Ya hace algunos años que me había alejado en mis lecturas, de la novela negra, pero tuvo su momento, y los clásicos, Hammett, Chandler, M. Cain, Jim Thompson, Sciascia, Simenon, o Patricia Highsmith, me hicieron disfrutar con las historias que sus creativas mentes habían concebido.

He observado con escepticismo el giro que las editoriales han dado para alejar a los devoradores de bestsellers, de la literatura que se ha estado consumiendo estos últimos años (que marcó “El código Da Vinci”), conduciéndolos hacia la novela negra (con la trilogía de Stieg Larsson a la cabeza). Y seguía sin intención inmediata de volver a introducirme en el género (no me gusta que me dirijan en la elección de lo que leo), pero, visto el retraso con el que se iba a estrenar una película que ha despertado en mí gran interés, si que me planteé comprar un libro que pertenece a la novela negra. Me refiero a “Shutter Island”, de Dennis Lehane, que Martin Scorsese ha llevado al cine, y que se estrenará en Estados Unidos el 19 de febrero próximo.

Con “Shutter Island” me ha ocurrido exactamente lo mismo que con “The road”, llevada al cine por John Hillcoat, sobre la novela de Cormac McCarthy, y pendiente todavía de estreno. En ambos casos, tener que esperar su llegada a la pantalla, me ha “obligado” a leer antes la novela.

Pero en realidad, no es de “Shutter Island”, ni de “The road” de las que voy a hablar en este post, como ya habréis podido imaginar por su encabezamiento, pero como una cosa lleva a la otra…

Como llevar en mente comprar “Shutter Island”, me llevó a comprar antes “Mystic River”.

Y fue casual.

Aunque conocía la noticia de que una editorial había lanzado una nueva colección de libros de bolsillo dedicados a la novela policíaca para la venta en kioscos, no me había despertado ni el interés de conocer los títulos que la componían. Pero hace unas semanas, recargando la tarjeta del bus en uno de esos kioscos, reparé en la entrega que se había puesto a la venta aquellos días. Era “Mystic River”, la novela de Lehane en la que se basó Clint Eastwood en 2003, para realizar una de sus mejores películas.

El recuerdo de la magistral película de Eastwood, mi decisión de leer “Shutter Island”, y, todo hay que decirlo, su asequible precio (4,95€), me decidió a comprarla.

Estaba acabando por entonces “Nocturna”, la novela de Guillermo del Toro y Chuck Hogan (si esto fuera un foro literario, le dedicaría un capítulo aparte, y no muy favorable -pero podéis pinchar en el título y leer una reseña que coincide plenamente con lo que yo diría de ella), y a los pocos días, pasando por alto otros libros que esperaban su turno de ser leídos, comencé su lectura. Aunque, confieso, con ciertas reservas, porque en ningún momento pensé que la novela pudiera ser tan plena como la película. Y me equivoqué.

Sin quitarle ningún mérito a Eastwood, que supo aprovechar al máximo el magnífico material que contiene la novela, el libro sirve en bandeja para su adaptación al cine, una coherente e interesante historia, bien redactada, con unos personajes que derrochan autenticidad y un dominio de los diálogos que la convierte en notable.

Son precisamente los diálogos (y en la novela hay muchos), uno de valores que más he apreciado en esa pequeña joya que es “Mystic River”, y los que al igual que yo, seáis aficionados a la lectura, sabéis a lo que me refiero, pues cuantas veces, un libro que te ha contado una buena historia, te ha dejado un mal sabor de boca porque en la de los personajes han aparecido frases que piensas nadie hubiera dicho de esa forma en la vida real.

Cuando hablamos, sobre todo la gente corriente (que somos los más), no preparamos las frases para que suenen bien, ni introducimos palabras de adorno en ellas. Todo es espontáneo, y salen de nuestra mente comentarios, preguntas o contestaciones que no suelen tener una segunda oportunidad de ser rectificadas como cuando escribimos. Y ese es el fallo de muchos escritores. Por mejorar la forma, abandonan el realismo, lo natural de los diálogos. Y Lehane lo domina. Jimmy Markum, Dave Boyle, Sean Devine (los protagonistas), y todos los personajes que aparecen en la novela e interactúan con ellos, se expresan como lo haríamos cualquiera de nosotros en sus circunstancias.

“Mystic River”, la novela, no es tan sólo una buena historia del género negro o policiaco. Su profundidad en el tratamiento de sus personajes, de sus sentimientos y reacciones, la convierten en algo más.

Si habéis leído este post desde su principio, sabéis que este libro ha sido mi primer contacto con Dennis Lehane, pero… ahora estoy por la mitad de “Shutter Island”.

No voy a hablar de ella hasta que no vea la película de Scorsese, aunque sí quiero comentar una opinión compartida con una amiga tan aficionada y veterana en la lectura como yo. Es nuestra opinión, y discutible, pero nos hemos confirmado con el tiempo, en la idea de que en la producción literaria de un autor (hablamos de los buenos), siempre hay una novela que sobresale sobre las otras. Un libro “redondo”, al que prácticamente no puedes encontrar ningún defecto. En el resto de sus escritos, anteriores o posteriores, volverás a encontrar muchos de los valores de esa gran obra, pero nunca la igualan, y menos, la superan. Creo que “Mystic River” es la obra “redonda” de Lehane.

LA PELÍCULA DE CLINT EASTWOOD

No es mucho lo que puede añadir mi opinión personal a un film aclamado en su momento como uno de los mejores realizados por Eastwood, nominado a seis Oscar en la edición de 2003, y ganador de dos (Mejor Actor, Sean Penn y Mejor Actor de Reparto, Tim Robbins), pero quiero alabar su trabajo.

La película arranca, como en la novela, una tarde de verano, en la que Jimmy Markum, Dave Boyle y Sean Devine, tres niños de once años, juegan en las calles del barrio obrero East Buckingham, situado a las orillas del río Mystic. Una pelea por un desacuerdo entre ellos, ocasiona que un hombre que se identifica como policía, salga de un coche, y obligue a Dave a acompañarle, ante la mirada impotente de sus amigos. Dave aparece unos días más tarde. Ha conseguido escapar del hombre y de su compañero, pero todo el mundo sabe que ha sido víctima de abusos sexuales. La mala conciencia de Jimmy y Sean, que no hicieron nada para evitar que Dave subiera al coche, hace también que su amistad acabe diluyéndose. Veinticinco años más tarde, la vida de cada uno de ellos, ha seguido un rumbo diferente: Jimmy (Sean Penn), que se inició en la delincuencia y pasó un tiempo en la cárcel, se casó muy joven, tuvo una hija a los 17 años y está casado en segundas nupcias, porque su primera mujer murió tempranamente de cáncer, regenta ahora un pequeño supermercado en el mismo barrio que le vio nacer. Sean (Kevin Bacon), en cambio, es policía y abandonó el barrio al casarse, pero su mujer le ha dejado. Dave (Tim Robbins) no ha dejado el barrio, se ha casado y tiene un hijo, pero aunque aparentemente es un hombre normal, lo ocurrido en el pasado continúa atormentándole. Un día, la hija Jimmy de 19 años, desaparece, y su cuerpo sin vida es encontrado a las pocas horas en un parque. Esto motiva que las vidas de los tres vuelvan a cruzarse, pues Sean, junto a su compañero Whitey (Laurence Fishburne) es el encargado de investigar el asesinato, en el cual llega a relacionarse a Dave por una serie de circunstancias que lo convierten en sospechoso. Jimmy, por su parte, inicia una investigación paralela a la de la policía, porque quiere vengar la muerte de su hija…

Muy poco altera Eastwood, el desarrollo de la novela, y a los principales personajes en su película (Whitey, que es un hombre blanco en el libro, y su personaje está más elaborado, sería una de esas mínimas alteraciones), y pone con magistral acierto, escenario y rostros, para contar la trama, en la que los diálogos, tanto exteriores como interiores, al igual que en la novela de Lehane, son los protagonistas.

Y se ve su mano al dirigir a los tres actores principales, sacando lo mejor de cada uno de ellos. El comedimiento de Sean Penn (excelente actor, pero que si no es bien dirigido tiene tendencia a los tic y al histrionismo), aún en la escena más desgarradora de la película, sus expresiones, con las que nos cuenta su tortura interior… La aparente apatía del personaje de Tim Robbins, pero que con su mirada y movimientos, nos dice que algo está ocurriendo dentro de su cabeza… Y la corrección de Bacon, en la que yo diría, la mejor de sus interpretaciones…

Si los tres actores principales nos ofrecen magníficas actuaciones, no quedan atrás las de Marcia Gay Harden (que da vida a Celeste Boyle, la esposa de Dave), y Laura Linney (la esposa de Jimmy Markum), personajes secundarios, pero importantes en el desarrollo de la historia.

Magistral es también el tratamiento que ha dado Eastwood a la violencia contenida que subyace a lo largo de todo el film, y que en algunas secuencias llega a sobrecogernos. Arropado todo, por una adecuada banda sonora compuesta por él mismo.

Y mucho más podría extenderme comentando la película, pero no quiero repetir lo que otros ya dijeron cuando se estrenó.

Lo que sí quiero, es recomendar la novela a los que no la hayáis leído, pues sea o no, vuestro género favorito, sé que os satisfará su lectura. Igualmente recomiendo el film. He vuelto a verlo después de leer el libro, y me he confirmado en la idea de que es una gran película.

-

Para ver la ficha de la película, pincha aquí

-

Swanson 

It’s been suggested over here that Mystic River employs a sort of narrative “cheat” not unlike the oft-repeated one in The Sixth Sense. It’s often true that movie watchers don’t like being fooled, but it should be acknowledged that some of the greats (e.g. Hitchcock) were masters at doing this in just the right way – a way that didn’t seem as offensive. Most of Hitchcock’s films work so well because the viewer is so well sutured to a particular character or characters that the narrative feels like one’s own. This effects an attachment to not only the narrative but to the film itself; the spectator feels part and parcel of the movie, something Hitchcock well knew and so exploited it through humor and adventure, making the audience feel like they were along for the ride and not simply watching someone else’s ride.

Perhaps it shouldn’t be said that the narrative twist in The Sixth Sense is a “cheat,” at least not like it is in Mystic River. The main problem with the shock in The Sixth Sense is that it’s all the film is standing on. Whatever other notions might be suggested in the film are given the back seat (as in, the very back seat of a twelve-passenger van) to the not-so-little detail that changes everything in the film. However, it is not a cheat because the viewer is usually connected with Bruce Willis’ character Malcolm and is only privy to what he knows. Alternately, it can be said that the spectator’s point of view is Cole’s view of how Malcolm sees himself. We see what Cole sees, and what he sees Malcolm see. The viewer is only let in on the film’s big secret at the moment Willis realizes it. Shallow? Empty? A shameless conceit? It may be all of those things, but it’s probably not really a cheat.

Enter Mystic River. In what is ironically an actor’s movie (it was even directed by one), it’s slightly trickier to determine just which character the viewer is supposed to identify with most. Maybe it’s not ironic; maybe the thespian ensemble functions precisely to confuse the viewer as to which character the film itself wants to see come out in front. This is doubtful. The characters are all types, caricatures, and oddities, personalities overly determined by their pasts or inconsistent in attitude and motivation. In fact, the film does choose its “main” character, the one whose point of view is given priority to the viewing audience: Dave. The opening scene functions as a flashback, giving the three main male characters a background that connects them and one that sets Dave apart from Jimmy and Sean in a certain, horrible way. Following the opening scene and periodically throughout the film we see flashbacks from Dave, a Rashomon-like forest view as he escapes his captors after four days of abusive captivity.

What is the point of all of these flashbacks? It seems fair to assume that they are for either one or both of the following reasons: to give narrative background to the main story that will fill in important information, or, to paint a fuller picture of the character of Dave in order to create viewer attachment and all the accompanying emotions, etc. As with most either-ors, this one turns out to be both. And herein lies the real cheat of Mystic River. More than any other technical element, Dave’s forest flashbacks suture the viewer to the character of Dave. No other character has POV shots like these. Over the course of the main story, exceedingly important information about Dave, of which he is fully aware, is withheld not only from the other characters, but also from the viewing audience. The only reason to withhold this information is to create suspense, but unfortunately it’s at the expense of a consistent connection between viewer and “main” character. This makes the suspense artificial, a “cheat.”

This is something that, again, The Sixth Sense did not do and something that Hitchcock didn’t do. These two counter-examples were chosen – one a film and one a corpus of films – because they represent the other two options: either let the audience in on what’s happening à la Hitchcock, or withhold information to the same degree that the main character is ignorant of it. One of the great twists in North By Northwest occurs after Roger Thornhill (Cary Grant) escapes narrowly from the United Nations building after being framed for a murder. The camera makes a transition from the U.N. building (a bird’s-eye or God’s-eye view of the reflective façade) to the exterior of the Central Intelligence Agency (a man’s eye view), the sign of which mirrors the Washington, D.C. Capitol building across the street from it. Hitchcock makes it clear to his audience that they have a privileged outlook by removing them from the restricted and confusing point of view of Roger Thornhill to the much more omniscient CIA. This move doesn’t so much cater to the audience as respect it, understanding that Thornhill’s situation is too intense for the audience to experience it with him past a certain point.

Interestingly, there is a later point in North By Northwest when Hitchcock does trick the audience. At Mount Rushmore, Eva Marie Saint’s character Even Kendall appears to shoot Thornhill point blank in front of a large crowd. The audience is briefly left reeling as much as the crowd within the scene, which believes that the two characters are on opposite sides, if one wants to murder the other. A few moments later, the viewer meets the characters in a secluded forest where Thornhill emerges unscathed from a car, along with Kendall, showing that the scene was a hoax. The main reason why this conceit is not exactly a deceit is that Thornhill is not in on the hoax until shortly after the shot is fired, when he realizes that it was a blank. The amount of screen time that elapses between the firing of the shot and the revelation to the audience that Thornhill is alive is no doubt not much longer than how long it took Thornhill to realize he wasn’t hurt. Sutured to Thornhill, Hitchcock plays the same trick on the audience that SHE plays on him, briefly (and only briefly!) letting the audience/Thornhill think that something dreadful has happened when it hasn’t. The event was not the crux of the plot and was not drawn out as an artificial suspense element.

The point may be done to death, but it amply illustrates how a film like Mystic River relies on an artificial and inconsistent plot device to distract the audience from some truly uninteresting characters and get the audience to focus on the only thing the film has going for it: the narrative. The aforementioned blog did well to note this point, as well. Granted, a film like North By Northwest loves and needs its plot. The plot, like in many of Hitchcock’s films, is larger than life, so the great director does what needs to be done to ground the film: give it a main character (or main characters) who appeal completely to the viewing audience. If the film isn’t “realistic,” at least let its characters appeal to those watching. The lack of realism in Mystic River’s story (Dave’s wife’s knee-jerk assumption that he killed the girl??) is piled on top of larger than life characters, rendered so by a kind of acting that draws more attention to the performances than to the characters. The characters in Mystic River repel the audience. The acting may appeal to viewers, but the characters themselves are generally unappealing, evoking sympathy at points but rarely if ever empathy rooted in a real connection with lived experience and a personable disposition. Some may say this is the nature of tragedy, but a quick look at Shakespeare disproves that idea. An effective tragedy does the same fundamental thing Hitchcock does, connecting the audience with the character for whatever effect best suits the genre or the work itself.

Good thing it's a closeup

PS: Having not seen many films directed by Clint Eastwood, what’s with the finger-gun motif here and in Gran Torino?

I’ve finished the rough draft of my third book recently, giving me 3 rough manuscripts total. Though there’s still a lot of work to be done, I feel I’ve accomlished something huge. With all of that, I still managed to squeeze in some reading.

I’ve felt some need for inspiration to finish my last MS, so I’ve gone back and reread First Person Plural, and for fiction I read Shutter Island by Lehane.

I’ve been a Dennis Lehane fan for quite some time. I was hooked after Mystic River and have read everything but Shutter Island. And now I’m wondering why. It’s such a good book with raw emotion, and though Mysic River remains my fave, Shutter Island is right up there.

Dogstar vs   BON JOVI &  KEANU REEVES vs Jon Bon Jovi

Do you know Dogstar? Keanu Reeves played the bass and toured with the band for 11 years. The band was founded in 1991 and broke up in 2002. But Keanu has been in movies since 1985.

Dogstar. First from the right, Keanu Reeves

Keanu Reeves became even more popular with the Matrix Triology. Dogstar what?

 Dogstar even has a picture with Bon Jovi, at the backstage of a concert where the band performed as the supporting act. And how many of you think Jon Bon Jovi as an actor? Sure, he has done some interesting films like The Leading Man and Little City but to most people, he is a rocker, a musician, the frontman of his band Bon Jovi.  Keanu Reeves always remained as an actor who liked to play bass and play rocker in his free time to his fans and the name Jon Bon Jovi can sell shitloads of concert tickets but it ain’t that strong when it comes to box office.

Bon Jovi have been together for about 25 years.

One of the many movies Jon has starred in.

KEVIN BACON vs The Bacon Brothers

Kevin Bacon has a band called The Bacon Brothers where he plays with his brother Michael. They have 3 albums but I didn’t even have a clue before I watched a special on the actor’s life. His movies? His movies are good. He is a theater trained actor who can play the good guys (Footloose, a classic dance movie) but thanks to Hollywood, he made a name for himself as the actor who best plays the bad guys. He has played good guys (Footloose, She’s Having a Baby, wrongly convicted and/or sexually molested prisoners (Murder in the First, Sleepers), kidnappers , murderers…the list goes on. You probably heard of Mystic River, JFK, A Few Good Men, Flatliners, Stir of Echoes… Did you by any chance get a hold of his albums? I actually heard him play during that show about his life. He sings and he is good. But it is OK. I know quite a lot of singers with great voices. But I think Kevin Bacon is a uniquely talented actor. I for one am glad he stuck with his acting career.

The Bacon Brothers

Here's the mean-looking Kevin we all know and love

 COMING UP:  John Travolta, Shane West, Bruce Willis and David Bowie

Thee boys reunite over a lost childhood, in both ways.

Tragedy reunites childhood friends Sean (Kevin Bacon), Dave (Tim Robbins) and Jimmy (Sean Penn) when they’re linked together in the Boston-based murder investigation of Jimmy’s teenage daughter. But while detective Sean works the case, Jimmy launches his own quest for the truth.

Mystic River is Clint Eastwood’s 24th directorial effort and it is one of his best. This is an extremely well-crafted and powerful film that shows us the real feelings of a childhood lost. Mystic River is based off of the novel from Brian Hegeland which works both as a taut thriller and a important character study.

After seeing all, the critical acclaim this film has gotten I will say that I was expecting to be taken away with one of the greatest films I have ever seen. But to be truly honest I wasn’t. Much of the story is great but there are some plot holes that I just didn’t believe such as the plot concerning Sean and his wife how she always calls but doesn’t say a word. Also Tim Robbins’ character as a young boy was molested, and throughout the whole movie he just acts like a nutcase, and throughout the whole time I was thinking, how did this guy have a smoking hot wife and a kid.

I liked how the film shows how these three men’s lives were changed when the incident with Tim Robbins occurred. The film isn’t a fast-paced thriller, but features elements that everything mysterious and wrong all lurk in the air.

Its a tremendously powerful film about the American tragedy that features characters that I did actually believe. I felt like the setting they were in was very true and actually was a character in the movie itself, and how each character reacts with one another felt true as well.

The performances are what really captivated me in this film however. The whole star-studded cast does a great job and all the performances jell together really well when their all on screen at once. Sean Penn gives one of the best performances of his career, and shows that he can take your typical average working American and switch him into something more than just that. There is a scene where he finds out his daughter has been killed and it is amazing to see his reaction, that scene though so early in the film kept me standing in my one spot. Tim Robbins does a great job as well despite his character being a little nutty, but he plays him real well.

The problem with this film that ultimately killed it for me was the ending. I don’t want to give anything big away but the ending was total junk. I felt that by the end of the film it was supporting murder, and vigilante justice, and didn’t make any sense or create a feeling of anything was right in this film.

Consensus: With some upsetting plot holes, Mystic River is well-acted, suspenseful, and full of great emotional power that shows a great portrait of real characters in real situations.

8.5/10=Matinee!!!

Für mich war DiCaprio lange Zeit nicht wirklich ein richtiger Schauspieler. Das lag einzig und allein an der Rolle in Titanic. Die Art und Weise wie er gespielt hat, hat mir und vielen anderen (nur Männer ) missfallen. Danach habe ich seine Filme gemieden (u. a. The Beach, Gangs of New York). Aber ich muss sagen der Leo hat die Kurve gepackt.

In The Departed, Blood Diamond und ganz besonders in Revolutionary Road (In Zeiten des Aufruhrs), zeigt er was er kann und er kann es wirklich gut. Deswegen bin ich richtig gespannt auf seine zwei neuen Filme.

Zum einen wäre da “Shutter Island”, da ist nun ein zweiter Trailer veröffentlicht worden. DiCaprio spielt einen US-Marshal der auf der abgelegenen Insel “Shutter Island” versucht, das verschwinden einer Mörderin aus einer Irrenanstalt aufzuklären. Während der Ermittlungen stößt er beim Personal auf Ablehnung und hat im Laufe des Films mit eigenen psychischen Problemen zu kämpfen. “Shutter Island” basiert auf einem Roman von Dennis Lehane, dieser hat bereits das Buch zu “Mystic River” geschrieben. Verfilmt wurde “Shutter Island” von niemand geringerem als Martin Scorsese. DiCaprio und Scorsese hatten ja bereits bei “Gangs of New York”, “Aviator” und “The Departed” zusammen gearbeitet und kennen sich dementsprechend gut. Auch die restliche Riege der Schauspieler (Mark Ruffalo, Ben Kingsley) kann sich sehen lassen. Schaut Euch bitte den Trailer an, der ist wirklich eine Granate. Sehr atmosphärisch mit einem Horroreinschlag. Ist derzeit wohl einer der besten Trailer. Release ist im Februar 2010, war aber eigentlich angesetzt für dieses Jahr. Der Verleih hatte aber immense Angst, dass der Film dieses Jahr untergeht, deswegen hat man ihn verschoben. Bei dem Trailer ist die Angst aber ungerechtfertigt.

Ein weiterer Film mit DiCaprio, und darauf dürfen wir sehr gespannt sein, ist das neue Werk von Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight). Der Film heißt “Inception” (Übersetzt: Anbeginn, Anfang) und der Teaser ist eine weitere Granate. Über den Inhalt wird noch geschwiegen aber lt. Warner Bros. wird der Film ein “zeitgenössischer SciFi-Actionfilm, angesiedelt in der Architektur des Geistes”.

Der Teaser geht in Richtung Matrix mit einem Schuss Dark City. Das wenige was man sieht, macht bereits jetzt schon einen fulminanten Eindruck. Neben DiCaprio spielen noch Marion Cotillard (Public Enemies), Ellen Page (Juno) und Joseph Gordon-Levitt (Brick). Genießt den Teaser der macht richtig Lust auf mehr.

It’s 1954.  The place is a small island in the Massachusetts Outer Harbor that houses a facility known as Ashcliffe Hospital, one of the most notorious institutions in the United States.  Ashcliffe is an institution for the criminally insane, and one of the inmates has escaped, a deranged psychotic by the name of Rachel Solando.  U.S. Marshals Teddy Daniels and Chuck Aule have been sent to investigate, but on this island, nothing is as it seems.  As a massive hurricane bears down, it is up to Daniels and Aule to get to the bottom of the mysterious disappearance of Rachel Solando.  But as the storm outside rages, the lawmen find that it is nothing compared to the storm raging inside the institution, and they are desperate to get to the truth on Shutter Island.

This was my first time reading Dennis Lehane, who also wrote Mystic River, which was adapted to the big screen, directed by Clint Eastwood, and won an Oscar.  I thought Mystic River was a decent movie, although I find Sean Penn an annoying hack who overacts and I didn’t care much for the ending.  But this book…wow.  It is the kind of psychological thriller that leaves you guessing up until the very end.  It’s that rare thriller that is intelligent enough to make you think in order to obtain answers, instead of happening upon them by way of a lucky guess.  Lehane begins with a large amount of buildup, introducing us to the characters of Daniels and Aule, letting us get to know them and understand their backstories.  But once the storm hits, we begin to discover one revelation after another, each as shocking as the last.

The characters were multi-layered and deeply interesting, but one of the things that gives this book real life is the way the island (and the hospital) are woven into the story as characters themselves.  They seem alive, with a past as dark and mysterious as the main protagonists, and the descriptions and character interactions with the island are just fantastic.  In most books, backdrop is a necessary part but not an essential element the way that it is in Shutter Island.  The island is a brooding, scary place, and it as much as anything else seems to be what Daniels and Aule are fighting against.  The place of Ashecliffe Hospital is more than a psychiatric hospital, it takes on a deranged, psychotic life of it’s own, spurred on by the people running it.

Lehane blends this altogether by showing us Ashecliffe through the eyes of the outsiders, all the while giving us clues that will lead to the final thrilling revelation.  This is a great read, intriguing and full of character and life.  If you like intelligent thrillers and characters with depth, I highly recommend this book.

the Wizard of Oz

أول مرة أشوفه .. على قدم الإنتاج لكن كان له طعمه الخاص
راقلي جدا .. فكرته بسيطه ومباشرة
كنت أتمنى يحتوي أغاني أكثر .. والمشكله انه في ربع الفيلم الأخير تقريبا مافيه ولا أغنيه

8-10

Mystic River

قريت كثير انه لا تحكم على الفيلم من المشاهدة الأولى
لكن وحتى ذلك الحين اللي أشوف فيه الفيلم للمرة الثانيه .. الفيلم خيب ظني وتوقعته أفضل من اللي شفته
أرجع أقول لأنه توقعاتي كانت عاليه جدا ويمكن هذا الشيء كان له التأثير السيء على التجربة
بما اني مقصر بمشاهدتي لـ أعمال شون بين .. كان هذا الفيلم جرعة كافيه لتعطي درس في التمثيل من شون بين

6-10

Mystic River is a 2003 film directed by Clint Eastwood.  Luckily for me, its also a really great novel written be Dennis Lehane.

I spent the majority of this long weekend not at work and, instead, curled up in bed with this fast-paced and exciting book.  It’s not my usual style.  The cops all talk like, well, cops; using tough talk, sprinkled with expletives and metaphors about submarines and such.   The great thing about this novel, however, was that it wasn’t just a bunch of lonely, alcoholic cops (although they were certainly present) busting their latest case.  I honestly cared about these characters.  It opens with the three main characters as children, experiencing something traumatic together that will haunt them, in different ways, into their adulthood.

I’m keeping this one short and simple.  I don’t want to give anything away.  I haven’t seen the movie (yet) so I had a great time guessing the ending and yelling at characters to look behind them and don’t go in there.

Haunted house – exorcising &evil spirits& from Kashmir assembly …

Spirits. There is the central idea. The spirits of the house. What makes them comfortable and allows the household spirits to live in harmony with the house and the land and the more corporeal inhabitants? Find the answer to that and …

Many members of the public are needed for the spirit-walk scene Saturday for a $5 fee. The scene calls for more than 100 people to walk the Hinsdale House land as spirits. Anyone interested should arrive at the house at 1 p.m. Saturday, …

Many members of the public are needed for the spirit-walk scene Saturday for a $5 fee. The scene calls for more than 100 people to walk the Hinsdale House land as spirits. Anyone interested should arrive at the house at 1 p.m. Saturday, …

Many members of the public are needed for the spirit-walk scene Saturday for a $5 fee. The scene calls for more than 100 people to walk the Hinsdale House land as spirits. Anyone interested should arrive at the house at 1 p.m. Saturday, …

Spirits. There is the central idea. The spirits of the house. What makes them comfortable and allows the household spirits to live in harmony with the house and the land and the more corporeal inhabitants? Find the answer to that and …


mad men love among the ruins
pillsbury bake off
ryan jenkins myspace
regina king
michhami dukkadam
myuhportal
sts 128
Pinoy …
peace in swahili

A Wallpaper Of Marcia Gay Harden From The Movie

You know sometimes when you buy a movie, or you record it or download it and you never watch it because of lack of time or any other reason ? Well, that happens to me almost everyday.

It took me a lot of time to watch “Mystic River” for the first time in 2007. Directed by Clint Eastwood, this movie is now part of the movies I call “my favourites”.

There is nothing wrong with this movie in my opinion. Of course, the ending isn’t breathtaking but that doesn’t mean it’s any less good. It’s one of the most wonderful movies I have ever seen in my entire life.

From the opening scenes to the very last moments, you can’t take your eyes away from Sean Penn, Tim Robbins and Kevin Bacon. You’re always waiting for their next line, their next move, their next appearance.

I admit, I thought Dave was the guilty one from the start, and I was wrong. Even after they found the gun, I told myself : “No, it’s still Dave who’s guilty.” Sorry for anyone who hasn’t seen the movie but Dave is not guilty. If you want to find out who is, just watch it.

Kevin Bacon & Sean Penn

I always loved Sean Penn. He is in a class all by himself. Few others can say : “I’m as good as Penn.”

I always thought that Kevin Bacon was a very good actor. In fact, he never disappoints.

Tim Robbins ? I loved him in “Bull Durham” and a few other movies like “Arlington Road” but I never considered him to be among the greats. Maybe I was wrong.

Here’s a quote from the movie :

Sean Devine [Kevin Bacon] : [On the phone with Lauren] “Okay. “Hey Sean, how was your day ?” Oh me ? I’m tired of wishing things made sense. I’m tired of caring about some dead girl, and there’s just gonna be another one after her. Sending killers to jail is just sending them where they’ve been heading all their dumb, pathetic lives. The dead are still dead.“

For those of you who haven’t seen “Mystic River” yet, do it. It will blow your mind away !

Mark Ruffalo and Leonardo DiCaprio in Shutter Island

By DAVE MCNARY – Variety.com

Moviegoers won’t be going to “Shutter Island” this fall, as Paramount has moved the Martin Scorsese-directed thriller, starring Leonardo DiCaprio, from Oct. 2 to Feb. 19.

Citing economic factors, Paramount made the decision Friday morning, only six weeks before the pic would have opened.

Fox Searchlight immediately moved “Whip It,” its Drew Barrymore-helmed roller derby comedy, forward a week into the slot. The only other pics set for wide release Oct. 2 are Disney’s 3D re-releases of “Toy Story” and “Toy Story 2.”

The Feb. 19 slot currently contains a pair of actioners: Lionsgate’s “From Paris With Love” and Screen Gems’ “Takers.”

The studio issued a statement from Paramount Pictures chairman-CEO Brad Grey saying: “Our 2009 slate was greenlit in a very different economic climate and as a result we must remain flexible and willing to recalibrate and adapt to a changing environment.

Amazon Specials!

“This is a situation facing every single studio as we all work through the financial pressures associated with the broader downturn. Like every business, we must make difficult choices to maximize our overall success and to best manage Paramount’s business in a way that serves Viacom and its shareholders, while providing the film with every possible chance to succeed both creatively and financially.

Pundits had put “Shutter” high on the list of possible awards contenders this year, given the Scorsese-DiCaprio pedigree and the fact that it’s based on a novel by Dennis Lehane (“Mystic River”). However, the trailers, which have been running for several months, sell it as a thriller, which is not always a genre that gets kudos attention.

Laeta Kalogridis penned the script for the project, a co-production between Phoenix Pictures, Scorsese’s Sikelia and DiCaprio’s Appian Way banners. Mike Medavoy, Arnold Messer, Brad Fischer and Scorsese are producing.

“Shutter Island” is set in 1954, with DiCaprio portraying a U.S. Marshal investigating the disappearance of a murderess who escaped from a hospital for the criminally insane and is presumed to be hiding on the remote Shutter Island.

My Mystic River collection is close to completion and will make a very nice presentation…

Mystic River has a great cast including Sean Penn, Kevin Bacon and Tim Robbins.  Typical of Clint Eastwood diligence the movie was shot in only 39 days.

Sean Penn                                                            Jimmy Markum

Kevin Bacon                                                       Sean Devine

Tim Robbins                                                       Dave Boyle

Laura Linney                                                      Annabeth Markum

Marcia Gay Harden                                         Celeste Boyle

Will Lyman                                                          FBI Agent Birden

Jenny O’Hara                                                      Esther Harris

Eli Wallach                                                          Mr. Loonie, Liquor Store Owner

Dennis Lehane                                                   (novel writer)

Still in search of a Laurence Fishburne autograph

En 2003, le meilleur film de l’année selon les Oscars:

LE SEIGNEUR DES ANNEAUX: LE RETOUR DU ROI

Pourquoi ça a gagné: Parce que les blockbusters qui sont aussi des grands films, pour enfants et pour adultes, avec un coeur qui bat dedans et pas seulement un caisse enregistreuse, ça ne court plus les rues. Parce que ça a quand même rapporté des milliards de dollars. Parce que de haut en bas, tout fonctionne: de la mise en scène virevoltante aux effets spéciaux qui servent l’histoire sans la submerger, des acteurs parfaitement distribués à la direction artistique fabuleusement détaillée, de la musique à la fois épique et intimiste aux scènes d’action qui retournent la tête, en passant par l’émotion, qui contre toute attente, n’est pas frelatée. Parce que c’est un blockbuster réalisé par un artiste, en somme.

Mon choix:

LE SEIGNEUR DES ANNEAUX: LE RETOUR DU ROI

Pourquoi: Pour les mêmes raisons.

Meilleur Réalisateur:

Peter Jackson
pour Le Seigneur des Anneaux: Le Retour du Roi

Pourquoi il a gagné: Parce que l’ambition et la passion méritent d’être récompensées quand elle sont couronnées de succès, et que cet hurluberlu néo-zélandais a entrepris ce qui est probablement l’un des projets les plus ambitieux de l’histoire du cinéma (trois films de plus de trois heures chacun, tournés en même temps et sortis sur trois ans). A l’arrivée c’était soit l’asile, soit l’Oscar.

Mon choix:

Pourquoi: Pour les mêmes raisons.

 Meilleur Acteur:

Sean Penn
dans Mystic River

Pourquoi il a gagné: Parce que c’est Sean Penn, le plus grand acteur américain de sa génération et qu’il n’avait pas encore d’Oscar pour décorer sa cheminée. Parce que c’est le rôle de sa vie, le rôle qui cristallise le mieux l‘essence de Sean Penn: son intensité, son ambiguïté, sa violence, sa fragilité. Parce que 21 Grammes, un rôle à l’opposé de celui-ci, la même année. Parce qu’il SOUFFRE et que sa rage est hypnotique.

Mon choix:

Sean Penn
dans Mystic River

Pourquoi: Pour les mêmes raisons. Et pour ce dernier regard, caché derrière ses lunettes de soleil.

Meilleure actrice:

Charlize Theron
dans Monster

Pourquoi elle a gagné: Parce que TOUT, mais absolument TOUT y est! Personnage réel (BIOPIC!), lesbienne, pute, tueuse en série, condamnée à mort, l’accent, et la fille sublime qui prend des kilos, se couvre de maquillage et devient très très laide et méconnaissable pour le rôle (le courage! la transformation!), la potiche qui se révèle actrice de composition (surprise!), TOUT Y EST. Elle ne pouvait pas perdre.

Mon choix:

Charlize Theron
dans Monster

Pourquoi: Parce que même si je ne suis pas aussi subjugué que certains, sa composition ne se limite jamais à la transformation physique et au maquillage. Parce qu’on sent qu’elle puise ses émotions dans son affect, pas dans l’idée qu’elle a du personnage, et qu’elle ne disparaît justement pas sous le grimage. Parce que contrairement à 99% des actrices qui jouent à s’enlaidir, elle arrive à nous faire avaler, pas ses gestes, par son langage corporel, qu’elle sait ce que c’est que d’être un femme pas attirante.

Meilleur second rôle masculin:

Tim Robbins
dans Mystic River

Pourquoi il a gagné: Parce que c’est Tim Robbins, acteur et réalisateur respecté. Parce qu’il joue un type traumatisé, qui s’exprime comme un attardé et semble parfois proche de la folie (attention difficulté!). Parce qu’il est par deux fois la victime de cette tragédie, et qu’il y a de quoi avoir de la peine pour son personnage. Parce qu”il est le compagnon de Susan Sarandon, que tout le monde adore aussi.

Mon Choix:

Tim Robbins
dans Mystic River

Pourquoi: Parce que j’ai eu beau trouver son jeu appuyé lors de certaines visions, il suggère avec beaucoup de force l’enfant détraqué et l’adulte anesthésié qui cohabitent dans son corps de géant. Pour son aplomb sarcastique complètement inattendu lors de la scène d’interrogation. Pour Bull Durham, The Player, Short Cuts, The Hudsucker Proxy, The Shawhshank Redemption. Parce que la catégorie était faiblarde cette année-là.

Meilleur second rôle féminin:

Renée Zellweger
dans Cold Mountain

Pourquoi elle a gagné: Parce que Bridget Jones en 2001 et Chicago en 2002. (C’est l’heure!) Parce que c’est un très gros second rôle, bien juteux, avec de la comédie et du drame, qui semble fait pour elle, et qui, à vrai, dire semble avoir été créé juste pour lui rapporter un Oscar.

Mon choix:

Renée Zellweger
dans Cold Mountain

Pourquoi: Parce qu’elle en fait justement des caisses, et que son jeu rappelle savoureusement celui des grands seconds rôles des années 30-40: par moments on croirait presque Hattie McDaniel dans Autant en Emporte le Vent. Parce qu’elle est la plus mémorable d’une distribution de prestige archi-bondée. Parce qu’elle est très drôle, comme à son habitude.

Wow! Un sans faute.

New trailer for the new upcoming Martin Scorcese directed film Shutter Island based off of the 2003 novel by Dennis Lehane (The Wire, Gone Baby Gone, Mystic River)  The film stars Leonardo Dicaprio, Mark Ruffalo, Michelle Williams, Jackie Earle Haley & Ben Kingsley and is set for a October 2009 release.

“In 1954, two U.S. marshals investigate the disappearance of a patient from a hospital for the criminally insane on an island in Massachusetts.  They run into trouble when they are deceived by the hospital’s chief administrator, a hurricane hits and an inmate riot traps them on the island.”

There could be others, and I’m sure if I sat here long enough I would think of other films I should’ve and would’ve included.  I think when I make one of these lists that it’s all about the day I’m making it.  Tomorrow the list would include some of these same films, but there would probably be differences.  That’s the way it goes.  That’s life.  For now, today, these are some of my choices for the top films that always make me cry.  Honorable mention would go to films like Piano, On Golden Pond, Old Yeller, Fried Green Tomatoes, and countless other films you might be thinking of right now.

Philadelphia

The humanity in this scene is sort of overwhelming.  You have to ignore the crappy dubbing and the Greek subtitles, but it’s powerful none the less.

Beaches

Friends know each other for years, have their differences, lead disparate lives, stay bonded through everything, and love each other to the end.

Steel Magnolias

Nothing more heart wrenching than mother losing daughter. I distinctly remember seeing this and crying and laughing out loud and crying again.

Mystic River

Again… parent losing child.  This is powerful.

Playing By Heart

This whole movie takes the watcher on a roller coaster of emotion.  I cried a few times.  This scene is just sort of indicative of what the movie is about.  Not really a scene that made me cry.  It’s got an amazing cast and is a great film, if you like emotional movies about love and relationships that is.  If not, skip it.

Schindler’s List

This is one of, for me anyway, the most powerful scenes in film, ever.  Schindler is leaving and he breaks down wishing he could’ve saved more, done more.  It makes me cry just thinking about this scene.  Spielberg is a master.

Ghost

Sort of a common choice, but good none the less.  A classic tear jerker.  The moment when they see each other and he gets peace.

Powder

Fighting and then giving over of yourself… if you haven’t seen this movie it is a powerful film about humanity.  Just strange and amazing.

The Hours

I could’ve picked more than just two scenes from this movie.  It’s another character study kind of film about choices and consequences and living with both.

E.T.

I had to include this… E.T. goes home.

Boys on the Side

Love… loss…

Immortal Beloved

I don’t know why this gets me so much, but it does.  Partly it’s the music, partly watching him remember and knowing, finally, as an audience member, what the music was born out of.

Saving Private Ryan

This is the worst battle scene I’ve ever seen in film, for me.  I started crying almost immediately and by the end I was a mess.

Milk este un film despre activisti gay. Nu este un film despre activisti. Nu este un film despre gay. Este un film despre activisti gay. Cele doua caracteristici sunt inseparabile. Nu incercati sa priviti filmul numai dintr-o perspectiva pentru ca nu veti reusi. Luati-l ca atare.

Ce se intampla in Milk are toata trasaturile acelui tip de poveste despre care vorbeam in Ghid despre schimbarea lumii. Oamenii care schimba modul cum alti oameni gandesc si actioneaza si pretul pe care il platesc pentru aceasta.

Daca n-ar fi componenta gay, povestea n-ar iesi din pluton. Dar asa, are ceva aparte, care va pune puternic la incercare rezistenta la prejudecati a persoanelor hetero. Va sfatuiesc sa vedeti intai Brokeback Mountain, pentru ca acolo scenele de zbenguiala intre barbati sunt mai soft, iar aici dau in dulcegarii gen alintari cu frisca; oricum, nu mica mi-a fost mirarea sa vad pe un latino lover ca Diego Luna (Havana Dirty Dancing) ca face (si bine) pe gay-ul cu grave probleme sentimentale.

Ce m-a interesat in primul rand cand m-am apucat sa vad Milk a fost interpretarea lui Sean Penn, care l-a batut pe Mickey Rourke la Oscaruri. Inca o data, am ramas pe ganduri in privinta modului cum durul din Mystic River si retardatul din I Am Sam a intrat in pielea personajului sau, un tip charismatic, abil, un pic ipocrit si homosexual. Sean Penn are o versatilitate careia eu cu greu ii gasesc egal intre actorii zilelor noastre. N-am nici un motiv sa ii contest statueta.

Crossing the Mystic River Bridge – each of these counterweights weigh in at 240 tons each.  It was a bit unnerving walking beneath them.  Just don’t look up….