Friday, November 26, 2010

Never Let Me Hunt Horcruxes for 127 Hours


"Never Let Me Go," based on the novel by Kazuo Ishiguro, follows Kathy, Ruth and Tommy, three schoolchildren, as they mature from their childhood years to early adulthood. The three of them attended the mysterious Hailsham, a secretive private academy for "special" children. As the children grow up, they eventually uncover the secrets of Hailsham, as well as their true identity. The film, directed by Mark Romanek ("One Hour Photo"), is hauntingly beautiful. From the elegant performances from the three young leads (Carey Mulligan, Keira Knightley, and Andrew Garfield) to the stunning cinematography, the film works on both a cerebral and emotional level. The score, by Rachel Portman, adds great poignancy to each scene. But what makes "Never Let Me Go" great is that it insists on asking the big questions. What makes for a memorable life? How does one accept death? Why does time slip away so quickly? While the film does not directly answer any of these questions, it at least makes the audience care for the characters who are struggling with them.


"Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1" continues the adventures of the boy wizard as he hunts down Lord Voldemort's Horcruxes (seven fragments of the Dark Lord's soul) in hopes that he can finally finish off the evil wizard for good. While "Hallows" does not rank as high as director David Yates's previous films in the series, "Order of the Phoenix" and "The Half-Blood Prince," it makes for an engaging enough first part to epic finale. Part of what prevents the film truly soaring is its constant reliance on exposition. While the novel by JK Rowling included much of this exposition, it unfortunately did not translate well from page to the screen. By this point, it's almost near impossible for a casual fan of the "Potter" films to comprehend the series's dense plot. Thankfully, the film's acting makes up for some of the script's weaker points. Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson give great performances as the now famous trio Harry, Ron, and Hermione. Watson, in particular, lends the film a certain emotional weightiness. But, in the end, this is only Part 1 of a greater film. Hopefully, when Part 2 is released this July, the combined film will make up for some of the flaws of its first part.


"127 Hours," the latest film from director Danny Boyle, stars James Franco as Aron Ralston, a mountain climber with an adventuring, if reckless, personality. While exploring the canyons of Moab, Utah, Ralston gets his hand stuck under a boulder, trapping him in a narrow canyon for - you guessed it - 127 hours. The film, based on a true story, manages to convey the reality of Ralston's situation through Boyle's unique style. Boyle heightens and exaggerates all of Ralston's emotions through several different visual and aural techniques. For example, when Ralston becomes disoriented, the film's visuals become less clear and the film's sound becomes less clear to match Ralston's state of mind. When he is in pain, Boyle uses sharp noises to convey Aron's agony. Boyle's energetic direction, paired with a solid performance from James Franco as Raslton, makes "127 Hours" an engaging, and emotionally uplifting, story. Although the film's ending teeters a bit too far into sentimentality for my liking, Boyle reigns in the emotion well enough to make "127 Hours" one of the best films of the year.

Sunday, October 17, 2010

A "Social" Conversation


I recently had a discussion with my friend Justin about "The Social Network." Ironically, we had the conversation on Facebook! DO HO HO! Since we both brought up some interesting points on the film, I've decided to post the conversation in full on the blog! The following conversation started after Justin commented on the film's hyperbolic tone.

John: I don't think the film's hyperbole is really a problem. The movie makes it very clear that it is not trying to imitate real life. After all, no one really talks in fast-paced, witty, Aaron Sorkin dialogue.

Justin: My comment on hyperbole is in reference to the gross sensationalism, which is good, otherwise the film would be quite boring.

John: I see. I do think the film is trying to say something though. Forgive my pretentious rhetoric, but I see it as a film which puts classic themes (ambition, friendship, betrayal) in a modern context. Before seeing the film, I thought it would be more of a comment on isolation in the digital age, but it's really more about the dangers of ambition and greed.

Justin: True. The majority of the characters have hedonistic tendencies.

John: But that does not mean the film approves of their hedonistic tendencies.

Justin: Definitely not. I think Zuckerberg is the contrast to the hedonism of his environment. He's more "pure." He wants to make something cool and significant, while everyone else wants money and women.

John: I did find it interesting that he did not really care about the money, but, in the end, he screws over his best friend - his only friend. So, I don't really seem him as a "hero." Ultimately, what he did was pretty pathetic. He created a website to impress a girl.

Justin: Right. And I don't think he's a hero because the film does not present an objective morality. For all its hyperbole, everyone is human and prone to error.

John: True. The film doesn't pick sides. While I disagreed with many of Mark's decisions in the film, I could see his point of view, especially when dealing with the Winklevoss twins.


Hey Reader! Do you like this banter? Should I try something like this again? Let me know in the comments! Also, feel free to leave your opinion on the film - to keep the discussion going.

Saturday, October 9, 2010

Grades?

I hate grades. I don't like them anymore. My opinions always change and I feel like written reviews give a better idea of how much I like a film.

From now on, I am going to just list all the films of the year in descending order - from most favorite to least favorite.

P.S. I will try to write a full review sometime soon.