When you see 20+ movies in 10 days each year, based on a few words printed in the guide, you are bound to see some bad movies here and there. Each year I have had 1 or 2 duds, although last year was either of a higher quality or I chose better. This year, I've had 2 duds, so below I cover them so you don't have to go through the same pain.
Movie # 5 - The Act of Killing
The Act of Killing is a documentary which explores the mindset of a group of men who were known as "executioners" during the Indonesian purge of communists in 1965 and 1966 following a military overthrow of the government. The doco follows 3 of these people in particular, all of whom are extremely proud of their role in abducting and killing up to thousands of people who were, or more importantly were deemed to be, communists and a danger to the new ruling power. An absolutely shocking chapter of world history that is probably largely unknown and in my opinion, deserved much better treatment than this film gives it.
I hated this movie, while I was watching it and every time I have thought of it since. I cannot understand how this has won "audience favourite" prizes at other film festivals and has such a good rating on IMDB and so many good reviews. It is not only morally objectionable (the perpetrators were so proud of their killing techniques and quantities without being able to explain why so the filmmakers decide to allow them to re-enact the killings for the cameras in any way that they choose - which results in truly offensive scenes performed by people with no remorse for their victims) but it is extremely poorly constructed. The film takes up almost 3 hours when anyone with any film editing skills could have cut that down to around 2 hours or less - so many boring, unnecessary scenes are included that add nothing but exasperation for the viewer. There is no focus and we follow random people at random times with no direction at all.
I suspect that the reason for all the prizes is the fact that the process seems to have ended with one of the key perpetrators coming to regret his actions and really understand the depth of the horrors he perpetrated, particularly after acting as a victim in one of the many annoying "movies" the participants create. It also sheds a little light on the ridiculousness of these paramilitary groups that have so much power in Indonesia (which might have made a better subject matter). This is a great outcome but unfortunately it is not going to bring any justice to the victims, and in fact I believe that several of the other perpetrators simply had their egos stroked even more and really enjoyed reminiscing about the murder of thousands of innocent people that they justify as "doing what we were told and what was right". They seem to have no conscience at all. I just found it all morally sickening, especially given that the filmmakers can't have known that any of the subjects would actually "reform" their views. Don't be fooled by all the prizes.
Movie #10 - Sapi
Last night produced our second unexpected dud. Billed as a "supernatural thriller", the description of this Phillipines movie turned out to be only 50% right. The movie covered some supernatural events, but had 0% thrills. It sounded promising and started alright, as we watch two journalism crews from 2 rival news stations as they roam the city of Manila looking for exciting stories to cover to boost their ratings in the wake of major storms and floods. Apparently there have been reports of "mass possessions" with people experiencing demonic possession. Crew A gets to a house in time to record footage of a possessed middle aged school teacher, who is soon cured in the lamest exorcism ever put to film. Crew B arrive a bit later and get some interviews but no possession footage. It seems we are going to get some good commentary on whether the media is making the news or filming the news and how much manipulation goes on. But all that really falls by the wayside after a camera man working freelance for Crew A and B gives Crew B the footage from Crew A. Crew B's station unknowingly airs the footage uncut first, which upsets the formerly possessed lady and seems to result in some "demonic" activity following Crew B around.
The "demonic" activity in this movie is laughable and in my book barely registers as ghostly let alone a demon. We get a few doors slamming shut, some bad dreams (which none of them seem to actually take any notice of whatsoever or have any ramifications), a bit of scary whispering. Any time there seems to be some kind of tension building, it finishes with a ridiculous scene which evaporates the mood and leaves you wondering what is going on. There is just so little logic to the construction of the movie and the script that you can't take it seriously. There is no tension or frights. And there is no resolution. Possibly because it had no budget and no special effects at all.
This is just an out and out bad movie which has failed to make any point. Disappointing that this has come from director Brillante ma Mendoza who has had several popular movies at the film festival in past years. This is definitely not going to sit in the Top 10. And it doesn't even fall into the "so bad it's good" category as there is just nothing to enjoy.
Wednesday 20 November 2013
Monday 18 November 2013
BIFF Movie # 4 - Bethlehem and Movie # 9 - must-see The Square
Each year at the Film Festival I try to avoid the comedies and the American and English movies, and some of the Australian movies if I know they'll get a release anyway. Instead I use the limited time and tickets to head towards the low budget horror flicks, Asian cinema and particularly Middle Eastern cinema. The goal here is pretty simple - try to find out more about what is happening in the world around me, from the perspective of those who are there and have something to say. Despite the rise of social media as a way of getting the stories out to the rest of the world, it still takes a fair bit of effort to really understand what is going on in some of these places and I must say I don't really make the time to do it regularly. So the Film Festival is one way that I can gain a deeper understanding. Two films so far this festival have achieved that to different degrees.
One of those choices I made for that reason was to see "Bethlehem". Not a religious movie at all, it is set in Palestine and looks at how the Israeli Secret Service is activating people in Palestine to spy for them to try to stop further acts of terrorism. The trouble is that there is still so much division between the Israelis, Jews, Arabs and more radical Islamic groups. Even though there is a Palestinian National Authority which rules the West Bank, the Hamas group has taken the Gaza Strip and continue to fight both the Isrealis and their 'own' people in the PNA.
The movie sets up with establishing the relationship between Israeli Secret Service agent Razi and young Palestinian teen Sanfur. Sanfur has become a 'collaborator' in jealousy of his older brother Ibrahim who is a leader of the Martyr's Brigade which is undertaking suicide bombings in Jerusalem. Razi has been getting close to Sanfur in an attempt to gather intelligence on Ibrahim who they are trying to shut down but he has gone into hiding. Ibrahim is planning something big when the film opens but Sanfur doesn't know much....or does he? Razi discovers through other agents that Sanfur has been transferring money for Ibrahim and lying to Razi. This is a blow but he determines to use it to flush out Ibrahim while trying to protect Sanfur with whom Razi has become too close. Events then begin to accelerate and the stakes increase and Sanfur begins to be torn apart by the pressure of hiding his spy activity and helping his brother and making his father proud of him.
The thing about Bethlehem is that it is a very well written, authentic film with a lot of tension and strong acting. But it keeps the focus in very tight on these characters and therefore you don't really get a solid understanding of the political factors and the motivations behind either side. So it didn't really achieve my goal of understanding the conflict but it did give me a feel for what day to day life must be like in these areas where there is so much violence and conflict. It is a great film and the ending is absolutely devastating - in the screening I attended on Friday night, the film ended and the screen went black and there was an audible "oh" from the audience which signified to me that most had not expected it could end that way. No Hollywood happy endings with things wrapped up neatly here at BIFF! Bit like real life!
The second choice I made for this reason was to see "The Square". The Square is a documentary unlike the fictional Bethlehem. This film was amazing and deserves to be more widely seen than it was and than it will be. It is screening again this Sunday 24 November 2013 at 12pm so if you are interested in this sort of thing, I'd recommend you get along.
The film follows the events surrounding the revolution in Egypt which occurred in 2011 when the people of Egypt decided they had 'had enough' of the military regime ruling Egypt. Egypt had been under "Emergency Law" since 1967 (apart from a small period in the 80s) and under the rule of Hosni Mubarak since 1981 - an unprecedented 30 year reign with no end in sight as he was grooming his son to take over when he was ready to retire. The issues that people were angry about included the lack of free elections, no free speech, police brutality (secret police regularly arresting and beating anyone who spoke out), corruption of the government and army, economic conditions such as low wages, and just the emergency law conditions in general.
In early 2011, a series of mainly peaceful protests began which we see first-hand through a camera crew following an intelligent young revolutionist, a well respected Egyptian actor, a singer who became the voice of the revolution, a girl seeking more rights for women amongst other justice issues, and a man who is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood religious group. This mixed group of friends are well involved and we see fascinating footage of them gathering more people to their cause and how they use unity across different religions (Christian, Jew, Muslim) and political views as their tool of protest. The action all takes place in and around Cairo's Tahrir Square which often hosted millions of protestors. While largely peaceful, there were several violent clashes which look to have been escalated by the armed forces to using live ammunition on the people. In the first revolution, at least 846 people were killed and more than 6000 injured. In February 2011 they got their way and Mubarak stepped down, appointing the Supreme Council of Armed Forces to run the country for six months. However, our revolutionaries notice that nothing has really changed despite the announcement of a free election in June 2012, and so the protests start up again, at first peacefully and again becoming more violent as the days drag on. The problem is that there will only be 2 parties in the election - the military who had effectively already been ruling (badly) and the new party started by the Muslim Brotherhood. Not much of a choice.
The acquittal of Mubarak from charges arising from being complicit in the murder of the original protestors starts a new protest and an interim government is appointed until the elections. The election brings the Muslim Brotherhood into power in both the parliament and as the President of the country. The problem is that the Muslim Brotherhood has some fairly strong views on religion and with only 51% of the vote, they are far from having the support of all people. In time, nothing has really changed, there is no new constitution, no raising of the emergency law and in fact, the leader Mohamed Morsi votes himself extensive new powers and makes himself virtually a new Pharoah. This stirs the protestors again, who gather regularly to call for the removal of Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood and installation of real democracy. In July 2013, Morsi is removed in a coup and a civilian installed as interim president. However, to this day the military still effectively rule and not much has changed, and in fact there are more issues due to the pro-Morsi groups who continue to protest and fight against the other revolutionaries to reinstate Morsi to power. Violence against the people continues by the army and by each other.
As you can see from the above, there are a lot of big issues in Egypt and although the main events did make the news here, before seeing this doco I had no idea how frequent the protests were (on an almost daily basis over weeks and months, and in 4 main blocks) and what they involved. The injection of the Muslim Brotherhood into the previously secular protest movement certainly seemed to derail it quite a bit without improving the situation markedly. What amazed me were the scenes were citizens were arguing with the protestors about why they didn't need to protest because everything was fine. Clearly everything was not fine when you see the shocking footage of the armed forces firing on unarmed (apart from a few rocks) citizens or driving over them in tanks and vans. Yes, there is some footage in here that some will not be able to tolerate and certainly made me gasp out loud at how brutal it was.
The best thing about this film is that it depicts both the personal and the bigger picture successfully. You get a good understanding of what has happened to date, with the personal impact to make you really care about it. I just wish there were some solutions or some way to help. All I can do for now is reflect on what a lucky country this is and how we need to continue to ensure that we maintain our democracy and freedom of speech so that this never happens to us. Maybe if more people watched this (along with perfect doco partners "The Reluctant Revolutionary" which portrayed the so-called Arab Spring from Yemen's point of view, and "Mugabe vs the White African" which shows what non-free elections will do to a country with a terrible dictator in power). Essential viewing.
One of those choices I made for that reason was to see "Bethlehem". Not a religious movie at all, it is set in Palestine and looks at how the Israeli Secret Service is activating people in Palestine to spy for them to try to stop further acts of terrorism. The trouble is that there is still so much division between the Israelis, Jews, Arabs and more radical Islamic groups. Even though there is a Palestinian National Authority which rules the West Bank, the Hamas group has taken the Gaza Strip and continue to fight both the Isrealis and their 'own' people in the PNA.
The movie sets up with establishing the relationship between Israeli Secret Service agent Razi and young Palestinian teen Sanfur. Sanfur has become a 'collaborator' in jealousy of his older brother Ibrahim who is a leader of the Martyr's Brigade which is undertaking suicide bombings in Jerusalem. Razi has been getting close to Sanfur in an attempt to gather intelligence on Ibrahim who they are trying to shut down but he has gone into hiding. Ibrahim is planning something big when the film opens but Sanfur doesn't know much....or does he? Razi discovers through other agents that Sanfur has been transferring money for Ibrahim and lying to Razi. This is a blow but he determines to use it to flush out Ibrahim while trying to protect Sanfur with whom Razi has become too close. Events then begin to accelerate and the stakes increase and Sanfur begins to be torn apart by the pressure of hiding his spy activity and helping his brother and making his father proud of him.
The thing about Bethlehem is that it is a very well written, authentic film with a lot of tension and strong acting. But it keeps the focus in very tight on these characters and therefore you don't really get a solid understanding of the political factors and the motivations behind either side. So it didn't really achieve my goal of understanding the conflict but it did give me a feel for what day to day life must be like in these areas where there is so much violence and conflict. It is a great film and the ending is absolutely devastating - in the screening I attended on Friday night, the film ended and the screen went black and there was an audible "oh" from the audience which signified to me that most had not expected it could end that way. No Hollywood happy endings with things wrapped up neatly here at BIFF! Bit like real life!
The second choice I made for this reason was to see "The Square". The Square is a documentary unlike the fictional Bethlehem. This film was amazing and deserves to be more widely seen than it was and than it will be. It is screening again this Sunday 24 November 2013 at 12pm so if you are interested in this sort of thing, I'd recommend you get along.
The film follows the events surrounding the revolution in Egypt which occurred in 2011 when the people of Egypt decided they had 'had enough' of the military regime ruling Egypt. Egypt had been under "Emergency Law" since 1967 (apart from a small period in the 80s) and under the rule of Hosni Mubarak since 1981 - an unprecedented 30 year reign with no end in sight as he was grooming his son to take over when he was ready to retire. The issues that people were angry about included the lack of free elections, no free speech, police brutality (secret police regularly arresting and beating anyone who spoke out), corruption of the government and army, economic conditions such as low wages, and just the emergency law conditions in general.
In early 2011, a series of mainly peaceful protests began which we see first-hand through a camera crew following an intelligent young revolutionist, a well respected Egyptian actor, a singer who became the voice of the revolution, a girl seeking more rights for women amongst other justice issues, and a man who is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood religious group. This mixed group of friends are well involved and we see fascinating footage of them gathering more people to their cause and how they use unity across different religions (Christian, Jew, Muslim) and political views as their tool of protest. The action all takes place in and around Cairo's Tahrir Square which often hosted millions of protestors. While largely peaceful, there were several violent clashes which look to have been escalated by the armed forces to using live ammunition on the people. In the first revolution, at least 846 people were killed and more than 6000 injured. In February 2011 they got their way and Mubarak stepped down, appointing the Supreme Council of Armed Forces to run the country for six months. However, our revolutionaries notice that nothing has really changed despite the announcement of a free election in June 2012, and so the protests start up again, at first peacefully and again becoming more violent as the days drag on. The problem is that there will only be 2 parties in the election - the military who had effectively already been ruling (badly) and the new party started by the Muslim Brotherhood. Not much of a choice.
The acquittal of Mubarak from charges arising from being complicit in the murder of the original protestors starts a new protest and an interim government is appointed until the elections. The election brings the Muslim Brotherhood into power in both the parliament and as the President of the country. The problem is that the Muslim Brotherhood has some fairly strong views on religion and with only 51% of the vote, they are far from having the support of all people. In time, nothing has really changed, there is no new constitution, no raising of the emergency law and in fact, the leader Mohamed Morsi votes himself extensive new powers and makes himself virtually a new Pharoah. This stirs the protestors again, who gather regularly to call for the removal of Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood and installation of real democracy. In July 2013, Morsi is removed in a coup and a civilian installed as interim president. However, to this day the military still effectively rule and not much has changed, and in fact there are more issues due to the pro-Morsi groups who continue to protest and fight against the other revolutionaries to reinstate Morsi to power. Violence against the people continues by the army and by each other.
As you can see from the above, there are a lot of big issues in Egypt and although the main events did make the news here, before seeing this doco I had no idea how frequent the protests were (on an almost daily basis over weeks and months, and in 4 main blocks) and what they involved. The injection of the Muslim Brotherhood into the previously secular protest movement certainly seemed to derail it quite a bit without improving the situation markedly. What amazed me were the scenes were citizens were arguing with the protestors about why they didn't need to protest because everything was fine. Clearly everything was not fine when you see the shocking footage of the armed forces firing on unarmed (apart from a few rocks) citizens or driving over them in tanks and vans. Yes, there is some footage in here that some will not be able to tolerate and certainly made me gasp out loud at how brutal it was.
The best thing about this film is that it depicts both the personal and the bigger picture successfully. You get a good understanding of what has happened to date, with the personal impact to make you really care about it. I just wish there were some solutions or some way to help. All I can do for now is reflect on what a lucky country this is and how we need to continue to ensure that we maintain our democracy and freedom of speech so that this never happens to us. Maybe if more people watched this (along with perfect doco partners "The Reluctant Revolutionary" which portrayed the so-called Arab Spring from Yemen's point of view, and "Mugabe vs the White African" which shows what non-free elections will do to a country with a terrible dictator in power). Essential viewing.
BIFF Movie # 3 - Almost Human
Almost Human is a cracking little horror comedy with what must be one of the lowest budgets ever. The film was made on the credit cards of the writers and producers but don't let that stop you from enjoying this creepy little film if you're a fan of gore/slasher films/alien abduction.
The film starts with the protagonist, Seth, driving in a very distracted scared manner to his friend Mark's house. Strange noises and lights are following him. When he arrives we discover that a third friend has disappeared, "sucked up by a blue light into the sky" according to Seth. The weird noises and lights flickering on and off continue until a very loud ear piercing scream is heard, and Mark is hypnotised and walking out into the yard. Seth and Mark's wife Jen see him get sucked up by the blue light also. Cut to 2 years later, where a series of news reports fill us in on what has happened with Seth and Jen not remembering exactly what has happened but they have lost contact with each other. Seth gets nose bleeds and nightmares, but Jen has moved on and got a new fiancée and seems fine.
The action starts when a news report states that flickering lights were seen the night before which are identical to the ones from 2 years ago. Seth has a bad feeling about this and what is about to happen. He tries to warn Jen but she doesn't want to hear it. Next thing we are following some hunters in the forest and what do you know, they stumble across a naked, goo covered Mark shivering. They go to his aid, but apparently he doesn't need it....Mark looks like Mark but in reality is now an alien intent on killing anyone he comes across. That's not giving anything away either, as all this happens in the first 20 minutes. It's what happens next that forms the bulk of the movie, as Mark tries to get back to his great love Jen and start colonising earth.
Despite the acting being of a fairly low standard due to inexperienced actors, this is more than made up for by the special effects which are pretty damn good. As a killing machine, Mark is almost 100% effective but not in any rush, which helps build suspense. He also uses a good selection of weapons. The splatter is used regularly and mainly on camera, and there is also a fair bit of 'goo' involved which my friend P said it was funny that I said "ewww" for that and not for the blood flying around. I can't help that I find blood splatter funny! As I've said in previous BIFF reviews, I'm pretty desensitised to that stuff.
If you can get hold of it and you're a bit of a gore hound, I'd say this is worth spending about $10 on. It's super fun, avoids the typical Hollywood neat ending and never really explains anything, just takes you on the ride.
The film starts with the protagonist, Seth, driving in a very distracted scared manner to his friend Mark's house. Strange noises and lights are following him. When he arrives we discover that a third friend has disappeared, "sucked up by a blue light into the sky" according to Seth. The weird noises and lights flickering on and off continue until a very loud ear piercing scream is heard, and Mark is hypnotised and walking out into the yard. Seth and Mark's wife Jen see him get sucked up by the blue light also. Cut to 2 years later, where a series of news reports fill us in on what has happened with Seth and Jen not remembering exactly what has happened but they have lost contact with each other. Seth gets nose bleeds and nightmares, but Jen has moved on and got a new fiancée and seems fine.
The action starts when a news report states that flickering lights were seen the night before which are identical to the ones from 2 years ago. Seth has a bad feeling about this and what is about to happen. He tries to warn Jen but she doesn't want to hear it. Next thing we are following some hunters in the forest and what do you know, they stumble across a naked, goo covered Mark shivering. They go to his aid, but apparently he doesn't need it....Mark looks like Mark but in reality is now an alien intent on killing anyone he comes across. That's not giving anything away either, as all this happens in the first 20 minutes. It's what happens next that forms the bulk of the movie, as Mark tries to get back to his great love Jen and start colonising earth.
Despite the acting being of a fairly low standard due to inexperienced actors, this is more than made up for by the special effects which are pretty damn good. As a killing machine, Mark is almost 100% effective but not in any rush, which helps build suspense. He also uses a good selection of weapons. The splatter is used regularly and mainly on camera, and there is also a fair bit of 'goo' involved which my friend P said it was funny that I said "ewww" for that and not for the blood flying around. I can't help that I find blood splatter funny! As I've said in previous BIFF reviews, I'm pretty desensitised to that stuff.
If you can get hold of it and you're a bit of a gore hound, I'd say this is worth spending about $10 on. It's super fun, avoids the typical Hollywood neat ending and never really explains anything, just takes you on the ride.
Movie # 30 - Thor: The Dark World
As with Iron Man 3, it definitely helps to have seen "The Avengers" before you see Thor: The Dark World, and you must have seen the original Thor. This movie is part of Marvel's "Phase 2" which furthers the universe and existing characters and is beginning to setup for Phase 3 which will kick off with the Avengers sequel in 2015. This review will therefore unavoidably contain spoilers for "The Avengers" and "Thor 1" so stop reading now if you haven't seen those.
The Dark World opens up immediately after the events of The Avengers, with Thor back on his home planet of Asgard celebrating his newfound maturity and victory over the Chitauri to save Earth. Loki is to be dealt with by the Allfather Odin after his transgressions. While Thor's mind should be turning to his future as ruler of the Asgardians, instead he cannot stop thinking of his paramour Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) whom he left on Earth at the end of the first movie and didn't even have the decency to stop by and say "hi" to during the (admittedly more important) events occurring in The Avengers. So with Odin's okay if not his blessing, Thor heads down to Earth to reacquaint himself with Jane. But Jane has been having an interesting adventure of her own...
Jane and her super cool assistant Darcy (2 Broke Girls' Kat Dennings) have discovered a glitch in the universe in their new base of London, where things dropped in to the vacuum mysteriously disappear. Thanks to an Anthony Hopkins voiceover in the prologue, we know this will be the location of an object called the "Aether" which was hidden by the Asgardians a long time ago after getting it off the Dark Elves who were going to use it to return the entire universe to darkness and rule us all. Instead of destroying the Dark Elves and their evil leader Malekith (former Dr Who Christopher Eccleston), Odin only banished them and now with Jane's discovery and interaction with the Aether awakens them all to try and obtain it once more. Thor takes Jane back to Asgard but this brings the Dark Elves attention so Thor turns to Loki for help to find the Dark Elves and stop their universe destroying plan.
This film has a very different feel to the first one, definitely following the typical 'darker' path of many superhero sequels and losing some of the humour (with the exception of comedy sidekick Darcy who cracks me up near the end with her name for Mjolnir {Thor's hammer} from the first movie). The stakes are a lot higher in this movie and there is a deeper exploration of the conflicted relationship between Thor and Loki. There is plenty of drama for all the actors to get their teeth into, but Tom Hiddlestone again proves to be the best thing about the franchise with his portrayal of Loki.
The action is well choreographed and particularly the climactic battle between good and evil is exciting and well executed. The movie is pure entertainment and manages to keep the pace perfect without overstaying the welcome. Don't forget to stay for the now-standard post-credits scenes, although they key one for future Marvel properties is only a few seconds after the credits roll, whereas the one right at the end of 10 minutes of technical credits is less essential.
I'm giving this four hammers out of five, and maybe I'll add an extra half for the girls for the scene of Chris Hemsworth shirtless as he washes his face after the victory celebration!
The Dark World opens up immediately after the events of The Avengers, with Thor back on his home planet of Asgard celebrating his newfound maturity and victory over the Chitauri to save Earth. Loki is to be dealt with by the Allfather Odin after his transgressions. While Thor's mind should be turning to his future as ruler of the Asgardians, instead he cannot stop thinking of his paramour Jane Foster (Natalie Portman) whom he left on Earth at the end of the first movie and didn't even have the decency to stop by and say "hi" to during the (admittedly more important) events occurring in The Avengers. So with Odin's okay if not his blessing, Thor heads down to Earth to reacquaint himself with Jane. But Jane has been having an interesting adventure of her own...
Jane and her super cool assistant Darcy (2 Broke Girls' Kat Dennings) have discovered a glitch in the universe in their new base of London, where things dropped in to the vacuum mysteriously disappear. Thanks to an Anthony Hopkins voiceover in the prologue, we know this will be the location of an object called the "Aether" which was hidden by the Asgardians a long time ago after getting it off the Dark Elves who were going to use it to return the entire universe to darkness and rule us all. Instead of destroying the Dark Elves and their evil leader Malekith (former Dr Who Christopher Eccleston), Odin only banished them and now with Jane's discovery and interaction with the Aether awakens them all to try and obtain it once more. Thor takes Jane back to Asgard but this brings the Dark Elves attention so Thor turns to Loki for help to find the Dark Elves and stop their universe destroying plan.
This film has a very different feel to the first one, definitely following the typical 'darker' path of many superhero sequels and losing some of the humour (with the exception of comedy sidekick Darcy who cracks me up near the end with her name for Mjolnir {Thor's hammer} from the first movie). The stakes are a lot higher in this movie and there is a deeper exploration of the conflicted relationship between Thor and Loki. There is plenty of drama for all the actors to get their teeth into, but Tom Hiddlestone again proves to be the best thing about the franchise with his portrayal of Loki.
The action is well choreographed and particularly the climactic battle between good and evil is exciting and well executed. The movie is pure entertainment and manages to keep the pace perfect without overstaying the welcome. Don't forget to stay for the now-standard post-credits scenes, although they key one for future Marvel properties is only a few seconds after the credits roll, whereas the one right at the end of 10 minutes of technical credits is less essential.
I'm giving this four hammers out of five, and maybe I'll add an extra half for the girls for the scene of Chris Hemsworth shirtless as he washes his face after the victory celebration!
Sunday 17 November 2013
The BIFF is harder this year
Well we are on Day 5 of the BIFF and I'm 7 movies into it and finding it hard to keep up with the blogging and letting you know what's good and what's bad. Here is a quick summary of the Festival until I can get a breather which should be tomorrow, as I have another 2 movies today.
1. The new ticketing system SUCKS so get there early
This year they have decided to use Ticketek as the method of buying tickets, and it is terrible. If buying tickets at the cinema, you should probably plan to get there up to 30 or 45 minutes earlier than the start time, as the ticketing system is plagued with problems (passes must be linked to a Ticketek account, you can't see how many tickets you have left on a pass, you have to use all your 'evening' tickets on a pass before you can redeem your free daytime movies, the staff can't understand the codes to sort out problems that arise with the free daytime movies) and it is also really slow. I've seen lots of people waiting in line 5 minutes before a movie and by the time they get their tickets, the movie has already started. I've also seen some people standing at the counter flipping through the guide trying to decide what tickets to buy while people in line behind them who know what they want slowly start to boil over. Be prepared people and don't hog the counter. I've stepped aside a few times when buying advance tickets to let people buying for a movie starting soon go ahead of me.
2. The Congress was amazing but has already finished
Sorry folks but the best film I've seen so far has already completed it's second screening last night. The Congress is worth searching out on DVD if you like mind-bending movies which satirise Hollywood, blend eye-popping animation and live action and leave you thinking "wow" even though you have no idea what it was really about.
3. Watch the trailer to decide rather than using the Guide
The program guide can be misleading and can make things sound better than they really are, and awards from other festivals don't mean it will be good. An example is the guide saying that "The Act of Killing" is 'the documentary of the festival season' whereas I found it horrible and annoying and a waste of almost 3 hours. How this won an audience favourite prize at the Berlin Film Festival I don't know. There isn't another showing to take warning against, but my advice would be to try to watch the trailer to get a feel for movies before you go see them. The BIFF team this year seem to have obtained a trailer for every film and set up a Youtube channel to screen them, which is a great way to see if you might like something. Pity I didn't do it before yesterday's waste of time.
4. Allow for movies to start/finish late
If you are thinking of going to back to back movies, allow enough time to get to your second movie and build in somewhere between 10 and 30 minutes for it to be late. If you don't think you'll make the second one, you will have to cut one of those movies out. Most movies start on time, but not all. Sometimes the film reel has literally not arrived from overseas on time, and other times I have no idea why they start 10 minutes late (my theory is they are trying to sell more tickets before starting due to the aforementioned queue problems). Last night we missed the first 5-10 minutes of our second film due to the first one running late. This problem can be compounded if you have to walk between different cinemas - allow yourself plenty of time.
So far I've enjoyed Almost Human (gory horror movie fans should see this low budget comedy), The Congress, Spirit of '45 and Bethlehem. A Touch of Sin was ok but slow, same goes for Outrage Beyond. The Art of Killing was terrible. Today there are 2 movies which I have high hopes for: Oxv: the Manual and The Square. If you have a spare afternoon, it's well worth getting along to something but follow my tips above!
1. The new ticketing system SUCKS so get there early
This year they have decided to use Ticketek as the method of buying tickets, and it is terrible. If buying tickets at the cinema, you should probably plan to get there up to 30 or 45 minutes earlier than the start time, as the ticketing system is plagued with problems (passes must be linked to a Ticketek account, you can't see how many tickets you have left on a pass, you have to use all your 'evening' tickets on a pass before you can redeem your free daytime movies, the staff can't understand the codes to sort out problems that arise with the free daytime movies) and it is also really slow. I've seen lots of people waiting in line 5 minutes before a movie and by the time they get their tickets, the movie has already started. I've also seen some people standing at the counter flipping through the guide trying to decide what tickets to buy while people in line behind them who know what they want slowly start to boil over. Be prepared people and don't hog the counter. I've stepped aside a few times when buying advance tickets to let people buying for a movie starting soon go ahead of me.
2. The Congress was amazing but has already finished
Sorry folks but the best film I've seen so far has already completed it's second screening last night. The Congress is worth searching out on DVD if you like mind-bending movies which satirise Hollywood, blend eye-popping animation and live action and leave you thinking "wow" even though you have no idea what it was really about.
3. Watch the trailer to decide rather than using the Guide
The program guide can be misleading and can make things sound better than they really are, and awards from other festivals don't mean it will be good. An example is the guide saying that "The Act of Killing" is 'the documentary of the festival season' whereas I found it horrible and annoying and a waste of almost 3 hours. How this won an audience favourite prize at the Berlin Film Festival I don't know. There isn't another showing to take warning against, but my advice would be to try to watch the trailer to get a feel for movies before you go see them. The BIFF team this year seem to have obtained a trailer for every film and set up a Youtube channel to screen them, which is a great way to see if you might like something. Pity I didn't do it before yesterday's waste of time.
4. Allow for movies to start/finish late
If you are thinking of going to back to back movies, allow enough time to get to your second movie and build in somewhere between 10 and 30 minutes for it to be late. If you don't think you'll make the second one, you will have to cut one of those movies out. Most movies start on time, but not all. Sometimes the film reel has literally not arrived from overseas on time, and other times I have no idea why they start 10 minutes late (my theory is they are trying to sell more tickets before starting due to the aforementioned queue problems). Last night we missed the first 5-10 minutes of our second film due to the first one running late. This problem can be compounded if you have to walk between different cinemas - allow yourself plenty of time.
So far I've enjoyed Almost Human (gory horror movie fans should see this low budget comedy), The Congress, Spirit of '45 and Bethlehem. A Touch of Sin was ok but slow, same goes for Outrage Beyond. The Art of Killing was terrible. Today there are 2 movies which I have high hopes for: Oxv: the Manual and The Square. If you have a spare afternoon, it's well worth getting along to something but follow my tips above!
Friday 15 November 2013
BIFF Movie # 2 - The Spirit of '45
I have a confession to make. I am a super nerd. What, you hadn't guessed that from all the gushing reviews of superhero movies and the fact that I take time off work each year and spend my holidays watching multiple movies per day rather than sunning myself on a beach? Well if you hadn't already worked it out, I'm confessing it now after having it confirmed last night when I enjoyed "The Spirit of '45" so much. A documentary based on how England rebuilt the country and economy after World War 2, and what happened since. This film will have another showing this week so if you like the sound of it, look it up and get along.
The drawcard for those not into economics and politics could be the fact that this is directed by the British director Ken Loach, who may not be well known here but is renowned in film circles for his 'social realism' style of movie making. Which is appropriate, because the doco is concerned with the social impacts of real events around the end of the war and it is clear that the filmmaker is a socialist.
The message is all important in this documentary, which has kind of copied the Michael Moore approach where you take your view of an issue and then just put stuff on the screen which backs that up and don't worry about interviewing anyone with a different opinion at all. Now I can say that and still say I liked the movie ok? The message here is "socialism works, unfettered capitalism doesn't" which is why I, a nerd with an Economics degree, found it really interesting.
The theory put forward by all involved is that England would never have recovered from the great depression and overcome the malaise that could have occurred after World War 2 was won, had the people not elected the Labour Government which had a strong socialist policy and passed many laws to nationalise many industries and sectors for the greater good. The employment, healthcare and housing this provided definitely looked to have been beneficial and the film spends a long time focusing on the "5 pillars" that were the key to England's revitalisation, and how the elderly folk they interviewed felt about it. A short amount of time is spent at the end looking at how the structures created then began to be dismantled in the Thatcher era and continue to have been since, and links the decline of socialist policy with a decline in British society in general - rising unemployment, drug and crime problems, poor health etc. Whether this is due to the privatisation of key industries and sectors in England or just a general symptom of the current global economy structure
Loach has constructed this documentary in a fairly basic style, which combines archival footage of people living and working in England from the 1930s to today with footage of political leaders of the time, intercut with current interviews from various folk reminiscing about the times. The 'talking heads' are half ordinary people who lived through the time (or their parents/grandparents did) and half experts on the particular topic at hand, but nobody famous. This ensures you are not distracted from the message. The ordinary folk included have been well chosen, as it's just like hearing your grandpa talk about the olden days, and their memories and the smiles or tears they bring to their eyes give the documentary some heart and some humour. Without them it would have been exceedingly dry. With them, it's fascinating stuff for those with fairly liberal views of economics.
The only downsides to this movie were the inclusion of subtitles (everyone was speaking English and not hard to understand!) and to my mind, a lack of statistics and numbers. I understand the focus was not on that, but I was fascinated by how the British Government had the money to undertake all the spending that is shown in the film, and where that came from. This is not explored. So, a little unbalanced and it definitely won't be everyone's cup of tea (get it?) but fascinating stuff and it may be quite instructional given the governments that most of the world are living under at the present time.
The drawcard for those not into economics and politics could be the fact that this is directed by the British director Ken Loach, who may not be well known here but is renowned in film circles for his 'social realism' style of movie making. Which is appropriate, because the doco is concerned with the social impacts of real events around the end of the war and it is clear that the filmmaker is a socialist.
The message is all important in this documentary, which has kind of copied the Michael Moore approach where you take your view of an issue and then just put stuff on the screen which backs that up and don't worry about interviewing anyone with a different opinion at all. Now I can say that and still say I liked the movie ok? The message here is "socialism works, unfettered capitalism doesn't" which is why I, a nerd with an Economics degree, found it really interesting.
The theory put forward by all involved is that England would never have recovered from the great depression and overcome the malaise that could have occurred after World War 2 was won, had the people not elected the Labour Government which had a strong socialist policy and passed many laws to nationalise many industries and sectors for the greater good. The employment, healthcare and housing this provided definitely looked to have been beneficial and the film spends a long time focusing on the "5 pillars" that were the key to England's revitalisation, and how the elderly folk they interviewed felt about it. A short amount of time is spent at the end looking at how the structures created then began to be dismantled in the Thatcher era and continue to have been since, and links the decline of socialist policy with a decline in British society in general - rising unemployment, drug and crime problems, poor health etc. Whether this is due to the privatisation of key industries and sectors in England or just a general symptom of the current global economy structure
Loach has constructed this documentary in a fairly basic style, which combines archival footage of people living and working in England from the 1930s to today with footage of political leaders of the time, intercut with current interviews from various folk reminiscing about the times. The 'talking heads' are half ordinary people who lived through the time (or their parents/grandparents did) and half experts on the particular topic at hand, but nobody famous. This ensures you are not distracted from the message. The ordinary folk included have been well chosen, as it's just like hearing your grandpa talk about the olden days, and their memories and the smiles or tears they bring to their eyes give the documentary some heart and some humour. Without them it would have been exceedingly dry. With them, it's fascinating stuff for those with fairly liberal views of economics.
The only downsides to this movie were the inclusion of subtitles (everyone was speaking English and not hard to understand!) and to my mind, a lack of statistics and numbers. I understand the focus was not on that, but I was fascinated by how the British Government had the money to undertake all the spending that is shown in the film, and where that came from. This is not explored. So, a little unbalanced and it definitely won't be everyone's cup of tea (get it?) but fascinating stuff and it may be quite instructional given the governments that most of the world are living under at the present time.
BIFF Movie # 1 - Outrage Beyond
Opening my account of BIFF 2013 was the new film from legendary Japanese director and actor 'Beat' Takeshi Kitano. He is probably best known in Australia for acting as the teacher in "Battle Royale" but also for his earlier yakuza films such as "Boiling Point" and "Violent Cop". He has explored different genres over the years but returned to the yakuza subject matter in the 2010 movie "Outrage". This movie is the sequel to that, although I had no idea that it was a sequel to anything beforehand or while watching it (thanks IMDB). The BIFF guide did not mention the film was a sequel and I think looking back now, it might have been pretty handy to have seen the first film. Although this film made total sense on its own when I didn't know there was a previous movie, as it did mention past events, I think seeing both would deepen and enhance the appreciation of the second movie.
As I understand it, Outrage Beyond starts immediately after events in the first film which from my reading seemed to concern rival Yakuza clans the Sanno, Otomo and Hannabishi. There is a new head of the Sanno family and new young upstart 'executives' whose plans for changing the operation and making more money than ever are unsettling the old guard. The Hannabishi have a pact not to start a war with the Sanno. And the Otomo family is no more, with Otomo himself (played by Beat Takeshi) not appearing in the first few chapters of this movie but eventually being revealed to be in prison. But a nosy, possibly corrupt cop seems determined to stir things up again by plotting and setting people against each other while trying to remain 'neutral'. Will he succeed and what are his motives?
Anyone expecting full blown violent yakuza action from the get go could be disappointed with this, as it takes quite a while to set up all the characters and the conflict between them. However, the final third of the movie does suddenly explode into gun battles, stabbings and torture although not as in your face gory as you may expect. There is some very clever use of sound in these scenes. The action is all pretty easy to follow but it does require some concentration in the dramatic scenes to remember who is who when a lot of them involve Japanese men of a similar age in similar black suits yelling at each other in non-descript offices and boardrooms.
I enjoyed the themes of the film in relation to honour, forgiveness, brotherhood and the changing of the guard within the yakuza ranks. This last item provides most of the few humourous moments. However I have to say I didn't totally love it the way I have loved most of his other films I've seen. This I put down partially to the very strange character of cop Kataoka and I think just to not having seen the first film so you are always playing a bit of catch up. However it does work as a stand alone movie with all previous slights and betrayals explained. For those who like serious Yakuza films rather than over the top Japanese craziness, you would enjoy this film.
It's showing again this Friday 15 November at 9pm.
As I understand it, Outrage Beyond starts immediately after events in the first film which from my reading seemed to concern rival Yakuza clans the Sanno, Otomo and Hannabishi. There is a new head of the Sanno family and new young upstart 'executives' whose plans for changing the operation and making more money than ever are unsettling the old guard. The Hannabishi have a pact not to start a war with the Sanno. And the Otomo family is no more, with Otomo himself (played by Beat Takeshi) not appearing in the first few chapters of this movie but eventually being revealed to be in prison. But a nosy, possibly corrupt cop seems determined to stir things up again by plotting and setting people against each other while trying to remain 'neutral'. Will he succeed and what are his motives?
Anyone expecting full blown violent yakuza action from the get go could be disappointed with this, as it takes quite a while to set up all the characters and the conflict between them. However, the final third of the movie does suddenly explode into gun battles, stabbings and torture although not as in your face gory as you may expect. There is some very clever use of sound in these scenes. The action is all pretty easy to follow but it does require some concentration in the dramatic scenes to remember who is who when a lot of them involve Japanese men of a similar age in similar black suits yelling at each other in non-descript offices and boardrooms.
I enjoyed the themes of the film in relation to honour, forgiveness, brotherhood and the changing of the guard within the yakuza ranks. This last item provides most of the few humourous moments. However I have to say I didn't totally love it the way I have loved most of his other films I've seen. This I put down partially to the very strange character of cop Kataoka and I think just to not having seen the first film so you are always playing a bit of catch up. However it does work as a stand alone movie with all previous slights and betrayals explained. For those who like serious Yakuza films rather than over the top Japanese craziness, you would enjoy this film.
It's showing again this Friday 15 November at 9pm.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)