We have taken the list of the Top Money Makers of the Decade and we are doing the “Question Entertainment Lightning Round”
I hope you like it. Let us know your thoughts.

See them all at

 http://www.youtube.com/user/1ThessFIVE21and22#p/c/A4E6B15329949FF4

What Is It?

This is the second collaboration between Pixar and writer/director Brian Byrd. Their first outing, The Incredibles, lived up to it’s name. Now Ratatouille… um… does not easily lend itself to pithy comments.

It is the story of a rat (Patton Oswalt)who wants to be a gourmet cook, a boy (Lou Romano) who does not know how to cook, nor does he know that he is the heir to a restaurant dynasty, and finally the evil, short chef (Ian Holm)who wants to simply cash in on his late mentor’s reputation.

How Was It?

This was not the achievement that the Incredibles was, but it is much better than Byrd’s early film, The Iron Giant. The movie is altogether fun to watch with enjoyable characters, whimsical story twists, and great visuals. I especially liked Anton Ego’s (Peter O’Toole) house. To complement his corps like presents, his hall is coffin shaped and you can see the smile of a skull in his old typewriter. I also appreciate the fact that they have someone who they say is a great writer, and instead of just leaving it at that and showing people’s reaction to his writing, we actually hear his entire article. It is at the climax of the film, making it even more daring a move.

Is It Good For Kids?

There is no cussing (other than the line “welcome to hell” referring to work), violence in minimal and slapstick and no one is shown inappropriately. The rats occasionally “Steal” food, but every time the action is condemned in explicit terms with negative consequences following directly. There is also an Aladdin style racism, where they are in a foreign country, all the evil characters and comic relief people have thick accents and the two hero’s have the American TV “No-accent”

You can get a complete break down of what is on the screen at Screenit.com

What About Spiritual Issues?

Stealing is show throughout the film but, as I said, always with a verbal rebuke and eventually with negative consequences. This movie is very careful to explain itself at many points. Similarly, Remy the Rat (Patton Oswalt) talks with Gusteau (Brad Garrett) a dead chef. Gusteau has lots of lines pointing out that he is not a ghost but only imagined by Remy. He even goes so far to state that Gusteau only knows what Remy already knows himself, because Remy is making him up. I appreciated the distinction, because it is one distinction people often do not understand.

Gusteau is not the only brush with death we have. When we meet Linguini for the first time, his mother has just died. When explaining this, he tells the kitchen staff that she “believed in Heaven” so she is all set, as far as an afterlife is concerned. This line caught me off guard. On one hand, it was great to see the concept of heaven and that death is not to be looked at as an ending but a new beginning. Still the idea simply believing in the concept of heaven will ensure you go there is a frighteningly simplistic one. Jesus said, in John 14:6 “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.” Also look at James 2:19.

There is also an odd undercurrent of sexual immorality. Linguini’s mother had been the girlfriend of Gusteau when they were both alive. Linguini and Gusteau did not know it, but Gusteau was Linguini’s father. This concept is tossed around in those terms throughout the film, without moral comment. This is stands out, considering they go out of their way to explain other actions as being wrong.

What Is Your Recommendation?

It’s a fun and well made film, which is the norm for Pixar. Still, there are pitfalls within the plot. If you are going to enjoy this cinematic dish with your family, you will want to talk about ghosts, Heaven, true salvation, stealing, and “love”.

I would instead look to any other Pixar film free of fishy-automotives or the other CG rodent themed  film “Flushed Away“

Flushed Away

Exciting news indeed for the many fans of Studio Ghibli’s work.

It is going to be called Karigurashi no Arrietty (The Borrower Arrietty) and is an adaptation of Mary Norton’s Carnegie Medal winning novel The Borrowers which was made into a TV ages ago starring Ian Holm and also a 1997 movie featuring John Goodman and Jim Broadbent. The animated adaption will be directed by Hiromasa Yonebayashi.

Unlike the original novel, which tells a story about tiny people who “borrow” things from normal humans during the 1950’s in England, Studio Ghibli have transferred their version to Tokyo Koganei in 2010 (Koganei is where Studio Ghibli is settled) and tell the story of 14-year-old little Arrietty (Chiisana Arriety was the films original title).

Yonebayashi earlier worked as a key animator on previous Ghibli works like Howl’s Moving Castle, Ponyo and Spirited Away and was animation director for Miyazaki Goro’s Gedo Senki.

Karigurashi no Arrietty is to be released summer 2010 and will have a length of about 80 minutes.

Source: GhibliWorld

The Borrowers TV show at Amazon UK
The Complete Borrowers – Book on Amazon UK

Desde ya lo advierto, esta entrada tiene mucho de sentimental. Ratatouille fue de las últimas pelis que me ví con mi mamá y ella se había aficionado a las pelis de Pixar, a tal punto que tenía una colección de DVD’s bastante amplia y comprendía Toy Story de 1995, A Bug’s Life de 1998, Monsters, Inc. de 2001 y Finding Nemo de 2003.

Cuando fuimos a cine, a mi mamá le encantó, que la ratica toda divina, que el hermanito todo gordito, que el par de enamorados, que París… Y ahí se quedaba en una pausa larga y constante. Ella ansiaba visitar la ciudad de las luces como nunca he visto a nadie hacerlo y ví como una lágrima recorría su mejilla cuando la ratica Remy descubría desde una ventana la ciudad, ella era la ratica y esos iban a ser sus ojos cuando la visitara.

La peli me parecía increíble en animación, en texturas, en imágenes compugeneradas, en historia, en desarrollo de personajes. La apuesta de Pixar por tratar de no seguir imitando a los humanos y por el contrario tratar de caricaturizarlos les salió muy bien desde The Incredibles y al final definió su estilo. Patton Oswalt, Ian Holm, Peter O’Toole y Janeane Garofalo, un excelente reparto de voces.

La segunda invitación a Brad Bird para participar con Pixar en la dirección después de The Incredibles me parecía súper acertado y enfocar una historia de dibujitos animados al tema de cocinar, uno de mis pasatiempos favoritos, parecía ser la combinación perfecta. Me reí, me conmoví, disfruté la peli y ya. No hay mucho que decir es una buena peli. Se de antemano el gran trabajo y el esfuerzo que deviene tanto de la producción de una peli animada como de la preproducción gráfica a cargo de excelentes artistas conceptuales. Tengo varios amigos que podrán dar fé en algún momento del artista encargado de este proyecto, yo no lo tengo a mano pero se nota a leguas el gran esfuerzo y la alta calidad del proceso. Mi pregunta sería, es Lou Romano, voz que hace de Linguini, el artista conceptual de esta peli? Se que Romano es de este tipo de artistas porque recientemente y a partir de Up empecé a seguir su magnífico blog de ilustrador, artista y artista conceptual.

Finalmente, no siento que haya sido la mejor peli de Pixar (léase con la voz de Peter O’Toole interpretando a Anton Ego), como dice un amigo tiene los mejores ingredientes pero al final no es el mejor sancocho. Hoy que la ví en Cinemax, no pude evitar conmoverme, aguar mis ojos, recordar a mi mamá y evocar un buen producto animado.

The Fifth Element, Luc Besson (boyhood comic book fan), director, 1997  

Wild Ride

 HOOK: Every 300 years evil returns (luckily this time we have the cocky, smirking Bruce Willis as our savior). 

LINE: “Me protect you?” 

SINKER: As Mae West once said, “Too much of a good thing is, wonderful.”

 JOHN: This is an incomprehensible mess of a film that, for some reason, we end up loving.  I like  a sci-fi epic that begins in the past then shoe horns us into the distant future (call it the “2001 effect”). And what do we get? Bruce Willis driving a Checker air cab through a vertically challenged Blade-Runner inner-city. Maybe that’s the appeal. Our fate is in the hands of a guy who lost Demi Moore to Ashton Kutcher. Bruce 12 Monkeys Willis. But wait, there’s more. The alien morphs into a beautiful pink-haired waif (anyone who has ever seen a sci-fi horror film knows that a monster tied down in the lab means trouble–The Thing). In case that isn’t more than enough, there’s Gary Oldman as Mister Evil attracting a bunch of Chewbacca-like creatures (ala Star Wars). Perhaps that’s what’s so appealing. This is every movie ever made, but because it doesn’t take itself seriously we can laugh at our gullibility; and after some really annoying broadcast stuff in the last part, it ends with an interplanetary, opera diva and surprising  emotional punch. Did I mention it foreshadows Wall-E the The Divinci Code and 1012? Bruce, baby, you have a full cab! 

GO GO GO GO (4 GOs out of four) 

SPANKY: I’ll stick with earth, air, fire and water. Besson conceived the idea when he was 16, if that doesn’t hook you in as an adult, what will? I’m a little less enamored with this than you, John. It’s like, “Didn’t I see this movie before?” even if I didn’t. I like a sexy woman in adult diapers and strips of masking tape as much as the rest of you, but you humans have elected enough feeble-minded presidents to prove stupidity isn’t all that cute. Dazzling pyrotechnics aside, I see this as a kind of an outrageous, period cult film that makes us glad we’ve moved on. PS Isn’t it about time the cat-obsessed Willis moved on too? 

BARK, BARK, (2 BARKs out of four) 

Location: Kitchen/Dining Room/Living Room Area of Scott Village Building D Apartment 103. Omaha, Nebraska.

After a near seven year odyssey, visionary director Peter Jackson concludes his epic “tour-de-force” telling of “The Lord of the Rings”. His three part epic has brought audiences to their feet as each chapter pushed the envelope on how long a feature film presentation could be.

Probably the biggest box office gamble in Hollywood history finally concludes. But is the final installment worth waiting for or is it just some halfling dropping a ring into molten lava?

The third chapter picks up close to the conclusion of last winter’s “The Two Towers”. Frodo (Elijah Wood) and Sam (Sean Astin) are still being escorted by the waif and tormented Gollum (Andy Serkis) deep into enemy territory as the stranglehold of evil still threatens to overcome Frodo.

Meanwhile, Gandalf (Ian McKellan), Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), Legolas (Orlando Bloom) and Gimli (John Rhys-Davies) come upon Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd) after the defeat of Saruman. The heroes return to Rohan where they are welcomed by King Theoden (Bernard Hill) and Eowyn (Miranda Otto).

But rising ever so quickly, the evil forces of Sauron look towards the weakening kingdom of Gondor for an epic defeat. Gondor’s capital Minas Tirith, homeland of fallen comrade Boromir (Sean Bean), is a classic warrior based city which has seen its powerful leadership wean with Boromir’s father and the kingdom’s steward, Denethor (John Noble).

If Gondor falls, the whole of Middle Earth will fall beside it. The heroes, the hobbits and the people of Rohan must once more lock swords with the evil of Sauron in hopes of securing of regal destiny for one of the heroes and the freedom of Middle Earth.

Can one small insignificant hobbit finally achieve his destiny? Can the forces of Sauron finally be destroyed? It comes down to this free-for-all and may the best man, woman, elf, dwarf, orc or hobbit win.

Peter Jackson’s conclusion is as long and drawn out as his previous films. Jackson begins his third chapter with a lot of slow key story points and eventually emerges into the epic battle for Minas Tirith. This battle is probably the best battle of the trilogy and is utter magic. The problem with this sequence being so good is that overshadows a lot of the rest of the film.

The struggle between Sam and Gollum is brilliant as Astin shows range he hasn’t used since the under-appreciated “Rudy”. Sean Astin’s Sam is a crowning achievement in this film. He so deserves an Oscar nomination for his powerful performance. He brings that character to another level beyond that of any hobbit in the film.

The Andy Serkis-Gollum CGI creation keeps getting more and more precious. (Please, forgive the pun!) I also loved the CGI creation of the giant spider. It was seamless and the whole sequence was amazing.

I also really enjoyed the separation of Merry and Pippin. It really allowed for each actor to show a different side of the hobbits. Each of their individual storylines was fun and it made for a more interesting journey this time around. I always felt they were under used and were insignificant compared to Sam and Frodo.

My biggest concern with the film was the ending. The film reaches about 7 different conclusions before the end credits. Each ending felt longer than the next because there was no flow or cohesion as we see a lot more than was needed. We love these characters but did we really need that extra 30 minutes?

I love the world of Middle Earth and all that dwell there. Peter Jackson has done what no other filmmaker ever dreamed of accomplishing with this project. Thanks, Pete for a wonderful journey.

4.5 out of 5

So Says the Soothsayer.

Written: December 2003

It’s always hardest to do the middle film in a proposed trilogy of films.

The second film is always the maker or breaker of a franchise. In some of the most successful franchises of all time, the second film has gone on to eclipse its predecessor. Examples of these stellar sequels are series like “Aliens”, “Star Trek”, “Star Wars” and even James Bond.

The hurdle that director and Tolkien visionary Peter Jackson had to endure was making a middle film in his epic trilogy that has neither a beginning or ending. It is like filming a middle chapter of an unfinished novel. In some ways that is exactly what it is.

People expecting a recap of “Fellowship” will be disappointed since Jackson dives straight into the story almost with out pause. The story picks up within seconds of where “Fellowship” left off.

The Fellowship has been split. Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood) and Samwise Gamgee (Sean Astin) are off to Mordor to deliver the ring into Mount Doom. Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), Legolas (Orlando Bloom) and Gimli (John Rhys-Davies) are off to save hobbits Merry (Dominic Monaghan) and Pippin (Billy Boyd) who have been captured by a troop of Orcs.

In the sequel, we find Frodo and Samwise lost in the Misty Mountains as they find themselves striking up a symbiotic friendship and alliance with the waif, Gollum (Andy Serkis). Gollum was driven insane when he possessed the “ring of power” now all he wants is to reclaim his “precious”. Can this creature be trusted or will this creature be the death of Frodo and Sam?

On the other front of the story, Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli track their comrades to the kingdom of Mohan where they find a besieged kingdom that is about to overrun by the armies of the evil Saruman (Christopher Lee). A resurrected Gandalf (Ian McKellan) encourages the trio to join with King Theoden (Bernard Hill) to defend Rohan. Theoden leads his people and the trio to the legendary fortress Helm’s Deep where the final confrontation will be waged. Who will survive this battle? Will the fortress of Helm’s Deep fall? What did happen to Merry and Pippin and how will they figure into this chapter?

“Two Towers” is essentially three stories bridging the gap between the beginning and final confrontation with evil.

Jackson understands the scope of Tolkien’s Middle Earth as he finds a unique look for each of the kingdoms seen in this second Tolkien film. Tolkien and his master craftsmen built the castle of Rohan from scratch and etched out the fortress of Helm’s Deep from the walls of a rock quarry. They are truly amazing structures and Jackson uses them with passion and finesse.

The key performance of this film is the wonderful fully-digital Gollum. For once a computerized character seems to have a soul. The performance of the actor beneath the pixels shines through and he is amazing to watch in every frame. There is some humor in Gollum’s madness as he struggles with his loyalties but it’s the scenes where Gollum reacts and does things on his own that are more remarkable than his obvious psychological struggle. You can’t but feel for this misplaced creature.

I always thought that the first film took way to long to build momentum. I also felt the same about the novel. In the second film, Jackson continues the momentum he built in the third act of Fellowship. There are definitely lulls in a film of this length but Jackson never allows his audience to be bored as he delivers new and exciting things to look at in awe. The shame is that there are a lot of these spectacles that take away from the actors.

I continue to sing Viggo Mortensen’s praises in this film as I did the previous one. I also really started to enjoy John Rhys-Davies performances as Gimli the dwarf. I also have always loved the forever creepy actor Brad Dourif and I am positive there is no one out there who could have been as oozy as Brad was playing Grima Wormtongue. I liked Miranda Otto’s damsel Eowyn but I wish there were more meat in the role for this capable actress.

The biggest fault of this part of the epic trilogy is that it is the middle film. There are a lot of signs where the film could have gotten lost but Jackson stayed his course. I am sure that when we finally see the end of this epic journey the middle film will be looked on as a great bridge. There is a lot to be celebrated in this film but for people who aren’t familiar with the material they will be lost.

4.25 out of 5

So Says the Soothsayer.

Written: December 2002

New Zealand director and visionary Peter Jackson spent over two years of filming time to bring forth the vision created by fantasy guru J.R.R Tolkien. His epic masterpiece was deemed unfilmable in its whole but Jackson’s passion helped him begin an epic quest of his own. The first of three books of Tolkien’s masterpiece is the “Fellowship of the Ring”.

Young Frodo Baggins (Elijah Wood) is a hobbit. Hobbits are curious little people who live the simple life in a far off pocket known as the Shire in the world known as Middle Earth. Frodo welcomes the wise wizard Gandalf (Sir Ian McKellan) to his town of Hobbiton on the eve of his Uncle Bilbo’s (Ian Holm) 118th birthday. Uncle Bilbo is an adventurer and the most curious of all the hobbits in Hobbiton. But Bilbo hides a secret that could undo the very fabric of Middle Earth itself.

3000 years previous, an evil sorcerer Sauron wielded a “ring” that could destroy armies and bring Middle Earth to its knees. In the wake of that victory, a desperate human general slices off Sauron’s fingers and the ring falls into his hands. The ring is pure evil and it can bring even the strongest man to his knees. The elves plead with the general to destroy the ring but to no avail. Eventually the ring is lost and thought destroyed after the general is killed and over the course of time it falls into Bilbo’s hands. It is this ring that could destroy all of Middle Earth.

Gandalf confronts Bilbo after his birthday party about the ring and Bilbo reluctantly gives it up. Gandalf begins to realize which ring it is and isn’t sure what he must do to destroy it. All he knows is that the powers of darkness are building to reclaim the ring and bring the Dark Lord Sauron back to power.

Eventually Gandalf and the elves develop a nine member fellowship to bring the ring deep into Sauron’s domain and destroy it the fires of Mount Doom. Among that fellowship is Frodo, Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), Boromir (Sean Bean), Gimli (John Rhys-Davies) the dwarf, Legolas (Orlando Bloom) the elf, Merry (Dominic Monaghan) the hobbit, Pippin (Billy Boyd) the hobbit and Samwise (Sean Astin), Frodo’s ever reliable friend. For the next three years we will follow these adventurers through Middle Earth as they embark on their epic quest.

Peter Jackson’s epic storytelling deserves the hype the Hollywood machine has been able to push behind it. From the truly evil monsters to the brilliant sets, “Fellowship” embraces the Tolkien vision with passion. You can tell that this film was created by people who loved the books. There is richness and eye-candy in this film like none seen this year.

The first amazing thing I noticed was how cleverly the film depicts the differences in heights of the hobbits, humans, dwarves and elves. I was always a curious to see if they could pull that feat off. They do it with flawless brilliance. The almost giant Gandalf stumbling around Bilbo’s house and thrilling battles involving a lot of different sized people.

I did love Jackson’s craftsmanship of the creatures in the film. They are utterly brilliant. I liked how each one is something we have never seen before. I loved the Black Riders and the Cave Troll. This troll is the way a troll is supposed to be and he is so more believable than say the troll in “Harry Potter”. I loved the whole troll sequence.

Jackson’s epic beginning isn’t without its faults. It truly is a site to behold if you can handle the enormous running time of 178 minutes. Theatres should acquire “lazy-boys” for this theatric experience. Tolkien’s epic masterpiece was deemed unfilmable because of the tome of content housed in the trilogy. The running time is what deemed it that. For any filmmaker it is truly hard to overcome that challenge. What makes the film’s epic running time bearable at times is the powerful score by Howard Shore. This truly is an amazing piece of filmmaking but even the most brilliant and beautiful can wear out their welcome.

Having heard the books read by my mother and having fond memories of the Ralph Bakshi version of the books, I was puzzled with the film’s depiction of Boromir. For me, Boromir was a valiant, courageous and honorable warrior who dreamed of bringing honor back to his homeland of Gondor. It isn’t until he touches the ring that his honor begins to subside and he begins a conflict of honor and desire. In the books, as I remember, Boromir was the fiercest of the Fellowship and did all he could to protect the ring and the hobbits.

Jackson’s vision of Boromir comes off as a twisted, scheming warrior who has an ulterior motive throughout. Where is the Boromir I knew? I won’t hold this factor against the film because Tolkien characters can be interpreted in different ways. I also had problems with the depiction of Elrond but that could be just me as well.

Jackson’s “Fellowship” is an utterly beautiful beginning and should be commended on a film that delivers on the hype surrounding it. “Fellowship” is all I wanted in the epic telling of the classic quest-story but being so close to the trilogy it wasn’t any more or less than I thought it would be. That truly is a compliment in these days of over-hyped extravaganzas.

4.5 out of 5

So Says the Soothsayer.

Final Note: I would like to make a short statement on how this film is being handled for its release. Some of us in the press core have had a hard time seeing this film and thus the reason for my narrowly early review. I am not laying any blame. In fact I would like to commend the people who worked on the project because of the hype surrounding it has been insane. No vision this extraordinaire should be held back. My question mainly lies in will we be going through this for the next two installments? Tolkien’s vision is about honor and overcoming overwhelming odds shouldn’t we as humans aspire to this vision.

Written: December 2001

Fifth Element, The (1997)
★★★ / ★★★★

I didn’t know much about this movie when I decided to watch it so my expectations were not that high. I thought it was going to be another one of those science fiction movies that deals with the apocalypse and so happens to take itself way too seriously. I couldn’t be anymore more wrong because “The Fifth Element,” written and directed by Luc Besson, was as funny and interesting as the vibrant colors that could be found in it throughout. Every 5,000 years, a strange power appears and tries to engulf life. It could be stopped by combining the powers of fire, water, wind, earth and the supposed “fifth element” for another five thousand years and the cycle continues. Bruce Willis stars as Korben Dallas, a taxi driver in futuristic New York who used to work for the military. He got sucked into the madness of intergalactic battle when Milla Jovovich–the fifth element, also known as the perfect being–literally dropped into his taxi. Their mission was to gather all the elements and save the planet from being obliterated into oblivion. Gary Oldman as the evil Zorg, Ian Holm as the priest, and Chris Tucker as the hilariously flamboyant DJ also star. I enjoyed this movie more than I expected to because its pace was quick; it didn’t dwell on the specifics on who’s who and what their intentions and motivations are. This film definitely reminded me of a hybrid between the “Star Wars” saga and the B movies of the 1950’s because it had that nice balance of imagination and humor. The only minor complaint I had was that sometimes it managed to distract itself from the story to make room for some of the more obvious funny moments. Tucker was the one who stole most of the scenes he was in because he was able to focus his manic personality into a character that had to be very enthusiastic about everything every time he was on his program. As for the visual and special effects, yes, they are sort of dated but I really didn’t care because I’m more concerned about the concept, how well a film builds on the story, and how it utilizes its characters. “The Fifth Element” is one of those movies that one can really enjoy if one doesn’t mind watching something over-the-top on a slow night.

MAGIA, ESPADA Y FANTASÍA (VI)

La segunda parte de la monumental adaptación a la pantalla de la obra de J.R.R. Tolkien por Peter Jackson y su equipo da comienzo en el punto en que la Comunidad del Anillo se disuelve: Frodo y Sam siguen su camino hacia Mordor, Merry y Pipin han caído prisioneros de los orcos de Sauron, y Aragorn, Legolas y Gimli, dejando a los pequeños portadores del anillo que encuentren su propio destino, van tras los cautivos para liberarlos, mientras Sauron y su aliado Saruman siguen acumulando fuerzas con las que aplastar a las razas libres de la Tierra Media, desunidas y parapetadas tras sus débiles defensas…

Tras el impactante efecto sorpresa de la primera entrega, Las dos torres ofrece más de lo mismo (pero peor) en la forma, aunque empieza la decadencia en cuanto al fondo. Como dijimos en su momento en esta misma sección, a medida que la trilogía avanza, sus grandes virtudes se van poco a poco diluyendo y los pequeños inconvenientes del primer capítulo, minimizados ante la grandiosidad del conjunto, van creciendo hasta poco a poco adueñarse de este puente hacia la conclusión. El problema, precisamente, es la entrega incondicional a la espectacularidad de las formas y el paulatino descuido de unas, ya de por sí, demasiado elementales, lineales, esquemáticas cuestiones de fondo (personajes, psicología, motivaciones, reacciones ante los hechos…) siguiendo, obviamente, las pautas marcadas por Tolkien pero haciendo que la película, exactamente igual que su antecesora y su continuación, dependa en exclusiva de los conocimientos previos del espectador sobre la obra literaria a fin de que pueda entender la lógica de acontecimientos y personajes, sin que se trate de un producto cinematográfico autónomo. A ello no es ajena la introducción de las grandes batallas y de las escenas de acción propias de la historia en las que la entrega a la espectacularidad es total, y en las que se desvirtúan algunos logros de la primera parte. Por ejemplo, donde hay un ingente esfuerzo por utilizar el maquillaje y la caracterización para la construcción de las diversas criaturas “no humanas” y de ambientación y dirección artística para los espacios, comienza a haber demasiada labor de computadora a fin de recrear enormes ejércitos en movimiento, espacios abiertos o decorados en los que transcurran los combates, auténticamente de videojuego por más espectaculares que sean, y también en el momento de provocar un buen número de efectos de la violencia sobre individuos y objetos. La batalla principal es tan grandiosa como artificiosa, con algún que otro guiño que supera lo humorístico para adentrarse en lo ridículo, completamente fuera del tono general de la historia, y las múltiples y complejas tramas paralelas que como un mosaico van salpicando la narración y cambiando el punto de interés y de tensión a cada momento, unidas a la excesiva duración del film, hacen que el ritmo vaya desde la lentitud más extrema al servicio del crecimiento de una tensión no siempre lograda (porque hay que entender que al igual que se depende del libro para presuponer aspectos de los personajes el espectador ya conoce el desenlace de los hechos sobre los que se pretende cargar emoción) hasta la vertiginosa sucesión de acontecimientos acelerados que siembran la película de altibajos y lagunas de emoción.

El problema es que la ingenuidad y expectación del discurso de la primera parte se torna aquí en una oda a las imágenes animadas desprovistas de discurso de cualquier tipo o, lo que es peor, intentando alcanzar la sublimidad de ciertos mensajes a través de la mera repetición de frases y situaciones pretendidamente trascendentes y decisivas (cuando, insistimos, el lector de Tolkien, espectador a quien va dirigida la película, no como intención, pero sí como construcción, ya sabe qué va a pasar y qué no) pero que, a través de ese culto a lo entendido como modernidad e innovación visuales, son en el fondo de una emotividad vacía, de una emoción nula, sin una aventura real, sin un riesgo o un peligro que realmente cruce al otro lado de la pantalla, sin unos personajes vivos por los que podamos sentir una empatía que vaya más allá de lo que los personajes dicen representar, sin llegar a sentir algo por los personajes en sí.

La película acumula historias que transcurren de manera paralela pero no por ello gana en solidez, muy al contrario, es una forma de perder pulso, de deshilvanar un puzzle que en la primera entrega había quedado ensamblado de manera aceptable. Se vuelve facilona, vulgar, reiterativa, simple y lineal, por más que visualmente pretenda todo lo contrario, resultar majestuosa, abigarrada, rica, espectacular; busca enganchar por la belleza y el impacto de imágenes grandilocuentes, olvidándose de atraparnos por el cariz de los acontecimientos que cuenta, y es ahí donde, a pesar de que engancha y obliga a seguirla, apuesta por explotar los elementos más pobres y simplones del lenguaje cinematográfico y busca convencer a través de algo, en el fondo, tan fácil como es apabullar, embaucar por aplastamiento.

Habiendo alcanzado así la trilogía la cúspide de lo que podía ofrecer, buena parte de esta segunda entrega y toda la tercera parte son un lento caer hacia la superficialidad en el discurso y el tributo a las formas animadas por ordenador en detrimento de la historia misma, al metraje excesivo en la creencia de que la mejor adaptación es la que cuenta todo (ya dijo Voltaire que el secreto de aburrir consiste en decirlo todo), de que a más, siempre es mejor. Y el cine nos ha dado gran cantidad de muestras, seguramente las mejores, de que lo mejor suele ser siempre lo contrario.

Data
Title: Brazil
Year: 1985
Length: 142 minutes
Director: Terry Gilliam
Writers: Terry Gilliam, Tom Stoppard & Charles McKeown
Starring: Jonathan Pryce, Robert De Niro, Katherine Helmond, Ian Holm, Bob Hoskins, Michael Palin, Ian Richardson, Peter Vaughan, Kim Greist
Music: Michael Kamen
Distinctions: currently #240 on IMDb’s Top 250

My reaction
Synopsis: a man in a bureaucratic dystopia obsesses over a woman from his dreams
How I saw it: on video several times (used to have on DVD), most recently (rented from Netflix) yesterday
Concept: Good.
Story: Bad.
Characters: Good.
Dialog: Great.
Pacing: Bad.
Cinematography: Great.
Special effects/design: Great.
Acting: Good.
Music: Great.
Subjective Rating: 6/10 (Okay). I used to think this movie was great, but I can’t figure out why. Maybe it was just because I loved other Gilliam movies, so I thought I should love it. Or maybe it’s the same reason that every young person who hasn’t read too many books thinks 1984 is the best thing ever. In any case, I was pretty bored watching this yesterday. The visuals are great, but they rarely actually contribute to the storytelling. There are some great scenes, mostly when it’s being silly, and some great acting from Holm and Palin (meanwhile, De Niro is pretty bad), but the story just doesn’t make a lot of sense if you think about it too much.
Objective Rating: 7/10 (Pretty good) 2.9/4 (Good).

'ALIEN' Movie Poster circa 1979

——-
——-

...yo quinto elemento, ser supremo...

Directed: Luc Besson
With: Bruce Willis, Gary Oldman, Ian Holm, Milla Jovovich, Chris Tucker, etc..

Gary Oldman es un maestro, Milla Jovovich sale buenísima, Bruce Willis es el mas duro, a Chris Tucker te dan ganas de ahorcarlo y todo eso mezclado con una pizca de futuro (en realidad futuro a gusto) y una historia de ciencia ficción (con elegido y todo) y con toques de comedia.
Puede que tome tiempo acostumbrarse al humor de la película, pero es entretenimiento puro y sin desperdicios.

VERDICT:
8/10 Pointed Fingers

A powerful, poignant movie about coping (and not coping) with grief and what it takes to move on from personal tragedy.

The Sweet Hereafter is about a lawyer that’s hired to represent a Canadian family who’s daughter was paralyzed after surviving a bus accident that took the lives of nearly all the town’s children. To bolster his case, the lawyer makes his rounds to all the said childrens’ parents in hopes that they will jump on his bandwagon to sue the bus manufacturer, all the while struggling with the troubled relationship he has with his own daughter, one that is rendering him utterly helpless.

It had been a long time since I first saw this movie but it wasn’t until I came across David Schleicher’s review of it that I was remember how damn good this was. A refresher was in order. And while it didn’t exactly carry the emotional weight that it did the first time around – probably because I knew what was coming – there aren’t a whole lot of movies that handle this kind of subject matter with such insight and humanity as The Sweet Hereafter does. Maybe Ordinary People, but that’s about it.

I feel ashamed that this is the only movie I’ve seen by director Atom Egoyan, because the guy sure knows how to tell a story from both a visual and literary standpoint. Maybe it’s just how Canada looks naturally, but the scenery in this movie is absolutely beautiful. It’s stark, it’s empty, and it’s immense, and it all complements the feel of the story quite naturally. Egoyan has also written a fantastic script and taken some fascinating liberties in adapting it from the novel it’s based off of. And even though I haven’t read the book, the liberty I’m talking about has to do with a parallel that Egoyan draws between the childrens’ deaths and the story of the pied piper leading the children out of Hamelin. You have to see it to get it, but the point is that it’s brilliant.

But the thing Egoyan does best here is that he maintains a much-needed sense of subtlety throughout it all. The biggest pitfall he could have fallen into here would have been to beat his audience over the head with what he was trying to say and try to provide his audience with answers where there are none, and he evades it by evoking this sense of unspoken tension and anger amongst the townspeople, letting them sort their issues out in the ways they see fit rather than try to manufacture it into a melodrama of sorts. Thank God he didn’t do that.

The acting is also very good on behalf of the entire cast for the most part. Most of the townspeople are actors I’ve never seen before or since, but two individuals really stood out to me. The first is Ian Holm (aka: Bilbo Baggins) as the lawyer. He’s a damn good actor and it wasn’t until his performance here that I really started to notice. Really intense and very…honest at the same time.

The other actor is Bruce Greenwood – who I only know as Captain Kirk’s superior officer in the latest Star Trek movie – as one of the townspeople trying to get on with his life after losing his wife to cancer and his two kids in the accident. He does a great job here and is easily the most interesting and affected person to watch.

Very good soundtrack, too. Again, perfectly complements the feel of the movie and it’s not often that the lyrics of the song choices actually reflect the kind of emotion being conveyed through the script. Really, really impressive.

And in case you were wondering, no, this is not a true story. The accident itself is based off actual events that occurred in Texas, but everything else is fictional. Nonetheless, there’s something here everyone can relate to even if you’ve never experienced loss in such extreme circumstances as these. The heart of this story isn’t so much about the accident itself, what caused it and who’s to blame, but rather everything that comes after and how drastically the town has changed as everyone tries to pick up the remaining pieces of their lives.

It goes without saying at this point, but this is one heavy movie that you need to be in the right mood to fully appreciate. That’s hardly a complaint, more a heads up than anything else. So if you’re looking for a good drama that leave you moved, The Sweet Hereafter is a very well-made, emotional powerhouse of a movie for those interested.

MAGIA, ESPADA Y FANTASÍA (III)

Un icono instantáneo en la Historia del cine. Ése es el primer y más importante tanto a favor de Peter Jackson y su amplio equipo tras asumir la titánica tarea de adaptar a la pantalla la monumental obra de J. R. R. Tolkien, superando por fin el complejo de una industria cinematográfica incapaz durante décadas de afrontar el reto de poner en imágenes el único libro que se le resistía. Habiendo adaptado en varias ocasiones con más o menos fortuna narraciones ricas y complicadas como El Quijote, Las mil y una noches o incluso La Biblia, de El señor de los anillos solamente había podido hacerse una cinta de animación de algo más de dos horas de duración y una continuación televisiva con el segundo de los libros de la trilogía, también de dibujos animados. El gran obstáculo para que el cine hubiera salido airoso antes de tan ingente esfuerzo era sin duda la enorme complicación que suponía reflejar en la pantalla el mundo imaginario diseñado por Tolkien, esa Tierra Media instalada en una eterno medievo, poblada por seres humanos y criaturas fabulosas de atributos fantásticos, poseedora de casi todos los ecosistemas existentes en el planeta Tierra y nutrida de centenares de referencias y trasvases culturales, históricos, mitológicos y legendarios procedentes del mundo real y de los que Tolkien era amplio conocedor gracias a su profunda erudición, a su dominio de las lenguas antiguas y al desempeño de sus tareas académicas. En los albores del siglo XXI, en cambio, a través de las nuevas tecnologías y con una encomiable actitud por parte de Jackson y compañía para utilizar los efectos especiales de manera respetuosa y no abusiva, usándolos para cubrir las lagunas que el maquillaje y la dirección artística no pueden satisfacer, la adaptación consigue una maestría formal absoluta.

Con un acertado planteamiento que incluía como medida indispensable (para la lógica narrativa y las necesidades de la taquilla) la realización de una película para cada una de las partes de la obra, esta primera entrega cubre el primer volumen de la trilogía literaria, la historia desde que Frodo (Elijah Wood) y Gandalf (Ian McKellen) tienen conocimiento de que el Anillo del Poder forjado tiempo atrás por Sauron, el Señor Oscuro, con objeto de controlar los anillos entregados a todas las razas de La Tierra Media, está en manos de Bilbo (Ian Holm) tras habérselo arrebatado años atrás a la criatura Gollum, hasta que la compañía creada por las razas de la Tierra Media para escoltar a Frodo en su arduo camino hasta el Monte del Destino, lugar donde el anillo debe ser arrojado para ser destruido, queda disuelta con la desaparición de Gandalf, la muerte de Boromir (Sean Bean), la marcha de Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), Legolas (Orlando Bloom) y Gimli (John Rhys-Davies) a la caza de orcos y la dispersión de los hobbits Frodo y Sam (Sean Astin), por un lado, y Merry y Pippin (Dominic Monahan y Billy Boyd), por otro. Entretanto, por su periplo han desfilado personajes como Elrond (Hugo Weaving), Galadriel (Cate Blanchett), Arwen (Lyv Tyler) o el ambiguo Saruman (Christopher Lee).

La tercera gran virtud de la cinta la constituyen los exteriores escogidos como localizaciones para la filmación, los impresionantes paisajes de los Alpes Neozelandeses, todo un descubrimiento para quienes nunca habían tenido oportunidad de ver, ni siquiera en los documentales de La2, las maravillosas y bellísimas riquezas naturales de nuestras antípodas. Esta elección viene sustentada por un soberbio trabajo de dirección artística y maquillaje, así como de vestuario y caracterización, aspectos para los cuales los efectos especiales, contra lo que suele ser habitual, son meramente accesorios aunque tremendamente efectivos y decisivos. Todos los aspectos relacionados, pues, con el escenario en el que transcurre la acción, desde el aparente cuento infanfil inicial en los deliciosos parajes de La Comarca hasta el inquietante cuento de horror y tinieblas en que se convierte la aventura de los hobbits, son sobresalientes, disminuyendo un tanto la magnificencia del espectáculo, por ejemplo, en ciertos momentos, escasos pero algo chirriantes, en que las Minas de Moria o la ciudad de Rivendel son recreadas al modo y manera de los videojuegos, muñequitos incluidos.

En cuanto a la trama, la casi imposible adaptabilidad de una obra tan compleja, abundante y rica impone limitaciones, cortes y refritos tan comprensibles como inevitables. En esta primera parte, de ciento ochenta minutos de duración, al menos las labores de cortado y pegado no perjudican en modo alguno al conjunto más allá de lo habitual en una película de tres horas que alterna pasajes de enorme tensión y emoción con pausas de ritmo y escenas más contemplativas o largas (probablemente demasiado) transiciones. Sin embargo, lo que en entregas siguientes se convertirá en un problema (el ritmo y la excesiva duración, no digamos ya en las versiones extendidas que circulan en las ediciones de lujo en DVD), aquí queda meramente apuntado y es perdonable una vez que se juzga la majestuosidad de todo el metraje, convirtiéndose en virtud lo que a priori sería un defecto, la supresión de buena parte de lo superfluo y más farragoso del libro de Tolkien, aunque las tijeras de Jackson bien pudieran haber hecho algún que otro corte más y, por otro lado, el resultado final adolezca en algunos momentos de ciertas imprecisiones en la continuidad.

Todos estos aspectos técnicos, recompensados con cuatro premios Oscar de la Academia de Hollywood, hacen que la película sea toda una experiencia visual. Entrando, eso sí, en los aspectos dramáticos, la cosa cambia. En este punto tanto Jackson como los guionistas parten de un principio: el espectador conoce la obra de Tolkien y tiene una clara imagen de los personajes, por lo que no se molestan en introducirnos en la “realidad” de La Tierra Media ni en presentar los protagonistas al espectador más que en breves pinceladas arquetípicas que, si bien es cierto que permiten hacerse una idea del carácter de cada uno de una manera directa y rápida, hacen de todos ellos, exceptuando al Boromir de Sean Bean, unos personajes planos, previsibles, sin fuerza. Si a ello sumamos la ausencia de escenas en que la tensión o la emoción la pongan los personajes y no el entorno, la música, los paisajes o la violencia, nos encontramos con que la mayor parte de los actores no aportan a sus personajes más que la percha (excepción hecha quizá de McKellen, Holm, Bean o Wood) y que se limitan a cubrir etapas de su viaje como el muñeco escogido en un videojuego. Todo ello contribuye a que la película no sea una obra autónoma, sino que sea tributaria, quizá en demasía, de la información aportada por el libro que un espectador que sea desconocedor del mismo tendrá que completar de su propia cosecha si no quiere ver reducido lo que sucede en la pantalla a las escasas notas con que el director caracteriza personajes y fenómenos.

Con todo, y a pesar de los inconvenientes citados, la irrupción en la pantalla con la sala sala del cine a oscuras de las doradas letras del título de la cinta acompañadas por la estimable composición de Howard Shore (su música es quizá una de las mayores virtudes de la trilogía), supone una de las puertas abiertas a la fantasía más logradas del cine actual, un estallido de épica y magia, de grandilocuencia formal y profunda emotividad, de factura impecable y sutil majestuosidad, en la que triunfa claramente la forma sobre el fondo y cuyo desarrollo en las dos películas siguientes conservará, aunque no en la misma medida, las virtudes formales, y poco a poco acrecentará de manera ostensible los defectos apuntados.

The New Zealand Hobbits Are Back!

With pre- production on The Hobbit which is the prequel to the Lord of the Rings movies, Matamata is in the limelight again, where the village of Hobbiton set was made.

Well now you can go and visit the site and follow in the paths of your Hollywood Icons, names such as director Peter Jackson, Gandalf (Sir Ian McKellen), Frodo (Elijah Wood), Bilbo Baggins (Ian Holm) and Sam (Sean Astin).

When Peter Jackson spotted the Alexander Farm during an aerial search of the North Island for the best possible locations to film The Lord of The Rings, the site commenced construction in 1999 to create the Hobbiton Movie Set

Thirty-seven hobbit holes were created made out of wood and polystyrene.

Now that all the film crew and movie stars have long gone it’s now your turn to re live the experience and loose yourself in the realm of The Hobbit and the Lord of the Rings world.

Flights to New Zealand have never been more affordable

SPECIAL DEAL to NEW ZEALAND, From only $798* per person

Ex Los Angeles/San Fransisco.
SALE ENDS: 18 Nov 09 TRAVEL COMMENCING: 01 May – 08 Jun 10, 22 Feb – 13 Apr 10

*Includes fuel surcharge. Excludes Government fees and taxes of up to $90 USD, depending on routing, which encompasses the Passenger Facility Charge of $4.50 and the September 11 Security Fee of $2.50 USD per person per enplanement in the USA to a maximum of $10.00 USD. Taxes are subject to currency exchange fluctuation and may vary from the estimated taxes shown. Other terms & conditions apply.