Shichinin no samurai (1954)

Japanese master director Akira Kurosawa presents Seven Samurai, a 3.5 hour epic film set in 19th century rural Japan.

A peasant village is at the mercy of marauding seasonal thieves, so they hire people of great moral fibre (at least that is their intention) and military prowess to come and protect them.

I really enjoyed this film over 2 nights. The characters were colourful, flawed and unpredictable. The setting was thoroughly original and it was interesting just seeing agrarian Japan.

IMDB

The Way Back (2010)

I often fear that film interpretations of fact based epics will default towards the emotional rather than take pains to help the viewer enter the pain of the protagonist. The Way Back tackles the incredible trek of gulag escapees from the Soviet north down into northern India. It becomes clear that while they can not spend time on each of the characters, they do not default to a soft retelling. The harsh realities are depicted unfettered by too much orchestral dazzle.

IMDB

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)

In anticipation of the film which I got advance tickets for about 3 weeks before the opening night, I reread The Hobbit. This is the first time I reread it since the first time back in 1987. I thoroughly enjoyed the book though I wish Tolkien had been encouraged to write an adult version of events following the publication of The Lord of the Rings. I was deeply moved by Bilbo's goodness.

To the film now. I was worried about the high frame rate (48 frames per second is twice as many as traditional film) and there was some trepidation in regards to 3D - would it be gimmicky? I fretted without reason - neither was a hindrance, in fact the film was so crisp, engaging, warm, and real feeling that I was immediately sucked in. As an aside, if you don't like 3D or high frame rate, then see it in 2D at 24 fps.

The jovial nature of the children's tale was maintained with plenty of slapstick and one-liners. I laughed out loud on numerous occasions. The character flaws were front and centre in every scene except when they became heroic - then it was a little over the top. It would be unkind to highlight any single character, hero or villain, as they were all magnificent.

Another worry I had was the caricaturization of the 13 dwarves with their wild hair, tattoos, beards and bling. The looks suite the characters and I was very pleased with their onscreen personas.

I plan on seeing the film in theatre at least 2 more times. It's candy.

[I'm 64 films behind in my reviews, so I thought I'd offer my 2 cents on this ahead of when I would reach it in April]

Official Site | IMDB

The Christians (1977)

 One of my recent interests has been church history. A long standing passion of mine is Christian theology, which is illuminated by church history. Documentarian Bamber Gascoigne produced this 13-part made-for-TV series on the history of Christians. Stylistically, it is marked by the era in which it is made (the 1970s), but the era also impacts the approach that Gascoigne takes in presenting the Christians. In recent decades we have seen the emergence of a rather vocal Christian right in the United States, a steep decline in the practice of Christianity in Europe, and the renewed popularity of atheism and interest in other world religions. This has led to Christianity being looked down upon by the popular culture (I just heard a man singing on the radio about how Christianity makes no sense to him, so he's picking hell - yes, it is ironic). When Gascoigne makes this 11 hour documentary, Christianity is still has a strong western presence and it is treated with respect.

The series begins in first century Jerusalem and follows the gradual geographic, cultural, political, and theological iterations over the next 20 centuries. Mr. Gascoigne narrates throughout and does a remarkable job presenting each major change in Christian culture by highlighting both the remnant architectural and artistic features from each era and the denominational representations from those changes (ie. the Amish are portrayed when speaking about Anabaptist history or Guatemalan Catholics are portrayed to show the colonial missions in Central and South America).

Because of its length, the series ensures that adequate depth is allocated since the breadth of the story is so great.

I highly rate this intricate telling of Christians' story. I would gladly watch the series several more times.

More Info

Doctor Zhivago (1965)

This is the first time watching Doctor Zhivago and what surprised me (and pleased me) the most was the genuinely flawed nature of the characters. While I despised some characters, they held my sympathy and while I loved other characters, I hated some of their decisions. Its tragedy and epic portrayal of the Russian revolution bring the film to an even greater height. It won't be the last time I watch it!

IMDB

Edvard Munch (1974)

A great skill was used to develop the film I just watched. It paints the portrait of celebrated and groundbreaking 19th century Norwegian artist Edvard Munch - famous for "The Scream." For three hours and forty minutes we survey scenes from Munch's life filmed as though it were a documentary where the characters are aware of the camera. Some characters are interviewed. Munch's diary is read as it was written, in the third person. And a narrator pronounces the chronology.

Beginning in a Protestant Christian home as a part of the middle class in Norway's capital city, Munch is surrounded by death, illness, and a social order that extorts and mistreats the lowest classes and their children. After losing his mother, he emerges into manhood and begins his rebellion with a group of bohemians who challenge every aspect of their culture. It is here that conflict arises between he and his father, but more strikingly it is where the great theme of his life's work begins: the threads that bond men and women together.

The series of failed relationships cast the learning and altogether rejected artist into a class all his own. He depicts the world in swirling colours, faces with pale and sickly complexions, and fades the sensory organs of his subjects where they meet their lovers.

Edvard Munch gains enormous popularity during his life while being lambasted by nearly all art critics across Europe. Pressing through all of this, Munch advances his new art form: visual psychology.

This is a masterpiece, unlike anything I have ever seen.

IMDB

Metropolis (1927)

This classic film about class struggle pulled out all the stops to generate a bleak, futuristic world where the masses were simply cogs in the wheel of progress (or at least labourers in an unfriendly factory). There are plenty of dials and steam in this analog future and not many smiles. Director Fritz Lang incorporates plenty of grouped choreographed movement and solo modern dances to demonstrate visually the moral of the film:

"The head and hand need a mediator, and that mediator is the heart!"

At the heart of the film is class struggle and considering that the film was made during the interwar period in Germany, I think it captures much of the sentiment of the Weimar Republic.

IMDB

Inception (2010)

Amazing. Superb. Mind blowing!

Christopher Nolan takes all the money and prestige from his other films (The Dark Knight, etc.) and pumps it into one of the most intelligent and creative films of all time. He also stacks the cast.

New wave criminals steal secrets by hacking victims dreams. They are presented with a challenge that they can't refuse: Hack into a man's dream to plant an idea.

The effects, complex twists, and incredible contemplation on reality, time, and pain raise this film to a higher plane.

Official Site | IMDB

Underground (1995)

Also known as Once Upon a Time there was a Country, this artsy and comedic biopic of the 20th Century life of Yugoslavia touches on both the pathos of its history and the resilience of the population.

Two scheming brothers in Belgrade end up fighting German invaders when the Nazis attack in the early 1940's. Leading them is the fearless and legendary Tito (shown in archive footage between eras) and surrounding them are people from every ethnic group in Yugoslavia who have joined together for a common cause. One brother is badly injured and is kept in a bomb shelter with other resistance fighters where they produce weapons while the other brother profits from their work long after the war is over as their only point of contact on the outside.

The film becomes much more surreal and it crosses path with a film crew producing an epic battle (which was in reality more humourous than heroic) before entering into the early 1990's when the two brothers end up on opposite sides of the civil war.

Rather than rendering a clear synopsis of Yugoslavia, Underground speaks of humanity and inhumanity between brothers. The film deserves the accolades it received.

IMDB

Amarcord (1973)

Federico Fellini is one of those filmmakers that I am not allowed to avoid as an enthusiast, and while I can certainly appreciate his otherworldly genre and his profound effect on cinema, his films can be rather tedious to watch.

Amarcord - one of his best known films - portrays a small Italian town as fascism and World War II pass by. The town is steeped in legend and crawling with wild-eyed characters, not the least of whom is Volpina the prostitute who swaggers in and out of scenes in her red dress. The town is the protagonist and a narrator shares tales with the viewer.

I enjoyed the film for its historical portrayal of Italy and the moments of comedy. Felllini's assertion that Italy's innocence and character remained despite Mussolini and having foreign military forces on their soil is clearly the message. I did not find myself overly drawn into the characters however and the music, as immortalized as it is, was awfully repetitive.

IMDB

All Quiet on the Western Front (1930)

This classic monochrome film can still generate discussion and sentiment decades after it was released.

Young American men portray Germans eager to defend their country at the beginning of the Great War. No where in the film are the soldiers explicitly defined as German nor their enemies the British, French, and Americans. This is done on purpose so that a viewer would be able to sympathize with the war weary Germans even though they had been the enemy just over a decade previous to the making of the film.

The men, who are just barely men are broken in several ways by the trauma they witness on the front lines.

In fashion with its period, the film does err on the side of melodrama, but this adds to the potency of the film setting it right before the Second World War.

IMDB

Mongol (2007)

Genghis Khan's mythical early years are depicted in this sweeping Mongolian drama.

Young Temudjin sees his father poisoned and then his leadership rights violated by another of his tribe only to be exiled with his family. He survives one trial after another before uniting Mongol khans.

This epic film is meant to draw attention to Khan's almost supernatural anointing and gifting as a leader of the great Mongol empire (similar to Alexander the Great or Cleopatra's god complex). I think it achieves much of this by revealing how superstitious he may have been and the era in which he conquered. The issues of justice ring true as well.

I enjoyed the sweeping cinematography of the Kazakh, Chinese and Mongol landscapes and the revelation of a culture that identified so much with horses.

Official Site | IMDB

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008)

David Fincher (dir. Zodiac, The Game, Fight Club) delivers a thoughtful meditation on age in this adaptation of an F. Scott Fitzgerald short story.

Benjamin Button is born with the physical ailments of an elderly man but with the innocent mind of a child. As time passes in his Louisiana home his body becomes younger and his mind matures. The film chronicles this mysterious occurrence over a span of 80 years or so in American history.

The pacing in the film is slow, but also needed as much of the film depends on steady progression and the sense that time is passing. The acting is also superb, giving tremendous strength to the characters. The soundtrack isn't overwhelming as it may have been in a similar film like Forrest Gump, but rather very much a supporting and subtle element.

Overall, the film is a fortress in filmmaking and a generous contribution to the art.

Official Site | IMDB

Watchmen (2009)

This year's big budget graphic novel epic has arrived following the massive successes of 300 and Sin City. As expected, the crowds came out, the visual effects department delivered, there was plenty of graphic violence, a gratuitous sex scene, and the characters were deeply flawed.

What would the United States be like if there were superhero crime fighters? Well, Watchmen is one person's interpretation. Only one of the characters is gifted with actual superpowers and that is Dr. Manhattan who was departicalized in a nuclear accident - now he can do pretty much everything he wants. His main job though is to stave off nuclear war with the Soviets. The bad guy, a secret until the end, wants to get the missiles in the air. And the real hero is Rorschach, a manic-revenge guy who is the only one still wearing a cape.

While the film is a great production as a whole, it doesn't quite nail the whole issue of human nature as it means to and aside from Rorschach, the characters are slightly boring. The soundtrack rocks, Malin Akerman looks great and so do a few choice scenes, but it ultimately fails to provoke.

Official Site | IMDB

Australia (2008)

I highly anticipated this film from Baz Luhrmann (Moulin Rouge). He adds unrestrained style and flair to his films which is refreshing since so many films cater to as broad an audience as possible and become bland as a result.

The story centres on a woman who, after just arriving in Australia, becomes the manager of a cattle ranch in the outback. The ranch provides the only competition to a massive cattle producer during wartime. A relationship forms between the Mrs. and her drover. But the film doesn't end there. Luhrmann tackles several historical elements of his native land - the main one being the whites' relationship with aboriginies and those of mixed race. 

The film goes on for 2.5 hours and the climaxes don't necessarily increase. Many of the performances are superb and there is hardly a boring moment in the film. I found the computer generated cattle somewhat unbelievable, but it is hard to find good bovine actors. 

Official Site | IMDB

There Will Be Blood (2007)

Being a fan of PT Anderson's work (Magnolia, Punch Drunk Love), I have been anticipating this film for a year. My expectations were blown quite literally out of the ground.

Daniel Planview (whose portrayal by Daniel Day-Lewis won the Oscar for best actor) seeks riches with all his being. He risks his life and others' lives while mining and then drilling for oil. Being able to play the part of a father or a Christian when opportunity knocks helps his image until image isn't important anymore. In one confession, he says that he really does not like people. Added to the plot of this oil tycoon is a religious wacko (Paul Dano of Little Miss Sunshine fame) who overtakes the community in another fashion, though with perhaps similar motives.

The film moves effortlessly across three decades and culminates in one of the most stirring and disturbing endings I have ever seen. The last two words echo for days and days.

Anderson takes this film to a new plain. The music is not typical of a sweeping western or epic drama. It resembles more a horror film. The effects of the early 20th century oil drills are stunning and so are the violent accident scenes (realistic to a fault perhaps). As I can not compare the book to Anderson's screenplay, I can't say who wrote the story better, but Anderson's version is supernatural. The film haunted my dreams through the night and into the next day.

Truths: When a person rejects what little blessing his or her father gives him or her, they take on the curse. Living for yourself yields no joy and it yields a distrust and hatred for others.

Official Site | IMDB

Beowulf (2007)

I have a deep respect for Robert Zemeckis, the director of Forrest Gump, Cast Away, and Back to the Future. I think he's exploring new territory with 1/2 actor 1/2 computer animation film and I commend him for it. I just think it looks too much like a video game and the story and characters have to be pretty compelling to draw me away from thinking "this looks so fake." I don't think I ever had the desire to watch The Polar Express for the same reason. The animation is quite good, but it's distracting how it doesn't fit an existing genre (and the closest genre is Sony Playstation).

That said, I think the story of wannabe hero Beowulf is quite compelling. The story is short enough to not lose the viewer and the tragic characters are at the very least represented well; Grendel's story and lines are perhaps the most captivating.

I have to admit now that I managed only the first of the three parts of Beowulf in university. I thought it was boring and I had plenty of other studying that seemed much more important at the time, so I can't really comment on whether it was a good adaptation - I'm assuming it is.

Something I find interesting is the way the film was marketed. Scenes of a musclebound hero shouting "I am Beowulf" let the viewer know that this will be a story about a self-centred hero and I think a lot of people are drawn to these types of films. I wasn't crazy about the idea as so many films like this are not multidimensional (stuff like Bond movies and the XXX franchise). I was startled to find how intriguing Beowulf was as a hero - unable to express his weakness, and he had some fierce weaknesses.

Official Site | IMDB

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)

The culmination of this 11-hour film is the glorious four hours that is The Return of the King. There is so much to say about this film, but I will restrain myself to a couple points.

Emotion is what makes this film work: The fear in each hobbit's eyes. They way Gimli trembles and brushes off fear at the same time. Eowyn's rejection and loss and love. Faramir's rejection and loss and love. Denethor's madness. Gollum's frustration. Gandalf's realization that all has been lost. Theoden's achievement on the battlefield and especially his rowsing speech to the Riders of Rohan. On and on. Really, credit needs to be given to all of the actors who truly made this film one of the heart.

On that same theme, I think the film could have reached an even higher height if the extras had been trained actors. Too often it was obvious what directions had been given to them. And another loss, and this goes for all three films, is how much of the fighting is unrealistic.

Now for a few of my favorite scenes.

Gandalf telling soldiers in Minas Tirith "You are soldiers of Gondor. Whatever comes through those gates, you will stand your ground." Then massive armored trolls bust through the gate with huge weapons that just sweep the soldiers as though they are straw. The look of shock in Gandalf's eyes tells so much.

Searching for the survivors and injured on Pelennor Fields really shows just a taste of what the battle did. In too many war movies, this part is skipped or glossed over. Pippin searches for Merry. Eomer searches for Eowyn and Thoeden. They know the losses were great.

Though there are so many more I could mention, Sam's realization of what he has sacrificed in his quest on Mount Doom is so heartwrenching.

The CG effects in this film far surpass the award winning ones in the previous two films. The battle sequences, Shelob and Gollum are superb.

The real magic of The Lord of the Rings is how it fleshes out timeless themes of humanity: identity, loss, fear, sacrifice, brotherhood, legacy, the battle against what is evil, miracles, transformation, and the spirit of adventure.

I could watch the entire trilogy right now. Again. And again. Bravo!

Official Site | IMDB

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

The most difficult of the three Lord of the Rings films to write is this middle one. It is supposed to provide some exposition for first time viewers, introduce seven more major characters, and leave the viewers hanging in limbo as there is still almost 4 hours left in part three. I think the writers did a fine job.

They didn't think there was enough tension in the story however and so the film veers wildly off course from the novel in The Two Towers. Frodo and co. are taken to Osgiliath. Travelers to Helm's Deep are ambushed by wargs. Aragorn barely survives the attack and is thought dead for a portion of the film. Elves show up to help save the Rohirrim. As much as these deviations bother me, they were inspired additions to the story (with the exception of the warg attack and Aragorn "dying").

What really takes this movie to the next level are the new characters. The Gollum/Smeagol split is captivating and viewers are instantly sympathetic to the pathetic creature. Treebeard's humour and originality adds a quirky personality to the cast. King Theoden of Rohan is fantastic as a conflicted, grieving, confused, and noble leader. Each one steals the scenes they are in.

Whereas in the first film we had one main narrative following the fellowship on their journey south, we now have seven major narratives: Frodo and friends, Treebeard and the hobbits, Aragorn and Legolas and Gimli, royalty from Rohan, Faramir and Gondorian soldiers, Arwen and Elrond, Saruman at Orthanc. The filmmakers do a terrific job of referencing the different stories and bridging the scenes without losing pace.

Now for the crowning piece of cinema that won 13 Oscars.
(FOTR and TTT took 6 combined)

Official Site | IMDB

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

After reading The Lord of the Rings I wanted to make the film. Peter Jackson beat me to it. That's probably a good thing, because he did perhaps the best that anyone could have done. I've watched each of the three movies at least 15 times - many of those times in theatre. They are some of my personal favorites and I could write several pages in response to the films. Here is some of what I think about film 1 (hopefully this isn't a repeat of what the millions of other people have commented on the film):

I watch this film as a gorgeous metaphysical poem. The journey of life which is full of camaraderie, the struggle against sin, prophetic voices, doubt, resilience, and pain. Each of the characters mean so much more than a direct metaphor for some theme or truth because they are dynamic characters in a narrative; they react surprisingly.

Continuing with the characters, this is what really drives the film. And there are so many main characters: The nine in the fellowship, the elven royalty, the enemies and their henchmen, Bilbo Baggins, and the ring of power. A great strength of the film is that it introduces each one of them to us and keeps them alive with revealing dialogue and unique passions.

The pacing of the film is careful and correct, but it still leaves the Tolkien fan insatiated. We want to see the barrow wights, Fatty Bolger, and less of Arwen, but ultimately, the fullness of the story is communicated. The sweeping and majestic panaramic views of Middle Earth say almost as much as the pages of description in the book.

As I consider the work put into the film, be it designing sets to sewing costumes to pondering the lines of the film, I know that it was a film meant to be made. We are all meant to watch it. It is a visual feast.

Official Site | IMDB