inspiring story of trying to survive in a world filled with hostility. The actors (virtually unknown to American audiences before the movie came out) are all very impressive, and the depiction of the Indian slums is amazing, though I honestly do not know enough about them to verify the accuracy of it. Still, it was very enjoyable to watch, and I definitely recommend it.