Vanilla Sky - 39% - I do not understand how this movie is not more well-liked. Maybe this just happens to be a case of it hitting all my likes and none of my dislikes at the same time. I believe the story is deep and contains very interesting characters. The use of music is also very well done. It's an eclectic mix of some classics and newer age techno sounds. I can also see, on some distant plausible scale, it happening down the road as technology progresses. Not exactly like in the movie but on a much smaller level. Hey, anything can happen.
It also deals with the loss of facial identity, and further, the loss of an appealing facial identity. It’s a theme that is not explored much in films. Usually it’s life and death and the vanity is shoed off to the side. “Vanilla” shows, without the dialogue spelling it out for us, the loss one can experience while still keeping his life. And how real-life wasn’t going to help him get it back and need to have his hopes realized in an altered state of being. And then on top of that, the altered state goes wrong and creates confusion. I love it.
Lions for Lambs – 28% (political spectrum from big government to small people)
Sometimes I just want a movie to make me think. To just be one of the better movies that came out in its general released time frame. Some people roll their eyes at these movies for being too “preachy”. I’m fine with preachy movies as long as it debates all the point equally and leaves you the viewer to participate in the end, which the movie ultimately does. I believe the strongest of the three pronged story is with Redford meeting with a student he believes can make a difference in the future. The debate they have, and the manner in which is spoken really made the movie for me.
When a Stranger Calls (Remake)– 9% (one of the thousands of pg-13 horror movies released in the last 5 years)
Although not a fantastic movie by any means, I found this to be one of the better horror releases recently. At least better than the collective 9% it received. I guess you want to know why because according to the rating it got. First let me show you some words and comments that were used in the negative reviews:
“there’s nothing new here”
“no reason for you to go and see this crap”
“A lot of boredom”
“For real thrills, rent the original,”
Okay, three of these comments are somewhat valid. But I disagree with the last one. Yes, it’s a little slow and there is nothing original and it really won’t make you a better person after watching it, but I found the remake to be much better that the original (44%). So where does that leave us? Style. I liked the style that was presented to us. Nice camerawork, creepy atmosphere and the best part…no over-explanation of the killer.
Horror movies work best when you don’t know who the killer is, what it wants and why it kills. When the enemy is left a mystery, you don’t know how to combat it. You can’t rationalize with something if you dont understand it. When you don’t know the limitations of your enemy, that is what causes real fear. You don’t know if they will ever give up trying to get you or not. It’s just a dark blanket of evil trying to cover you and it won’t give you an explanation. We don’t often get these answers in real life crimes so why should they be neatly packaged in an hour and thirty minute movie. Two other films that do this effectively is the original Black Christmas and Halloween (before the sequel induced revelation of Laurie being Michael Myers’s sister). You know nothing behind the killers’ motives in those movies. Perhaps “Stranger” got low reviews because of it being a remake. Which leads me into the below post…
No comments:
Post a Comment