Babyji (2005) -- Book Review

"Dans le monde du zéro et du un, l'immolation était un acte simple. Le feu, un élément purificateur. La violence, une réaction brute à la machinerie complexe fonctionnant à l'intérieur du crâne qui fabriquait des milliers de poisons abjects - chacun corrompant et diffamant, disloquant, blasphémant, décapitant, et corrodant l'univers des sentiments nés dans le coeur humain.

D'un autre côté, j'avait vu l'étendue de ma propre convoitise, passant du dégoût au désir, l'amour se changeant en brutalité, la chaleur de la peau de Rani éveillant une nuit la passion, une autre la vulnérabilité, et la troisième la laideur. Moi aussi, je voulais englober la simplicité des binaires, un gros soleil et un petit, tournant l'un autour de l'autre, béats dans leur suffisance conjuguée. Un geste grandiose totalement destructeur avait davantage de sens que de courts et répétitifs accès de souffrance."*

By Abha Dawesar

I was oblivious to the book when it was given to me. I quickly realized that it was surprisingly up my alley and after a while, I decided to start reading it, not necessarily thinking I would go through it but just to see what it was about.

Babyji is Anamika, a young science student who is growing up in the early 90's in Delhi, India. Anamika is the Head Prefect at her school and takes her responsibilities and studies quite seriously. One day, while walking around school, she runs into an older woman who came to try to get her son accepted in the school. Anamika helps her and is immediately seduced by her, and not knowing the woman's name, she calls her India. India's real name is Tripta Adhikari, a divorcée with whom Anamika soon has an affair. At the same time, Anamika rides home from school and passes by a jhuggi (slum, ghetto) and sees a woman peeing. She is fascinated with the vision and the fact that the woman doesn't feel ashamed once she realizes she's been seen.

At home, Anamika's mother announces that she found a new maid who is none other than the woman she saw peeing, who they call Rani (Queen)--common name for maids. Anamika and Rani grow closer and when Anamika's family learn that Rani's husband beats her, they decide to have her stay at their home full time. Anamika and Rani's affair starts slowly, first with massages and putting oil in each other's hair, and later the two embark on a relationship, sleeping not only in the same room, but the same bed.

With all the confidence gathered by her relationships and experiences with women, Anamika feels more at ease to try and seduce Sheela, the most beautiful girl of her class and the whole school. Sheela has all the boys looking at her, but behind her glamorous attitude, she is quite genuine and when Anamika starts hinting at kissing she is first scared. The two of them experiment with each other, but most importantly they try to keep their friendship alive.

Other characters include Vidur, Anamika's best friend, who is secretly in love with Sheela. Adit, Vidur's father, who despite being married, blatantly hits on Anamika. Chakra Dev, another boy from their class, who Anamika describes as the only one who looks more like a man than a boy and his violent, perverted and careless attitude both repulses and attracts Anamika.

All the teachers and director, including Mrs. Pillai, the math teacher, who Anamika fantasizes shortly about.
Anamika's coming of age story is set in a background of political violence and caste clashes.

As a devoted sciences student, Anamika analyzes her actions in relation to theorems and rules that are applied in physics, mathematics or chemistry. Describing her hormones as chemistry, her attractions as similar to the earth's rotation around the sun and her freedom as neutrons. Anamika reads a lot, from scientific magazines, classic novels and the Kama Sutra that she stealthily peeks at in her parents garage. Tripta once lends her Lolita and she identifies as Humbert Humbert.

The theme of studying abroad also comes into play, later in the novel as Anamika considers studying in America, after meeting Deepak, a friend of Tripta who studied there. However, both Sheela and Vidur think that it is a betrayal to India to leave.

I was immediately pulled into Babyji. I'm not sure whether it was because of the themes, the coming of age or Anamika's witty and sympathetic introspection. I was shocked at first when Anamika kept relating her feelings to maths principles, as I thought they would never apply, but it was surprisingly convincing and it worked well.

One of the strongest aspects of the book is how it is always sensual but never really sexual. With the exception of a few scenes, we are more in the realm of touching and feeling, rather than in some sweaty sexual experience. Anamika never ponders about terms such as being gay, lesbian or transgendered, rather, she is having affairs and they happen to be with females. Anamika always imagined herself with ladies, but she finds herself attracted to some men throughout the course of the novel. Maybe a representation of how binary sexuality is a Western concept, whereas sexuality in India is fluid, a good analogy again with how she calls Tripta - India.

Something that strikes the reader at first is the extensive use of Hindi terms, things that probably make no sense if translated. They are not explained but we found ourselves grasping their meaning quite fast. I can't speak for the original English version, but I liked the way the novel is bilingual, written in English but it is noted when Hindi is being used, as Rani, the maid, doesn't speak English but learns it with Anamika. It creates an interesting dynamic.

I was a little afraid that all the men would turn out to be grand jerks, however, there were, later on, who had a very good influence on Anamika, Deepak for example, so I was reassured.

The cultural and political analysis is always good too, despite being done through a 17 years old perspective, Anamika sounds more mature than usual and her interesting way of relating everything to theorems and principles works.

I haven't got many negative critics, one could be that Anamika's pursuit for right and wrong seems to navigate quickly between extremes, sometimes feeling guilty for something minor and then feeling quite fine with something bigger, I think it's a little confusing but keeping in mind that we are dealing with a, mature yes, but teenager nonetheless it is plausible. I found the end quite abrupt, it was an open ending which I enjoy because it lets you think about things to come, but I was surprised to see it come so soon.

I liked: Coming of age. Fluid. Daring. Cultural and political aspects without actually being cultural or political entirely. Guilty characters.

I disliked: Too basic sometimes. A big town became such a small world.

81/100
I didn't read many coming of age stories, but this one really pleased me. I really enjoyed the cultural aspects, the dilemmas and ways of thinking in the mind of a teenager. It had been a while since I read a book that fast, so I would recommend it.

*Pardon me for the quote being in French, but my book was translated and I couldn't find quotes in the original English. I felt it wouldn't do justice for me to re-translate it to English from the French.

The Two Mrs. Carrolls' (1947)

Geoffrey Carroll: "You know, I have the strangest feeling that this is the beginning of a beautiful hatred."

By Peter Godfrey
With Humphrey Bogart, Barbara Stanwyck and Alexis Smith

I think I came across The Two Mrs. Carrolls' after watching Key Largo (1948). It was a similar movie on IMDb and since I was on a Humphrey Bogart roll, I decided to see it.

Geoffrey Carroll is a relatively successful painter, however he often has issues feeling content with his work. He is married and has a young daughter, but after a trip to Scotland where he meets a woman named Sally Morton, his wife suddenly falls ill and dies shortly after. The last painting of his deceased wife goes on to become one of his most famous and he moves on and marries Sally Morton. When a new woman named Cecily starts entering Geoffrey's life and asks him to make her portrait, history seems to repeat itself and Sally falls ill. The tension rises as Cecily decides to leave, unwilling to risk it for a married man, and Sally becomes suspicious and Geoffrey gets more and more private about his last painting.

The beginning of the movie got me confused with the timeline, but it became clearer after a while. Once that was done, I felt more at ease with what happened in Geoffrey's first marriage and managed to follow the new intrigue in the second one better. The paranoia is quite well done, however there are some things that prevent it from working out as well as it could have been. It is hard to pinpoint exactly why, maybe it is the way Geoffrey is obvious about his interest in Cecily. Maybe it's the way his daughter, Bee, happens to always talk about the right thing, at the right time and to the right person. Maybe it's the way the doctor is absolutely incompetent and everyone seems fine with it.

The acting was good, though the critics at the time said Humphrey was miscast. I can understand that point of view, but I liked the way he portrayed a perturbed artist. Maybe their criticisms had more to do with how the movie unfolds very predictably at times and doesn't offer anything fresh.  However, it is undoubtedly a well crafted film.

I liked: The mystery around the paintings. The maid was awesome. The use of bells and bell towers.

I disliked: Convenient things to help the story. Not much questioning by anyone. Last line doesn't work.

68/100
It is a very decent intrigue and the paranoia works. However, it could have been weaved together more gracefully.

Ordinary People (1980)

Conrad "Con" Jarrett: "Uh... I don't know. It was like... falling into a hole. It keeps getting bigger and bigger and you can't escape. All of a sudden, it's inside... and you're the hole. You're trapped. And it's all over. Something like that. It's not really scary... except when you think back on it. 'Cause you know what you were feeling..."

By Robert Redforth
With Donald Sutherland, Mary Tyler Moore, Judd Hirsch

I met this movie after reading the novel Ordinary People (1975) and finding out it was adapted as a film. I decided to see it, not knowing it had won an Academy Award. It was also a plus that it starred Timothy Hutton who I admired from Beautiful Girls (1996).

This is perhaps one of the rare cases where the movie adaptation surpasses the novel. I think the narrative, the themes which the book explores, translate far better to film--the subtleties which can't often be framed in words or as powerfully expressed in descriptions are relayed masterfully in the movie. This is an ordinary [no pun intended] movie, about an ordinary family living in an ordinary town. Like the cliched quote "still waters run deep" the very banality of this particular suburb and this particular family, the Jarrets, is an illusion, quick to shatter with the death of their son, a boy named Buck. Six months after the event, all seems to have been healed only barring the shadow of Conrad--the younger boy's--suicide attempt.

The film is a character study, focusing on the faces of the characters, and the humble, every day speech and the every-day violence they experience or inflict. The mother and father resist easy interpretations--the mother's nearly obsessive attention to detail and propriety, the father's lost puppy-dog look as he tries to bridge the gap between mother and son, and Conrad, who finds himself unable to play the role the older (now deceased) brother played. One of the most revealing moments in the film was one not included in the book, where his grandparents try to take a family portrait and Conrad is forced to stand in the middle, between his parents. His presence is like a wedge that serves to drive the parents further and further apart.

Many have no sympathy for the mother, whose attention to detail and focus on society and impressions seems shallow and trivial. Yet she is struggling a profound battle with herself, a battle which is fought precisely by the obsessive measures she takes. When a plate breaks, she takes satisfaction that the break was smooth and can be glued together again. In a world where she feels she is not in control, where she can handle very little, her beautiful, neat face is never allowed to crumple, she is never allowed to let her mask slip. When Conrad walks in on her sitting in Buck's bedroom, her gaze unfixed, her body slack for the first time in the film, she jolts when she realizes his presence, and collects herself immediately.

Conrad, too, struggles similarly with control. When he visits a therapist and is asked what he wants to work on, he says he wants to be in control again. Echoing a statement his father makes at the end of the film, the reason why he and his mother can never get along is because they are too much alike. Buck was the mediator of the family, the go-between and bridge. Without him the family slowly but surely nosedives to its destruction.

The film re-enacts many of the cliches of dysfunctional family tropes, such as the family meal scenes which become a site of hostility, the strained holidays, the dinner parties where everyone else's family seems so much more 'normal' in comparison, the cathartic breakthrough scene in a therapist's office where the therapist makes you realize it's not your fault and you have nothing to be guilty about (see: Good Will Hunting (1997)). In many ways it felt like watching a play--the set is minimal, most attention is placed on the interactions of the people.

Ordinary People never feels forced and the dialogue is particularly cutting because of its honesty and reality. The somewhat Oedipal cycle of the mother, father, and son is well played out and the film ends on an honest and frightening note--with every character undergoing an internal revolution, the scabs torn open and the wounds fresh.

I liked: The modest set. There is very little to occupy your eyes other than the characters. Even the colors are normal, not the slick over contrasted colors of cinema today (although that might have to do with development in film making). The economy of the dialogue is particularly stunning, and this might be one of the most violently hurtful films I have seen.

I disliked: Some of the secondary characters were not as fleshed out as they were in the novel. However I do realize the film had to have some limitations, and perhaps since it was almost 2 hours long already, it would have been too difficult to include those details as well.

92/100
I have no reservations in recommending this film. Usually I would tell someone to read the book first but in this case, both the film and book are strong in different ways, and both hold their own independently of one another. Watch this movie if family dynamics/politics interests you at all, or if you are interested psychologically motivated films that don't hesitate to explore the more gristly aspects of growing up and family interactions.

Bullet to the Head (2012)

Jimmy Bobo: "You're gonna fight or you plan on boring me to death?"

By Walter Hill
With Sylvester Stallone, Sung Kang, Jason Momoa and Sarah Shahi

I heard about Bullet to the Head before it came out. I thought it would be in the vein of the Expendables (2010): entertaining, but not a must-see, and too action filled to be really impressive. However, the casting of Sarah Shahi convinced me to watch it.

Jimmy Bobo is a hitman, but his last job goes wrong and his partner ends up getting killed. While trying to seek out revenge he meets a detective from out of town, Taylor Kwon, and they soon have to team up in order to catch those responsible. Despite Jimmy's hatred for cops and Taylor's duty to arrest Jimmy, they get along fairly well. Their investigation leads them to city officials and dirty cops, as well as Lisa, Jimmy's daughter who is a tattoo artist but helps Jimmy when someone needs medical assistance (read "remove a bullet").

The credits state that it is based on a comic book. That was a good surprise as I feel they sometimes dare to go where normal scripts don't. I quite enjoy the Louisiana settings; it always proves to be a good asset in all the movies I've watched there. The casting is also quite enjoyable, especially Christian Slater's appearance as he wasn't much seen since the 90's.

The story is linear and not original at all. We see an unlikely pair more or less team up, bad guys who get punished in a painful way, etc. There are no real twists or mystery. Some scenes are well done and/or well shot and the Sylvester Stallone voice-over narration is actually quite nice. There aren't many catchy one liners, which is something I feel make action movies a lot better than they usually are--but there were still a few that at least got me smiling. Sarah Shahi was the high point of the movie for me, but yet again, as an L Word (2004) fan, I am quite biased.

I liked: The battle with axes is awesome. The music. Louisiana.

I disliked: Unoriginal and predictable. Nothing that really stands out.

50/100
It's a decent action movie, Stallone is good, a role that fits him and reminds us of his previous films. If you handle the film with no expectations, you can't be disappointed.

Static (2012)

Addie Dade: "You don't have to pretend anymore."

By Todd Levin
With Sarah Shahi, Milo Ventimiglia and Sara Paxton

What really decided me on seeing Static is that the lead role was Sarah Shahi who I know from her role of Carmen de la Pica Morales in The L Word (2004). Even though I didn't like her character, I think she's a good actress and as a general rule, I tend to follow as much as I can the work of actresses who were involved in The L Word.

In the film, Jonathan Dade is a successful writer but him and his wife have had a hard time living together since the accidental death of their 3 year old son. They live on a big property in a massive mansion with a pond. One night, they are woken up by loud banging on their door and a woman named Rachel says she has a flat tire on the road and then saw men with gas masks threatening her so she ran to their house. Rachel asks if she can sleep the night before leaving because she is badly shaken up, but she mysteriously seems to know too much about the couple and her presence starts making them uneasy. From there on, they are in for a long night.

The opening shots of Static are really beautiful. I was really looking forward to the film after the intro, and the photography and natural sights were promising.  Unfortunately, that only lasted the intro after which most of the film happens inside the house. It remains a well filmed movie, but nothing as impressive as the opening suggested.

The movie starts off as what could be a good psychological movie about a couple dealing with grief, a la Rabbit Hole (2010), however it quickly turns into a semi-horror, semi-thriller of a couple being stalked in their house by some strangers... a la Ils (2006) or The Strangers (2008), which in my opinion is not necessarily a good thing. This turnaround is filled with clichés, like the phones not working, the car not starting or the rifle not functioning. The ending twist is decent, however it cannot compensate for the lack of substance in the movie. It is possible that some would enjoy seeking clues during the whole movie in order to see how it all works out, but I was saddened by the decision to not explore the couples' relationship and psychology more.

Nevertheless, the actors playing the couple did a good job with the little they were given. The film is entertaining but we are neither served a good thriller, nor a drama, nor an horror film and it feels like everything is still in suspension when the credits roll.

I liked: The gas masks. The couple;s dynamic. Creative. Beautiful intro.

I disliked: Full of clichés. The twist is a little tasteless. The sounds are unexplained and is that the static that gives its title?

49/100
People who enjoy stalkers, mysterious assaults on a home type of movies will most likely enjoy this one, however, it is quite an undecided film and the spectator might feel led on.

High Sierra (1941)

Big Mac: "I've been dealing with such a lot of screwballs lately. Young twerps, soda-jerkers and jitterbugs. Why, it's a relief just to talk to a guy like you."

By Raoul Walsh
With Ida Lupino, Humphrey Bogart and Joan Leslie

High Sierra was one of the similar movies to Key Largo (1948) on IMDb. Naturally, I wanted to see it given it also featured Humphrey Bogart.

High Sierra is the story of Roy Earle, a gangster who, though just released from prison, already has a new heist waiting for him. He moves to the West, in the Sierra mountains to little cabins where two small time gangsters are waiting for him to start things up. One of them brought a dame with him, Marie, and Roy is not so happy about it as he knows there'll be troubles--yet, he can't bring himself to simply throw her on her way. The four of them, along with a stray dog named Pard, decide to rob a hotel during the highly sought out tourist season.

Surprisingly enough for a crime movie, the heist is not the highest point of the movie (which only comes at a later time). The running away and being most wanted is actually what really drives the movie. Speaking of driving, some of the car chases are quite interesting, although they are obviously played in a faster frame rate than they were filmed in, giving them this funny old fashion speedthrough kind of look. They are quite thrilling. The character of Roy Earle is also complex, as he is definitely a tough gangster but falls for a young lady, who, surprisingly enough doesn't fall for him in return and the gangster has to deal with romantic rejection--which I found good and original.

With its elements of crime, drama, romance as well as film-noir, this movie is quite polymorphous. It prevents him from excelling in any domain but provides a good through and through feature. One can argue that the story is predictable, but the fate of a gangster running away from the police can only go two ways.

I liked: The mountains. The car chases. The parallels between a young woman running from an abusive home, looking for freedom and a gangster in prison looking for the same thing.

I disliked: Eclectic, but lacked depth. Heading in a direction with no real twist or cliffhanger.

76/100
Could be considered proto-Bonnie and Clyde, the romance while being on the run. Bogart is really convincing as a softhearted tough gangster.

Domesticity and Consumer Culture in Iran (2012) -- Book Review

"An individual's class status was defined not so much by the ways in which he or she used a chair [...] but by whether one actually owned a chair." -- from 'Cold War: economies of desire and domesticity' 

Domesticity and Consumer Culture in Iran: Interior Revolutions of the Modern Era (Iranian Studies)
By Pamela Karimi 

I found this book randomly browsing the shelves of the library and the title was incredibly fascinating-- promising more about houses, living places, and the warmth of real people. I also thought it would be illuminating for a project I'm working on, since in many ways Iranian culture can be considered, even if tangentially, similar to other cultures of the Middle East. I had in the past months also greatly enjoyed Marjane Satrapi's Perselopis and Chicken with Plums, and in the past days the subtle and generous character studies in the film About Elly.

The first thing that struck me was that this book presents multiple perspectives of every phenomenon, making it one of the least biased texts I have had the pleasure of reading. On one hand it highlights the negative repercussions of the cultural imperialism that the United States had on Iran, which had the effect of reducing people from being proud of their heritage and culture into a cringing, embarrassed version of themselves, riddled with class consciousness and mimicry of the perceived "superior" nation. Yet, on another hand it clearly demonstrates the improvements and advancements which occurred directly as a result of US influence in Iran.

One example of this sort of double sided impression has to do with the way living arrangements were pre-US and post-US influence. I was surprised to feel ambiguously about this particularly because I'm partly through reading National Geographic's The World of Islam which has a picture of a typical Iranian household before it's "modernisation" -- and the living situation initially from the description in the book and pictures such as the one below struck me as inhuman, sordid, and absolutely repellent. The typical Iranian house in the 1920s was divided into the andarūn, reserved for only females and where all the cooking and washing is located, and the bīrūnī reserved only for males and which is furnished more affluently. The segregation is complete, even between members of the same family. Sons are sent to live with their fathers from a very young age and grow up largely within the bīrūnī. 

On the other hand, and what the surface reading fails to illuminate, is that the houses are constructed this way for reasons that the US failed to understand and simply attributed to segregation. As quoted in the book, the "traditional house was a self sufficient micro community in itself[...]herbs and vegetables often grown in the courtyard, much of the meat and dairy products came from the animals raised on the premises[...]multiple functions took place in a single room and the overall arrangement of the interior was based on kin relations."

The extent in which cultural relativism can confound one can be seen in the dress of the typical Iranian woman of the past. Here in the picture we see them wearing long amorphous black gowns, yet their opinions of European clothing, which in many ways could be described as the opposite, are the furthest from positive. One Iranian woman quotes,

"How could they [European women] wear something like a cage (corset) with bones in it to make their waists narrow? In reality they are a prisoner in their costumes...They talk of freedom of women in Europe, yet it seems to me that they lack any because so many rules and regulations exist for eating, drinking, dressing, sleeping, and even just existing." -- from The Hovel, the Harem, and Hybrid Furnishing. 

 In the end it seems to me that what women in both the Western and Easten discourses seemed to lack was the agency to decide how they wanted to dress -- chaddor or not, corset or not. The people of Iran were faced with the same issues -- yes, I believe their way of living had much to be improved upon -- but it was their choice to make, and it disturbed me to read some of the examples of the ads that conflated being Western to being Modern -- as though the typical Iranian (who at that time in the 20s wasn't used to sitting on chairs) -- was somehow backward, uncultured, and not worthy of respect. In the same way, when women were 'liberated' in Iran, they were forced out of their veils -- rather than it being a choice. In every aspect it seemed their actions were governed and dictated by external rather than internal forces -- either their own government or one outside.

The awkward clumsiness of so much changing and the people of Iran (un)adapting is probably best illustrated in two remarkable examples in the book. One was about an American Christian missionary who was invited to dinner to a wealthy Iranian family's house. The furniture and architecture of the house was completely Western, but she was shocked to see standing in the kitchen, two lady servants plucking a chicken, feathers flying everywhere on the marble counter in a manner very authentically Iranian.

The other example has an interesting relation to this blog as it was about an Iranian film which was afterwards censored and banned for its content. The film was titled Under the Skin of the Night (1974) and related the story of a poor Iranian man who meets an American girl. They find a connection between themselves and decide to have sex. However, as a bachelor he lives in the squalid joined housing of other poor workers like him, as he cannot afford individual housing, nor is he allowed to rent a hotel night due to his circumstances (even though she is willing to pay for it). They spend the night roaming the glittering city searching for a bed. It's a highly symbolic tale, and it ends with the man standing in front of a model home with beds advertised, staring at the bed and imagining the American girl naked on the bed. From the corner of the street, other homeless men watch him watching the bed with the girl next to him.

This kind of jarring of two worlds, the ache and unfairness and lack of words to express is what's best illustrated in this book -- it's extremely difficult for me to summarize in any way the contents of this book yet if I had to, it would be this, the total significance of the private life in social, economic, and political contexts of modern Iran and the interplay between local aspirations and the foreign influences all of it wrapped up in the role of consumables and objects, things as simple but as revolutionary as a chair.

I liked: The ambiguity. No easy answers or explanations. Nothing was set in stone yet everything was examined like a documentary. Wide wide scope.

I disliked: I would have liked to hear more voices from the Iranian women, and maybe some discourse on how their answers may have been influenced by other voices rather than their own. So for example, the Iranian lady who critiqued European dress to be imprisoning, it would be nice to hear why she thought her tent-like clothing was freeing.

92/100
I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in history, culture, sociology, women studies, or an interest in the Middle East or Iran. It's a powerful, engaging book which can be easily appreciated by a scholar of the field as much as by someone seeking to learn something new. Since the book is composed of four different essays by different writers we get a breadth of voices and opinions, especially helpful in a book of this sort. History should never be composed of one voice, and the beauty and strength of this book is in the polyphony of voices here. Absolutely wonderful. 

Key Largo (1948)

Gaye Dawn: "It's better to be a live coward than a dead hero."

By John Huston
With Humphrey Bogart, Edward G. Robinson and Lauren Bacall

After I watched Dark Passage (1947), I wanted to see the movies which starred both Lauren Bacall and Humphrey Bogart, and Key Largo came up first although it was their last film together.

Frank McCloud is a world war II veteran who goes to the southern Florida island of Key Largo to visit the remaining family of a soldier who died under his command during the war. Arriving there, he's informed that the hotel is closed by some guests. Then, he sees the owner of the hotel, the father of his soldier friend as well as the friend's widowed wife, Nora Temple. Soon a hurricane alert is sent and all the guests are constrained to the hotel. Things start to turn sour as the other "guests" are discovered to be gangsters who want to run a deal and are using the Key Largo for their business because of its proximity to Cuba. All the parties involved will try to stay alive while the hurricane hits and the police comes searching for runaway Indians.

The strength of Key Largo lies in the characters development. They learn about one another and fight for one another behind the hotel's closed doors. The claustrophobic environment is further accentuated by the storm which requires the shutters to be closed.

The quality of the cast is amazing and some of the biggest names of the film-noir era are present. The discussions are quite philosophical as ideals, morals and honor all happen to come into play. The gangster aspect is not the best one, however, it drives the story line fairly well and feeds humorously into the dialogue. For example, when the gangster Johnny Rocco is afraid of the storm, Frank McCloud suggests he point his gun at it, and shoot if it doesn't comply.

While this was overall a very good picture, it didn't pull me in the story as much as some other intrigues have. This one was all about character development. Lauren Bacall and Humphrey Bogart don't interact very much as the action takes place with an ensemble cast for the most part. In a way, I enjoyed that as the movie doesn't necessarily need a romance to be carried out with full power.

I liked: Ensemble cast. Behind closed doors. The hurricane. Great plays on emotions and tensions. The hero and anti-hero aspects.

I disliked: Predictable. Underdeveloped criminals.

79/100
I found it to differ slightly from most of the others film-noir movies I've watched recently in its comparably weaker intrigue. However, the strong character development and ensemble scenes can compensate. I'm guessing these are due to the fact that this film was based on a play.

About Cherry (2012)

Angelina: "I think I might be a bad person."

By Stephen Elliott
With Ashley Hinshaw, Lili Taylor, James Franco

I chose this snapshot to be the cover of this review because I felt it explained in essence what this film was trying to say all along. The film, which follows a young girl's induction to the American porn industry, is co-directed by porn star/writer Lorelai Lee. This isn't a film warning young girls away from the porn industry, nor does it --arguably-- romanticize the profession in any way. The titular character, "Cherry", is shown here adjusting her shower, and in the slight moment between her entering the shower and stripping away the makeup which constitutes her "work" garb, you can glimpse a powerful girl, haughty and self assured -- about to embark on the smooth transition between "Angelina" and "Cherry". The most important thing to focus on is her position of control, her appropriation of her body, her choice as to how and when she can be viewed as a consumable object.

A bildungsroman in many ways, I still believe the subject matter could have approached more fruitfully. The film sticks to several tiresome tropes: the scrappy, faithful best friend --played by Dev Patel of Slumdog Millionaire (2008)--who is madly in love with her much to her oblivion and who eventually gets tired of being a "pet" and splits, the emotionally manipulative perennially drunk mother, the snooty younger sister, and the sexually predatory, faceless, and threatening step father and so on and so forth. To further complicate matters, "Cherry" falls under the attention of a adult film directer, the charming Heather Graham, who eerily resembles the protagonist and who dismantles her own long term relationship just to have a fair shot at bedding "Cherry".

Nevertheless, there are a few points of interest. The film is full of references and symbolism. Her first cocaine-addicted lawyer boyfriend --played by James Franco-- takes her to a geisha exhibit (though no commentary is made on the similarities of their roles), who later passes judgement on her profession despite his severe snorting-coke-and-hitting-strip-clubs-in-his-free-time habit. Her "innocence" despite her job is transformed into the choice of her show name, "Cherry", to highlight her "virtuosity". I enjoyed the apparent spontaneity of her scenes, and what felt like genuine acting. Her smile was incredible and real, she sparkled in her scenes, and her excitement at trying out the different costumes for different films was palpable.

I liked: The every-day take on a porn actresses' life. Yes, her background may be troubled but it doesn't make her, someone working in the sex industry, unhealthy or sick. It is referenced how everyone working there is tested various times for STDs, something that doesn't happen usually for more normal avenues of dating. Her expressive features, smiles. The ambiguous nature of sexual orientation.

I disliked: The stereotypical characters. The ending which implied she becomes another Heather Graham, and the innuendo that she, too, will eventually dump Heather for a younger actress who comes along -- although of course this could be hinting at the indispensability of porn actresses and actors after they reach a certain age. I also disliked how her best friend was first hinted at to be gay and yet no further developments were made along that story line and it seemed the writers just hastily wrote him out, along with her boyfriend.

52/100
Not a substantial movie, but the actress is charming and a few important issues are raised. If you were looking for a serious film that addresses the current porn industry, I would direct you elsewhere. Otherwise, give this a watch but don't go into it with too many expectations.

Street Trash (1987)

Ed: "What the hell are you talking about? Just get your booze and get outta here."

By J. Michael Muro
With Mick Lackey, Bill Chepil and Vic Noto

After I watched The Toxic Avenger (1984), I was browsing through similar movies on IMDb and Street Trash came up. I wasn't really pulled into it, but the cover looked so amazing--it actually looked like some of Iron Maiden's 80's album covers, just with more gore.

Street Trash brings the spectator to a dirty world, at the back of a car demolition center where a bunch of bums live, drinking being their one and only distraction. There lives Freddie with his brother Kevin. Freddie buys a bottle of Viper, but he gets robbed off by another bum, yet the spectator sees the thief drinking it and he starts to dismantle it in gory effusions of bright neon liquids. Life continues at the demolition center, with the police, the mob and all around criminals getting involved.

Street Trash doesn't seem to have a strong main topic and we follow the events without always an explanation. The really impressive parts of the movie are the death scenes, especially those involving the Viper: the bodies get bloated, torn or simply melt but the gore is somewhat relieved by the fact that we're not seeing red blood, we're seeing a ton of beautiful painting colors dripping. Then we see a severed organ, which looks like it's been burnt, but it's still in a very poetic deep blue. These scenes alone made the movie worth watching for me, really impressive job there.

The rest of the movie, unfortunately, does not live up to it. It has its funny moments, but they do get lost in the mass of events we have to follow at once. It's not a trauma and it doesn't feel as low budget as a trauma would, but the spirit is definitely the same, joke around, be stupid and add a ton of gratuitous gory violence.

I liked: The death scenes, especially the first, the toilet one. Completely immoral and politically incorrect.

I disliked: Lack of a central plot, no real beginning or end. Could have deserved better dialogues.

52/100
It's funny, if you like gore this is definitely worth watching. To reserve for horror buffs.

The Power of Habit -- Book Review

All our life, so far as it has definite form, is but a mass of habits,— practical, emotional, and intellectual,— systematically organized for our weal or woe, and bearing us irresistibly toward our destiny, whatever the latter may be. -- William James

The Power of Habit: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business 
By Charles Duhigg

A few months ago I was roaming the library as I tend to do with a pile of books in my hand. One of them was The Power of Habit. A friend passing by saw this in the pile and told me I must read it and that she'd been the one who requested the library to get it in the first place. Today after an exam and a short walk I felt encouraged to read something inspiring and after browsing the shelves I saw the shiny yellow spine of this book and thought why not?

Why this book works as opposed to a vast number of self-help books out in the market is that it does not profess to change you. All it aims is to have you analyze your habits and find ways to replace them with better habits if you wish to. It does this through a mixture of science/cognitive behavioral techniques and extended case studies of habit formation in popular culture.

One of the central arguments uses the following case study to illustrate it. The book posits that Americans in the 60s simply didn't brush their teeth. For a company manufacturing tooth paste, this was an issue as no matter how carefully a recipe for tooth paste was made, it was not an item people bought regularly. An advertising executive soon realized that if he highlighted the 'film' that grows on teeth (plaque) a few minutes after eating something sugary, and used the flashy bright smiles of popular film stars as examples of people who had brushed their teeth with Pepsodent (the name of the toothpaste they were selling) then people would associate the glamour of the film stars with brushing their teeth with Pepsodent.

However, this too didn't work. After much deliberation over why even then the toothpaste wasn't selling, they realized that they needed to make the customers feel like a transformation was happening in their mouths. They added an ingredient to cause the mouth to tingle after using the toothpaste, a sensation which people immediately associated with clean teeth--film stars. Soon they began to crave the tingling refreshing feeling and would brush their teeth for that sensation. Brushing teeth became a habit, as people got addicted/habituated to the tingling sensation. Sales boomed, and tooth paste became a regular staple in every American house hold.

Identifying the process behind the beginning of a habit is central to this book as it can be applied to virtually every habit one has. Understanding every component of the habit loop is how people can successfully make and/or break habits. The highly successful Alcoholic's Anonymous also uses this technique--identifying what triggers drinking (the cue), discovering what exactly the craving is for (is it really for the drink? or the feelings of success or forgetfulness?) and finding new or alternative reward systems.

The strength of this book lies in the first two chapters, where these examples are laid out and the basic rubric and set up of a habit is explained. I think if one was short on time, reading the first two chapters is sufficient to getting the most out of the book. It's a simple cycle but crucial and freeing if used well.

What I liked most about this book was the final chapter--habit formation and free will. The book--rightly, in my opinion--implies that our daily actions are informed nearly 90% by habits, rather than by active choices on our part. As such, old cycles, old failures tend to repeat on loop. As for those with serious addictions (gambling, drinking, etc) it may even feel like they don't have free will if the brain (as the book illustrates through scientific experiments) goes on autopilot. The important point the chapter relays is that while one may not have a choice once the habit is formed one can create a new habit of one's own choosing to counter it.  So yes, maybe there is no free will once a particular habit is created, however, a person can consciously create habits (and create "determination") of their own choosing. This might not be the most intellectual or even complex point, but to me it was ground breaking because of its simplicity and its approach towards excuses or helplessness.

79/100
The book is clearly written, and uses engaging and convincing examples to explain its stance. It is, however, a bloated and repetitious book--so my advice for the optimal reading experience is to read the first two and last chapter, as well as the final epilogue which delves a little into how these principles can be applied to one's life. It's not a profound or even philosophical book, but it can be inspiring for those who need that little push to investigate and become more self aware of their habits and their ways of life. 

Dark Passage (1947)

Sam: "I figure you slugged her with that ashtray because she made life miserable for you."

By Delmer Daves
With Humphrey Bogart, Lauren Bacall and Agnes Moorehead

I was randomly browsing through Lauren Bacall's filmography when I saw Dark Passage. First of all, the title is brilliant and screams film-noir and when I saw that she made it with Humphrey Bogart, it didn't require much more convincing for me to see it. Now, I feel like I will have to investigate the two other movies they made together that I didn't see yet.

Dark Passage is the story of escaped convict, Vincent Parry, who is on the run when he is surprisingly rescued by the beautiful Irene Jansen who also decides to host him at her place. Baffled and suspicious at first, Vincent learns that Irene's father was convicted of killing his wife, Irene's stepmother, just like Vincent was, and she believes he might be innocent  like her father. In order to remain hidden from the police, Vincent undergoes intensive plastic surgery to change his face. For a week, he isn't be able to talk, a week he spends at Irene's before the bandages come off and they see the new man he is.

Dark Passage uses very clever tricks. To begin with, we don't see Humphrey Bogart for the first hour of the movie. Given the fact that he plays Vincent after his surgery, we only see him in the shadows or under bandages, but more interestingly, the action is all filmed through a first person view in which the spectator sees through the eyes of Vincent Parry.

The real life couple of Bacall and Bogart works wonders and when they are together, the room holds so much class and charm. The intrigue is well directed and the mystery unfolds at a good rate. Although very little relies on anyone else, there are a few second characters who play key roles. We slowly learn more about Vincent's trial and even though it could have been possible to have the mystery of his guilt, or lack thereof, remain longer, it adds an interesting element to the film while it lasts. There were a few scenes that didn't keep the pace up as much as the rest--mostly involving Vincent's interactions with the crook or the policeman.

One thing that was quite experimental was the use of multiple, almost kaleidoscopic shots while Vincent is anesthetized for his surgery. I felt it added an interesting aspect in such an old movie. The pair of the cab driver and the doctor are really great as well.

I liked: First person view, use of plastic surgery and the bandages, the intrigue, San Francisco.

I disliked: Uneven pace. Not necessarily realistic when it comes to scarring and the surgery.

79/100
Even if the Dark Passage is simply metaphorical, it is a great ride, dealing with some serious issues and carried masterly by the couple Bogart-Bacall.

Mangiati Vivi! / Eaten Alive! (1980)

Professor Carter: "Cannibals. Instead of buying frozen meat in a supermarket. They get theirs fresh from people like you."

By Umberto Lenzi
With Robert Kerman, Janet Agren and Ivan Rassimov

I was looking for the other Eaten Alive (1977) and I remembered this one, in its original Italian title Mangiati Vivi! also known as Eaten Alive!. I had read about it after I watched Cannibal Ferox (1981) and so, while stumbling upon it once again, I decided it could be a great feat to watch the both Eaten Alive one night.

Mangiati vivi! is about Sheila Morris who is being interrogated by the police about the disappearance of her sister Diana. The only clue they have is a film that shows some sort of cult and she appears on it. After an investigation, they realize she must have went with Jonas, the leader of a cult that rejects civilisation and calls for a return to nature. The leader and its members have all gone to the jungle, a place where no one could escape for it is surrounded by cannibalistic tribes. Sheila decides to go pick up her sister, finds the help of Vietnam deserter Mark Butler and they both end up in the cult'd settlement.

Watching Mangiati vivi! felt like watching Cannibal Ferox (1981) all over again. They are very similar. The locations are different and the cult was then replaced by a student's research but it has all the same themes, which are shared also with a lot of Italian horror movies of the 80's. The blatant misogyny, the awesome English dubbings with their one liners, the killing of way too many animals to justify the creation of the animals guild, free topless shots of the fantastic plastic of the actresses, few scenes in New York, cannibals, missing limbs, castration and of course, a ton of jungle shots.

Well, this movie is definitely for a converted audience, but it works well. The idea of the cult is a bit dull, but apparently it was inspired by a real cult so you can't blame them--after all, it justifies the trip to cannibals' land. It's a very solid cannibal movie overall, but don't watch it for the plot or the acting. The gore scenes are plenty, the stereotypical cannibal tribes are... well, typical and the cult leader is obnoxious and most likely a fraud. What's not to like?

I liked: It feels old, it feels cheap, it feels like Italian horror.

I disliked: Between the slaps, the punches, the eating of breasts and the overall sexual abuse of women, it's not your feminist dreamlike movie. Did they really use Sri Lanka for Guinea?

70/100
I like cheap Italian horror. Cannibals not as much as zombies but it's quite gory, funny...and entertaining.

Eaten Alive (1977)

Miss Hattie: "All he wanted to do was look and talk his crazy talk."

By Tobe Hooper
With Neville Brand, Mel Ferrer and Carolyn Jones

I had heard of Eaten Alive before, but it was only after I watched Kansas City Confidential (1952) and checked out the filmography of Neville Brand that I remembered Eaten Alive and decided to watch it. Eaten Alive was the second movie of Tobe Hooper after the cult and critically acclaimed The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974).

Eaten Alive takes us to rural Texas, where the movie starts after a girl runs out of a brothel because she refused to service a man. She ends up in a broken down motel where the old Judd lives. The motel will attract different people over the night but the alligator that lives just next to it will dine more than once tonight.

Tobe Hooper doesn't deviate too much from what got him famous with The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Rural Texas, broken down house, weird borderline psychotic people, a lot of screaming and of course, blood. In a way, it worked well in The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, but here, it didn't. Neville Brand is absolutely terrifying as Judd and one might wonder how an actor can prepare for such a demented character.

I was really annoyed by some things in this movie. For example, the constant shrieking of the females when in danger--which is pretty much all movie long. Another thing that annoyed me was the over use of that weird fog that only horror movies ever produced, but here it always ends up being blue or red. There is really not much of a plot to the film, it is simply a follow up of people arriving at the motel and at some point Judd gets angry with them and decides it's time to feed the crocodile. The gore scenes are not that great either, yes, there is quite a bit of blood, but the weird angles and the fake gator don't really help.

The music element could have been nice, some of the songs are great, but the fact that the jukebox is constantly running in the motel and everything happens on top of it becomes quite annoying after a few songs. There is no suspense or mystery.

I liked: Neville Brand and Robert Englund are both good.

I disliked: Scream fest. Incomprehensible psychotic main. Jaws (1975) was good: sharks worked in that case. The same can't be said about the crocodile here. No mystery, no story, no plot.

30/100
If you're really bored this film might do the trick, otherwise... Well, maybe you're a fan of Tobe Hooper and then you should see it just to say you did.

Selected Short Stories of William Faulkner -- Book Review

Selected Short Stories of William Faulkner: The Modern Library 1993
Including "Barn Burning", "Two Soldiers", "A Rose for Emily", "Dry September", "That Evening Sun", "Red Leaves", "Lo!", "Turnabout", "Honor", "There Was a Queen", "Mountain Victory", "Beyond", and "Race at Morning".

The first story I ever read by him was A Rose for Emily which I'd read for a class. It was a cryptic little story, relating the necrophilic, and patricidial actions of the titular character, Emily, and I think an impossible one for me or my class to understand at that time. Much later, even as his work was recommended to me by several professors and friends and finally, I was wary of coming close to his writing because of the intensity I could sense from it, and I knew it wouldn't be an easy or even comfortable read. That said, I still feel I should have started with his novels (As I Lay Dying, or Sound and the Fury) first, but I wasn't courageous enough to. This little book (the Modern Library edition) of his short stories was the perfect path to his work--and as a book, is a pleasure to hold. The pages are thick, yet it's light and small, with neat corners. It's very portable, and his style is gripping, sensuous, and wholly absorbing. Faulkner to me seems to be the kind of writer who could direct simple movies that burn in your mind, a Clint Eastwood of the literary world, I would say.

The first story in this collection is the oft referenced Barn Burning (which I had some interest in due to Haruki Murakami's short story of the same name) set in the 1890s about a man who feels that the only way to preserve his honor in a society where he is constantly degraded is by burning things--and in his case, burning barns. Like many of the subsequent stories in this collection, the main conflicts concern honor, and the compulsion to maintain one's role and place in society with dignity. Even while the story narrates the man's conflicts, it is narrated through the son who is compelled to lie in court along with his family about his father's activities, something the son feels dishonorable about as well.

Maybe it will all add up and balance and vanish—corn, rug, fire; the terror and grief, the being pulled two ways like between two teams of horses—gone, done with for ever and ever. --from Barn Burning

What I liked most about this story though has less to do with such grand themes. In particular I loved the way food was described--the smell of cheese, the simple meals that they ate, and little household descriptions, the sly way that fun is poked at pretensions and materialism (the way the father relished ruining the expensive imported rug of one the landowner's, and his comment that if something was that precious to someone it shouldn't be sitting in the main hall for everyone to walk all over) which lead me to feel sympathetic to even his arsonist behaviors--what's the problem, after all with burning barns, with burning the symbols of arrogance and materialism and property? In essence how much of things can we own, and doesn't it free us in a manner?

The themes of honor and dignity return in the following stories in varying shapes and forms, both in the lives of men and women. In A Rose for Emily, Emily's father refuses every suitor who asks for her hand in marriage. When she finally falls in love with one of her suitors, to her it is more difficult to defy her father and marry him than it is to kill both father and lover and exist among their decaying bodies. This recalls countless Arabian and Southeast Asian honor killings, and even the narratives that proliferate in Arabic literature, depicting flouted love stories with Romeo-and-Juliet-esque endings where to be (an individual) and united with another (individual) without a green light from society can and will cost your very life. The society and social rules always come first, like an invisible thread that trips anybody who dares live in the margins. Like Majnun Layla, the opposing forces of parental and societal constraints effectively rob her of her reasoning, in the kind of grand way seen in many ancient Middle Eastern poetry and folk tales, and later on, in Southeast Asian ghazals.  These communities share characteristics that Faulkner noted in the South, the extreme loyalty to culture and society and to notions like honor and dignity, often in the context of socially repressed women.

Perhaps the most emotionally heartrending story out of all these was Two Soldiers where a little brother runs away from home and tries to find his older brother who had enlisted for the war. He follows the brother's route the day after his brother leaves for the army, certain that even though he is young, he can help chop wood so his brother can cook during the war. He sneaks away from home one night, traveling across America and selling precious farm eggs to get ticket money for buses to reach where his brother is stationed. Once again, honor weaves its way into the narrative as the older brother insists on enlisting in the war and staying in the way, despite the hurt it causes his mother, and to his little brother, saying it's something he simply has got to do. The evokes the sheer persistence of the father in Barn Burning where burning the barns is something he simply has to do. Here Faulkner's underlying belief in fate, and his fatalistic stories that span generations, cursing generations, emerges. In the end of the story, the little boy meets his brother who gives him a piece of chewing gum to make him happy, hugs him, and tells him to leave. We know they may never meet again, and the little brother's traveling home to the reader is as poignant and painful as the older brother's travels to the war front, his grave.

Besides this, a few of the stories were difficult for me to follow, especially the ones concerning Native American tribes. Faulkner uses extremely colloquial dialogue so it can be hard to understand if you aren't versed or aware of the lingo they employ. At least three of the stories were such--I read them but sadly understood very little of them and had to simply gloss over them. The remaining stories revolved around similar themes, often ending in murder, the paranoid fear of murder, stories of infidelities, lynching, and other sordid eruptions of human emotion occurring in the middle of every day life.

78/100
In all, this was an intense collection of stories. I admired how seamlessly the stories start and finish. Often the endings are ambiguous and no judgments are made as the lines between good and bad are refreshingly fluid. However, there are many moments of confusion--and I couldn't help feeling that sometimes a little more clarity could be helpful to the reader. 

Dark Skies (2013)

Lacy Barrett: "Sammie, did you have that dream again? about the sandman?"

By Scott Stewart
With Keri Russell, Josh Hamilton and J.K. Simmons

There wasn't any particular reason as to how I came across Dark Skies, it was mostly because it came out and it seemed like I could enjoy it. The title was great, the cover as well and it seemed to be along the lines of those new horror-in-the-house/kid-sees-supernatural-stuff movies.

Dark Skies is about the Barrett family who seemingly live a happy life in their suburban house. Things quickly turn sour as their house is broken into night after night, without anything being stolen. Yet, unsettling events do happen. The police can't seem to help them, neither does the house alarm that they use. Young Sam experiences the first encounters with what he calls "sandmen" but quickly the whole family seems to act strangely, which shatters the very core of their sanity, instilling doubt on each other's role in the events.

I was at times pleasantly surprised and disappointed with Dark Skies. One thing that pleased me is that it ends up being more scary than I was expecting. The great use of distorted bass sounds helps a lot and the house gets creepier at night with it. There are a few turns of events that I didn't exactly comprehend and which seemed a little too convenient to me, without having proper justification to them in the actual story line.

Mostly, the strength of the movie resides in clever filming. I quite liked most of the shots. The acting was okay, with the exception of J.K. Simmons who always gives out great performance no matter how much screen time he has. The movie ends up genre-hopping randomly, which could thrill some but might alienate pure horror fans or pure sci-fi fans.

I liked: Some good creepy scenes. Finds a good spot in the haunted house, weird events movies.

I disliked: Not always coherent. Potential loopholes. Well filmed, but confusing dreamlike sequences.

58/100
A decent creepy flick, should not remain memorable for long but can give some unexpected jumps.

Selected Poems by Federico García Lorca -- Poetry Review

Selected Poems: Federico García Lorca
Translated by Martin Sorrell 

"Death laid its eggs in the wound." -- from Lament for Ignacio Sánchez Mejía

"My shadow deprives the frogs / of stars." -- from Debussy

"The first time I didn't know you / The second time I did." -- from In the Institute and In the University

"A tiny, tiny heart / is growing from my fingers." -- from Prelude

"The tall light / plays chess with the window blind." -- from The Gypsy Nun

These are only some of the lines which repeatedly floored me. Federico García Lorca, who I met through the recommendation of a professor, writes playful poetry, youthful poetry--but serious poetry, made up of the very gristle and potency of life. Poetry that merges the boundaries between animate and inanimate, which takes imaginative leaps, isn't afraid to introduce excrement, death, wounds, and eerie, haunting images -- In the jasmine an elephant and clouds/and in the bull the girl’s skeleton.

I can't vouch for the translation as I only know and thus only read the English, but the original poems in Spanish are placed side by side with the translations for those who are interested in reading the original. These poems were important to me, despite this selection emphasizing Lorca's lesser known work, lesser anthologized. It still remains full of the symbols and vibrancy that made up his persona and the rest of his work. He was the quintessential Spanish poet, whose imagery extended to the history of Spain, even to the point of referencing and utilizing the qasida*. Cultural links abound, references to bull fighting --his best friend died doing this sport-- to literature and more. To me however, the most poignant images were those of nature--the April sky turns my eyes indigo--the sort of immense infinity felt by the utter beauty, splendor, and quiet magnitude of the physical world. 

Like this, imagine the golden girl/bathed in the water/the water turned gold. These poems often reminded me of the poetry of Pablo Neruda, or even Rainer Maria Rilke--Romantic poetry, even sensual poetry, but sensual in a religious, spiritual or devout way, full of longing and impossibility and the sheer grandness of scale--of God, or of a girl named Lucia Martinez

I am here, Lucía Martínez,

here to consume your mouth

and drag you by the hair

into the seashell dawn.

                               -- from Lucía Martínez

Mostly these are the poems of someone whose poetry stems from the friction of life, someone whose pulse throbs so visibly, who tastes with so much zeal, who implores that should I die, keep the balcony open.

89/100
I heartily recommend this selection to anyone who takes an interest in poetry, especially French Symbolist poets such as Arthur Rimbaud, Paul Verlaine, Charles Baudelaire, or even Pablo Neruda, Rainer Maria Rilke, and Emily Dickinson.  I only rated this in the 80s because there were a handful of poems which I thought were out of place, were a little rambling and seemed to list images without any real beauty or purpose. Incidentally, those were the poems which are considered his more famous poems (the poems written in his hated visit to New York, for example).

* Note: qaṣīdaᵗ (also spelled qaṣīda; in Arabic: قصيدة, plural qasā'id, قــصــائـد; in Persian: قصیده or چكامه, chakameh, in Turkish: kaside), is a form of lyric poetry that originated in pre-Islamic Arabia. Qasida means "intention" and the genre found use as a petition to a patron.

A qasida has a single presiding subject, logically developed and concluded. Often it is a panegyric, written in praise of a king or a nobleman, a genre known as madīḥ, meaning "praise".

About Elly (2009)

Ahmad: "A bitter ending is better than an endless bitterness."

By Asghar Farhadi
With Golshifteh Farahani, Shahab Hosseini, and Taraneh Alidoosti 

I was recommended this movie by a friend a few months back, but didn't get around to seeing it until today.

There is much to say about the directing, the imagery, the use of sound, the simplicity of the plot, and the impeccable and sensitive acting. The film narrates a fateful trip to a house by the sea, where a group of friends go for a small vacation. One of the friends, Elly, is a newcomer to the group, known only to one other friend. After a series of incidents, Elly goes missing and a child almost drowns to death. Fingers begin to fly among the friends, each pointing to the other in blame. Lies unfurl, relationships begin to split at the seams.

By the end of the film I was left questioning the motivations of every character, and the palpable sense of disappointment with language and the failure of words to communicate meaning. Who is Elly? Does she die in the end? Were Ahmad's words to her (quoted at the beginning of this review) crucial to her death? What were Sepideh's reasons for lying? Was this film making a feminist stand? What was the role of the children? Why did one of the children have to almost drown? Was Elly symbolically drowning? What did the scene with the kite mean? Elly's look of distaste at the teasing and singing for her alliance (or soon to be alliance) with Ahmad seem to signal towards her dissatisfaction with the traditional roles of marriage, the regretful way she looked at her ring (which later we can gather is from her fiance, having been engaged all this time) all hints at perhaps a suicide.

The men in the film seem, despite them being upper middle class and fairly open minded and not too religious, still very misogynistic. In particular I am noticing a scene where all the women grouped together to cook and Ahmad requests Sepideh to bring the tea and later, the casual way in which the men either beat/verbally assault their wives. At the same time, it seems the women are capable of immense violence--it seems Sepideh's husband is jealous of her connection with Ahmad--perhaps there is more than meets the eye with their relationship?

I liked: The acting was superb. Natural, not high strung or over acting. The clever way the camera focused on little moments that revealed secrets of the moments.

I disliked: I expected more of Sepideh's character. A little more explanation perhaps of her actions, her past, and her relationship with both Ahmad and Elly.

74/100
About Elly will not give you easy answers, but if you are looking for a thought provoking film which delves into the complexity of friendship/relationship dynamics and human nature, you should give this a watch.

Undead (2003)

Marion: "Crazy's definitely come to this town for a visit."

By Michael Spierig and Peter Spierig
With Felicity Mason, Mungo McKay and Rob Jenkins

I learnt about Undead after watching The Toxic Avenger (1984)--it was amongst the similar movies on IMdb, along with Bad Taste (1987) and Slither (2006), both being films that I enjoyed. I decided to see it. The cover of Undead also pleased me as zombie movies interest me.

Undead is set in Berkeley, Australia. The town is the target of meteors and soon after the meteors, people start turning to zombie flesh-eaters and brain aficionados. A group of young people find itself strained on the lone farm of Marion, a fisherman with a passion for firearms who, fortunately for them, has had UFO theories and has built himself a bunker in case of such an attack. However, one of the young lady happens to be pregnant and hiding in the bunker will not suffice. They decide to go out and investigate the reasons behind the attack.

To be entirely frank, I was disappointed with Undead. Maybe I was expecting too much out of it simply because of the movies it had been compared to. I can see why those movies were related, in a way they are all action comedies with graphic scenes of horror, but Undead also has an UFO/ Sci-fi element to it, which I felt was a unnecessary and it made me lose some interest in it.

However, the movie can be funny at times and the character of Marion is really hilarious but the other characters were lacking and mostly stereotypical. Some of the special effects are not really convincing, apparently it is because of the low budget of the movie, however, I have found that people have done some really good horror effects by using simple tricks. Here it seems they opted to go for CGI, but on a low budget, it doesn't look that good. The zombies are not particularly scary, but they do the trick alright. Some of the best scenes are out in the open and with the orange of the sunset, they render really well. It is also a staple that the Spierig brothers have used in their more famous movie Daybreakers (2009).

I liked: The blood. Marion. The shopping scene. Funny.

I disliked: The use of aliens. Not really catchy. Most of the characters are useless.

51/100
Undead is fun at times, filled with actions and guns, but if you're looking for a zombie movie you will most likely be disappointed.

Kansas City Confidential (1952)

Joe Rolfe: "Take a good look Pete, you're looking at the patsy that was framed for the kill."

By Phil Karlson
With John Payne, Preston Foster and Lee Van Cleef

Kansas City Confidential is one of those old movies that fell into the public domain by lack of care by the, then rightful, owners. In a way, it was just standing there for me to check out and since it seemed to be a good film-noir, I decided to see it.

The film starts with a man watching over his windows' blinds, noting down the time when a truck arrives at the florist and the time when another truck arrives at the bank next to the florist. An heist will take place. The man, however, needs to rack up a few associates for the deed. He invites three men, one by one, but he wears a mask so they can't see him. The money is stolen, with masks on and he tells them that the money will be split at a later date, and that he will contact each one of them when the time is right. In the mean time, Joe Rolfe, an ex-convict who is now working as a delivery guy for the florist, is being the fall guy that the police is trying to have confess. The police clears him, but the media do not and he finds himself on the run, trying to find the real culprits.

The movie is really well thought and I quite enjoyed the script. The idea of the mask in particular works really well as we see each character discover, or try to discover, each others' identity. I was a bit confused during the first part, as I had troubles recognizing who was everyone and if someone was the same person, and/or involved in the coup. The atmosphere in that hotel down in Mexico is tense and anyone could betray the other and try to get a bigger part of the share. I think this was one of the strengths of the movie, mostly carried out by the fine acting of the ensemble. As it is common with movies at the time, there is also a slight element of romance that creeps in the middle. There are a lot of guns involved, but most of the time the action ensues over fist fights, which I thought was a little repetitive.

I liked: Well thought robbery. The mask and mixed identities. The use of Mexico as a hide-out. Intense close-ups during tense scenes.

I disliked: The mystery dries out a little after the first half. Uneven characters.

71/100
A solid crime movie, very little of the money is seen, but everything revolves around it.

Lock Up (1989)

Warden Drumgoole: "This is hell, and I'm going to give you the guided tour."

By John Flynn
With Sylvester Stallone, Donald Sutherland and John Amos

I think I came across Lock Up while seeing Sonny Landham's filmography. Lock Up seemed like the perfect example of a very manly action movie and I figured I could keep it in store for some day where I'd want to see an action movie.

The film focuses on Frank Leone, a convict who has very good relations with the wardens in his prison--so much so that he gets weekends out--but after coming back from a weekend outside, a team comes overnight and transfers him to another prison, even though he has only 6 months left of his sentence. Frank quickly learns the reason of his transfer. Once news of his previous escape from Warden Drumgoole's prison got around, bad publicity ensued for Drumgoole who ended up in this prison. Drumgoole now intends to make Leone pay for that, through every possible means.

Lock Up is mid-way a prison movie and an action movie. Stallone is quite convincing as Frank Leone and the role seems tailored for him. The story is pretty classic and not very original, relying mostly on a portrayal of a strong, yet moral and good doer inmate having to face sadistic wardens with a thirst for blood. Some of the best scenes happen with all the inmates outside, for example the football in the mud scene or the car in the mud scene. The inmates that gravitate around Leone are also quite interesting, but unfortunately we don't really know much about them. As most films of the genre, we are served with the gratuitous muscles and men doing manual work scenes. In the end, the movie tries to send out a feel good wave and manages it fairly well.

I liked: I was looking for an action, macho man movie and it's pretty much it. Outdoors scenes. Leone is a great character.

I disliked: Not original. Doesn't explore any of the jail internal rules or systems. Not realistic.

51/100
A manly man action film in the prison system, ends up being quite a feel good movie.

Chutney Popcorn (1999)

Reena: "Mom, I'm a lesbian, I'm not sterile."

By Nisha Ganatra
With Nisha Ganatra, Jill Hennessy and Sakina Jaffrey

I am not sure how I learnt about Chutney Popcorn, but if I had to guess it would probably one of the similar movies to something else I watched.

The story focuses on Reena, a young lesbian of Indian heritage. The movie opens with Reena's sister, Sarita's wedding. The fact that Reena brought her girlfriend Lisa along makes Reena's mother uncomfortable. Reena is an aspiring photographer who works at a beauty salon doing henna tattoos, and she seems to be living happily with Lisa. When Sarita learns that she cannot have a child, Reena offers to have the baby, a decision that threatens to shatter the cultural and patriarchal bounds that inform the family dynamics.

At times, it is difficult to know whether it's a comedy or a drama, but overall it works out fairly well. The story is quite interesting on ethical and philosophical aspects, even if they are not necessarily dealt with entirely, they are questions that do come up through the movie. The cultural jokes work just fine, same with the lesbian self-deprecative humor. Where it comes harder to follow is when the movie becomes darker in tone and more serious, it is hard to grasp the real implications of everyone involved. The topics, themes and sub-culture, if I may call it that, felt very proto-The L Word (2004) which pleased me. The director, writer and improvised main actress did a really good job in my opinion as she was refreshing in her portrayal of Reena.

I liked: Theme of surrogate mother. Doesn't seem to preach.

I disliked: Sometimes the comical took away from the seriousness of the topic. A little superficial.

62/100
The strength of this film resides in the fact that it dares to touch sensitive and taboo topics. It falls a little short, but to anyone interested in LGBT issues this should be intriguing.