Crime School (1938)

Judge Clinton: "If I don't find out who the guilty boy is, you're all going to suffer."

By Lewis Seiler
With The "Dead End" Kids and Humphrey Bogart

Here's one more movie with Humphrey Bogart and the "Dead End" Kids, this seemed to cast them in a much similar role to Dead End (1937) and it had Bogie so I was interested immediately.

The gang of kids is once again disturbing the peace of a poor neighborhood but things get worse when one of them accidentally kills the local pawnbroker. Unwilling to reveal the true identity of the killer to the judge, the kids stick together and are all sent to reform school. The arrival at the reform school is quite a shock for them and Frankie, the leader of the gang, learns the hard way that this ain't gonna be so easy anymore. The ruthless warden teaching him lessons the hard way--but a new special officer in charge of the schools will start investigating in their case and will do his best to change the ways of a school that is acting more like a prison.

The "Dead End" Kids are not exactly playing different characters as they seem to carry their personality over from movie to movie while their surroundings and story changes. It actually works fairly well as we seem to follow their gang and get to know them personally. Their ways of talking and thick accent also gets better when we get used to them over the course of a movie or more movies.

The story is a classic prison tale of corruption and abuse of power. The real philosophical issue is more social and consists of whether the behavior of the kids is inherently wrong or whether their surroundings force them to act this way. The film offers quite an optimistic point of view and appears like such a feel good movie in the end. It doesn't seem to be the most realistic in its treatment of reform schools or the power one person has against a whole institution.

Humphrey Bogart doesn't disappoint in a role where he seems to drift away from the usual early gangster persona. The movie editing, scene cuts and sound is quite poor but I reckon this is due to the poor recognition of the movie and the loss of the original material or original quality. We don't learn much from the movie and there is no big moral to be learnt but it's quite entertaining and it does bring up some interesting issues. The duo Dead End Kids and Bogart does it for me.

I liked: A stand against physical disciplinary actions. Feel good movie. Lot of charisma.

I disliked: Quite predictable. The villains lack quite a bit of characters.

70/100
I enjoyed every minute of it even though it doesn't stand out as much as other prison movies or other movies with the Dead End Kids.

Osama (2003)

Mother: "I wish I had a son instead of a daughter. He would help me with work. I wish God hadn't created women."

By Siddiq Barmak
With Marina Golbahari

After I watched a few Afghani films, I decided to see a list of them. I saw that Osama was the first film made after the fall of the Taliban regime which had banned movies. The topic seemed quite up my alley.

An unnamed young girl is being pushed in every directions alongside her mother when the Taliban interrupt a women protest. The women are asking for the right to work. The girl's mother is a widow and a doctor but has no way of supporting her family if she cannot work at the hospital. In collaboration with the grandmother, they decide to disguise their young girl as a boy, cutting her hair and have him escort the mother, since a woman can't go out without a male. A friend of the late father even accepts to hire the girl turned boy in his shop, but things become perilous when the Taliban recruit all the young boys for indoctrination and military training.

Osama is a grim film and it depicts real life horror without any blood. We are just as lost as the girl in the streets and her fear of being caught is terrifying. She is alone and it's impossible for her to count on anybody. The movie is really good in most aspects: it's beautiful, the story draws the viewer in and there's as much suspense as in a thriller.

The colors are only seen on burqa, the rest being shared between shades of grey and brown. The young amateur actress is doing a really good job and her high pitched voice is really nerve wracking when we know she has to pass as a boy, facing a great deal of consequences if not. One has to wonder about the involvement of the mother and grandmother who do not seem to grasp the dangers of the situation they put their own daughter/granddaughter in. As much as they face troubles by being unable to work, what allows them to use their girl in such a way?

The movie makes no mention of any moral dilemmas they might have concerning this, even going as far as putting the blame on the girl when she becomes suspected. This isolates the girl even further and the downward spiral is all but ready to begin with.

As good as the movie and story are depicted, there is something that is amiss. There is not a single glimpse of hope, all the smiles are powerless. I usually enjoy sad and depressing movies but this is on quite a particular level. The only comfort there is to be found is the fact that the Taliban regime had fallen once the film came out and the only hope is to believe that it got better. This movie will not teach you anything of the sort, in fact, the only lesson to learn from this movie is that if you have to get born in Afghanistan you have to be a boy.

I liked : Good story. Powerful acting. Unforgettable.

I disliked: Abandon all hope. No teaching, nothing to learn. What is there beyond all this sadness?

67/100
A powerful film in a forsaken place. Dark and grim, the loss of human rights.

The Incredible Melting Man (1977)

Sheriff Neil Blake: "You better tell me what's going on around here before there's nobody left in this town."

By William Sachs
With Alex Rebar, Burr DeBenning and Myron Healey

The title of the movie felt so silly I wanted to see it. I have to say I was quite intrigued by the poster and also to witness how they pulled off the make up and special effects of a melting man.

In a near future, three astronauts are on a mission to Saturn. However, when they are about to see the sun through the rings of Saturn there is a malfunction and two members of the crew die instantly while the other is recovered but has suffered heavy radiation. When he wakes up in the hospital he is covered with bandages but he realizes his skin is horribly affected by the radiations and he appears to be constantly melting. His first reaction is rage but then instead of seeking help, he attacks the nurse and runs out in the wilderness...

Overall, the movie is pretty silly as the title might suggest. The story is quite simple and straightforward, the acting is quite poor and there are tons of inconsistencies. The movie has a few good scenes and the make up for the melting man is really well done, in a very gooey, slimy, gross way.

It is interesting how this substance of slime for what we assume to be bodily fluids, blood or skin is gross in itself. We found ourselves disgusted simply because of that substance that stains everything the melting man touch, whether it's on the ground or on a window. It's not really rational, but it works on a most human level.

This was well done, however the rest of the melting man wasn't up to par and sometimes he'd leave slime all around him and sometimes he wouldn't. His forearm gets cut off and he then walks with an arm from the shoulder down, while we can clearly see the actor's arm under a shirt.

The dialogues are quite weak, but there are a few scenes that are funny, especially the ones with the elderly couple, they were so hilarious. The movie clearly had a cheap budget and it shows, fortunately the make up didn't cost much but it shows in everything else and while a lot of movies manage to really captivate you despite being low budget, this one uses cheap tricks like slow motion scenes to make up for it and it doesn't work. The story can't save the film.

I liked: The slime gore horror. The make up.

I disliked: Poor dialogues. Annoying music. Lots of goofs and inconsistencies. Weird scenes transitions.

30/100
It's real value resides in the cheap and bad which for some allows a lot of movies to become golden. I know I've had that feeling with some other movies but it didn't happen here for me.

Society (1989)

Bill Whitney: "I don't think about them, they don't think about me. We're just one big happy family... except for incest and a little psychosis."

By Brian Yuzna
With Billy Warlock, Devin DeVasquez and Evan Richards

When I came across Society and saw the cover I was quite intrigued as it is really a disturbing cover. I wasn't sure what to think as the synopsis didn't seem to involve much horror but then I clicked on the director and realized he made Bride of Re-Animator which is cult classic just for its quotes, so I decided to see it.

Bill Whitney is a popular kid living with his parents and his sister in a rich house in Beverly Hills. Bill doesn't really feel at home though and has paranoid ideas and consults a therapist for it. Bill thinks there is something really wrong with his family and that they might not be what they seem which also makes him think he was possibly adopted. His doubts amplify when a friend who has information on his family gets killed in an accident. Despite everything Bill witnesses, they always seem to evaporate before he can produce them to anybody, therefore it's unclear whether it's all in his head or if there is a consensus that cover their step.

Society is quite unique in its genre. It seems to start as a typical 80's movie about a teenager trying to fit in and facing issues about his parents expectations but the events take this turn where we almost feel like watching a thriller where the hero has to uncover the truth about some powerful organisation.

During the first part of the movie, we really don't know whether it's a parody, a comedy, or just over-the-top. I think the movie is a classic example of a film you have to take at the 3rd degree, if you watch Society and take it seriously you will probably get bored. If you decide to see it as a comical take on social issues and behaviors then it is actually hilarious.

The dress code and haircuts of the 80's (and the famous mullet) are priceless and add a lot to the entertainment. The true undertone of the movie shines through sparsely in the first part with some characters that can't be taken seriously and a few very out of place quotes that made me laugh.

The movie however will mostly be remembered for its ending and what I could only describe by a delightfully disgusting orgiastic flesh feast. That scene is absolutely disgusting, possibly brilliant in its own right, but probably shocking to any normal audience. Again, I had to remind myself of the context, the overall metaphor, the symbolism and more importantly, the overall tone of the movie to see it as something actually enjoyable. It is, when taken at the 3rd degree, a pretty funny scene. One must not forget to note the sound effects, they are brilliant.

Sadly, even when considering the movie as a comedy, there are some flaws that makes it less enjoyable. We have this vague feeling of a Rosemary's Baby (1968) rip-off while never really getting what the evil people want, which makes the thriller part of the movie fail. Also, we have no clear distinction to identify someone and it impends on our ability to follow the pressure rising around our hero. The hero undergoes some changes but they are mostly left unexplained: what happened at the hospital? Are Clarissa and Milo good? Is anyone being framed? These are questions that I couldn't wrap up and even though I loved the over-the-top social critic it seemed incomplete.

I liked: The most graphic of body horror. The 80's teenagers feel. The paranoia and doubts.

I disliked : Unclear. Has three very different tones. Does the metaphor still work if everything is taken into account?

64/100
Definitely not for everyone but it holds its funny moments. I can't think of anyone I'd recommend it to but if I heard someone saw it I would probably laugh about it with them. 

+1 (2013)

Angad: "I told you tonight would be full of surprises."

By Dennis Iliadis
With Rhys Wakefield, Logan Miller and Ashley Hinshaw

+1 looked like an interesting experimental film but I wasn't sure I wanted to see it until I saw that it was directed by Dennis Iliadis and I've been a huge fan of his movie Hardcore (2004).

When David goes to meet his girlfriend Jill who is away at college things turn bad as he just happens to kiss her opponent who just beat her at a fencing competition. On the verge of breaking and eager to make things right, David goes with his friend Teddy to the biggest party. Heavy drinking, loud music and loss of various articles of clothing happen as it is to be expected, but what is less expected is the power going out randomly and everytime it does it seems to create bizarre events which will have the partygoers ponder whether they are seeing double.

I have to admit that I enjoyed +1 a lot visually and I felt the concept was quite interesting. However it is one of those cases where I would say it was clearly style over substance. The movie fails to deliver an interesting unfolding which is sad considering the fact that the viewer is really eager to see the clash that should happen when the events finally converge.

Instead, we seem to have a few morals on people learning more about themselves in adversity and trying to change the past. This is quite sad, especially the focus on the cheating boyfriend trying to make up for it during the entire movie. I can't say whether the characters development was lacking or if it was simply the wrap up of the story but something definitely felt amiss when the credits rolled.

I think the movie could have been seen as a metaphor and the paranormal events would have just served the purpose of putting the characters under pressure but this path was not explored. The visuals are good though and the movie is filled with action while the plot keeps you wondering about the possibilities. Although I enjoyed the mind games of the film I felt quite disappointed.

I liked: Interesting and proactive. Fresh look.

I disliked: No likable character. Cheap and disappointing ending which fails to deliver.

51/100
If you enjoy party movies this is quite good, but sadly if you're in for the thriller part you might be disappointed.

House of Wax (1953)

Prof. Henry Jarrod : "The morbidly curious. Heh, I won't cater to them."

By André De Toth
With Vincent Price, Frank Lovejoy and Phyllis Kirk

Well, I saw the remake House of Wax (2005) about the time it came out so when I came across the old one I decided to give it a try.

A wax sculptor, Henry Jarrod is unable to fight off competition of other wax museums that portray macabre scenes, as he focuses on depicting historical events. His partner who is mostly interested in the revenue decides to burn the place down in order to cash in the insurance money. This is what he does as Henry Jarrod watches his work and artistic creation burn to the ground, so much so that a few months after his body has been missing and the partner gets all the money of the insurance. However, it is about the same time that an horribly disfigured man starts killing people and take their bodies away.

I was slightly disappointed by the movie, it started off with a great premise but it failed to capture my interest after that. I was maybe expecting too much from it. The artist who seemed very passionate about his work becomes obsessed by his inability to create due to burnt hands. While this is a good idea, it wasn't exploited at all and it seemed to have more interest in the botched police work and woman in shock.

The most scary part in my opinion is the young Charles Bronson's appearance. The wax creations are quite interesting but we don't see much of the process.

I liked: The main concept. The guillotine and historical murders.

I disliked: Stumbles upon itself in the second half. Filling scenes of dances.

58/100
I wouldn't call it a classic horror film but it has an interesting core story.

Casualties of War (1989)

Lt. Reilly: "You can't expect any different in the combat zone. Is that clear?"

By Brian De Palma
With Michael J. Fox, Sean Penn and Don Harvey

I think I heard about Casualties of War from my parents maybe because it was on television or because they watched it or simply while I was looking for movies.

After a tormented night in the war of Vietnam where Sgt. Meserve saves Eriksson's life, the squad is quietly resting in a little village when their friend Brown is shot. When the squad comes back to base they are allowed one day of leave and given a new soldier to replace Brown. They drink heavily and decide to visit the local brothel but they are denied access which irritates the sergeant Meserve so much that he decides that they will leave early for duty the day after, pass by a village, kidnap a girl and use her as a sex slave during their mission. While some soldiers don't believe they will really do it, the sergeant, helped by the caporal Clark proceed and kidnap a girl. Eriksson has moral issues with such activities and let the others know but it puts him in opposition of the leader of the squad and could have heavy consequences.

As with many of Vietnam wars movies of the 80's, this grim painting of the war is scary and seems quite realistic. We once again see men transformed by war and violence to reveal their true nature. They are all really young and have seen a lot of horrors already. This feeling is omnipresent and the first part of the movie sets the mood in a really well crafted way. The facts are pretty dark, especially considering it is based on true events. There are a lot of moral dilemmas exposed and we don't have much choice but to see their consequences.

There are some explosions and machine gun firing to remind us that we are in a war with opponents, but the war depicted here is mostly internal. The behavior of those who disagree, those who don't dare to disagree and those who can't wait to disobey. The army appears as a scary machine that swallow youths whole. In its ideology, the movie flourishes beautifully. However, it appears quite sketchy at times, for example with the idea of telling it through a flashback. Or the quick trial which comes almost as a surprise. Sean Penn does what he does best which is play screw loose violent characters with emotions.

I liked: Powerful war story. Group and army behaviors are scrutinized.

I disliked: The violence seems to have no answer. Builds up well and wraps up hastily.

72/100
Definitely not an easy movie but a worthy experience. Looks like Rescue Dawn (2006) meets Platoon (1986) but lacks that extra thing to make it as memorable as these two.

Des hommes et des dieux / Of Gods and Men (2010)

Frère Jean-Pierre: "Partir c'est fuir et abandonner le village aux terroristes."

By Xavier Beauvois
With Lambert Wilson, Michael Lonsdale and Olivier Rabourdin

I met Des hommes et des dieux after watching Le passé (2013) and browsing through its cast. I liked the synopsis and it seemed to have gotten nominations as well as being the French submission for the Foreign Language Film Award.

The movie follows the life of a handful of monks in a monastery in Algeria. Their peaceful and quiet life is soon disturbed when a group of Islamist fundamentalists starts killing foreigners. The army decides to protect the monastery but the monks dismiss them. There becomes a struggle to live with the fear, the faith and everyone's opinion on the question of whether to leave or stay.

I really enjoyed the context and until the end I wasn't able to place it in time and to know whether it was a true story or not. It turns out it happened in 1996. The dilemma is very strong and the dialogues between the monks as well as their beliefs are extensive. The movie follows the rhythm of life of a monastery and is therefore quite slow with a lot of religious rituals. I have to say those scenes annoyed me, at first I thought they were necessary in order to set the tone and pace but as they grew longer and longer I started disliking them, particularly the religious chants.

The acting is really good and the range of emotions is wide, the two stars, Michael Lonsdale and Lambert Wilson (who are both famous bilingual French/English actors) give amazing performances. The movie which came out in 2010 couldn't have been more contemporary as the so called Arab Spring was about to start and the eternal quarrel would be on everyone's mind once again. I like to think that a non-religious person should be able to enjoy a religious movie and the other way around. Despite its heavy religious theme I think the movie reaches out beyond that while trying to dig deeper in a fragile peace.

Although most of the music annoyed me, the scene playing Swan Lake was absolutely amazing.

I liked: The discussion of martyrdom. Absolutely relevant. Acting. True story.

I disliked: Very slow. Religious chants and rituals.

68/100
I think the movie has a lot to say but it won't say it in the way you expect it to. The experience is slow but worth it.

Dead End (1937)

Policeman: "Well, there ain't no profit in chasing kids."

By William Wyler
With Sylvia Sidney, Joel McCrea and Humphrey Bogart

I heard about Dead End after watching the movie Angels with Dirty Faces (1938) which also featured the "dead end kids" and, most to my liking, Humphrey Bogart.

In a poor neighborhood of New York, the poor have to cohabit near the fancy buildings that host rich tenants. This proximity isn't going too well and the dead end kids, a gang of young criminals in the making, are always ready to pick a fight. This new generation is observed by two old kids of the neighborhood, Dave a man who went to high school and 6 years of college to become an architect but down on his luck and lives by painting windows while dreaming of living with one of the rich girl from the fancy building. The other grown up from the neighborhood is "Baby Face" Martin earning his nickname for having gone through extensive plastic surgery in order to avoid the police as he is a notorious killer. The two opposites find themselves stuck in a place full of contradictions while witnessing the growth of a new generation that might end on their paths.

The similarities with Angels with Dirty Faces are legion and it really feels like a prototype of it. Where Angels with Dirty Faces involved the quarrel of good and evil, through a priest, Dead End is mostly about rich and poor--both displaying at times good and evil behaviors.

Sadly, where Angels with Dirty Faces had really good behavioral analysis and moral considerations, Dead End seems to end in confusion whether to take the analysis further or not. Much like its title, we seem to hit a wall in terms of reflection past the movie.

The movie has really good sets to recreate the slums of New York and the filming makes a great use of shadows, giving out this very criminal, film noir vibe. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Frank Miller had this movie in mind when he wrote Sin City as its neo-noir genre seems directly inspired by Dead End. 

I found the actresses to be very strong while their characters were the less deep. The dead end kids as an ensemble work well and give out a pretty good sense of what we'd imagine street kids to behave like back in the 30's. Their individual characters are quite shadowed by the group, except for Tommy who appears to personalize the fate of such kids.

I liked: The handling of social issues. Noir filming.

I disliked: There are no memorable lines or thought. Sketchy dialogues at times.

72/100
A pale comparison to Angels with Dirty Faces (1938), we see Humphrey Bogart building his gangster skills once again, en route to the stardom he would achieve.

Scenic Route (2013)

Carter: "Daily failing it's a lonely miserable business."

By Kevin and Michael Goetz
With Josh Duhamel and Dan Fogler

I have to say the cover of Scenic Route totally made me want to see it, although it first looked to me like a horror movie with the cover, after reading the short story on IMDb it appeared like an interesting psychological thriller and I decided to see it.

Two friends are driving through the desert when their car breaks down. As the panic first strikes, they lash on each other and criticize each other's lifestyle. One has sold out and gave up on his guitar dreams, settled, has a job he hates, wife and kid. The other one is homeless, lives in his car, dropped out of law school and follows his dream of becoming a writer. Their fights which is first verbal escalates into a physical fight. With the added desert climate and its canned heat days and cold nights, food and water deprivation, their physical and mental states deteriorate rapidly while also taking away their chances at looking normal to any car that would pass by.

The movie is well written whether it is through their lifestyle arguments or the psychological twists that we see evolving. The mohawk of Josh Duhamel is quite memorable and might be remembered for quite a while. I always enjoy movies that deal with insanity and was pleased to see their conditions deteriorate. The desert is very bare as it is to be expected and we are not meeting many new faces but the desert itself plays the secondary character being both the villain and the potential hope.

The shouting of Dan Fogler impended a little on their arguments in my opinion as it wasn't very clear. Another thing that felt misleading was the make up and bruises which didn't always seem linear. The end will probably divide a lot of the viewers with some hating it while others will enjoy it, I feel part of the latter. I thought I wouldn't like it but thinking about it, I think it had some good psychological element and it did make some sense.

I liked: Interesting friends and foes relationship. Threatening desert. Fading sanity.

I disliked: A few too many false hopes and red herrings. The only flashback we get is pretty useless and just to include a sex scene.

70/100
I found it interesting although it has many dark clouds, the writing was quite nice.

Kapurush / The Coward (1965)

Amitabha Roy: "All this palm reading was just an excuse to hold your hand."

By Satyajit Ray
With Soumitra Chatterjee, Madhabi Mukherjee and Haradhan Bannerjee

I have enjoyed all the movies from Satyajit Ray that I've had the chance to watch, I haven't seen many, but they were always really well directed. This one seemed fairly unknown but reading the story line I wanted to see it.

Amitabha Roy is a young scriptwriter who is taking time off from Calcutta to see the country and hopefully get inspired to finish the script he is working on. When his car breaks down and the local garage is incapable of repairing it, he is offered shelter, until the next train, by a wealthy tea plantation owner. The man is quite talkative and appears to want to discuss everything with Amitabha. The surprise is total when Amitabha enters the man's house and sees Karuna who was his only love but the one he failed to take a decision and had to let her go. We then learn to know about the past story between them while Amitabha tries to recover from the mistakes of his past while remaining himself in his cowardice.

As it is expected with Satyajit Ray, the filming is absolutely spot on and expect for a few scenes that have a few blurry points, which I would blame on the film's conservation, it is such a beautiful black and white atmosphere that is depicted. Faces come out to express more than dialogues would.

The character of Amitabha Roy is really interesting and we never know whether to pity him, feel for him or root for him. It was quite relevant to me at least because I consider myself a coward, much like the way Amitabha behaved. It deals with missed opportunities and the impossibility to make a decision when pushed against the wall. It's not blatant cowardice, but the kind that creeps on you and suffocates you, a metaphor that was also used as we see Amitabha sweating and having sleeping issues when he realizes he is so close to Karuna again.

As the movie deals mostly with the three characters, we feel the awkwardness of the husband, Bimal. He is talkative, laughs too often, criticizes everyone, drinks too much but ultimately, even though we would like to hate him for standing in the way of the young couple, we can't find him a real fault. I wouldn't be able to say whether the movie is a critique of arranged marriages or the impossible love between castes.

Maybe the movie doesn't pick a side and allows the viewer to dive through and decide which is the best option. Even the ending was clever. However, the movie is quite short and we barely have the time to gather enough information on the couple through a few, but key elements, flashbacks. As Bimal talks and talks, we observe the, now defunct, couple and we don't actually care about what Bimal says. The story and dialogues are not as striking as the other movies from Ray's that I've seen, but the directing work and clever mystery makes up for it.

I liked: Interesting main character with dilemmas and flaws. Brilliant shots and close-ups.

I disliked: Deserved a little more background. Simple dialogues and script.

78/100
I don't know if the term romance would apply here because it is quite an original take, but I liked this male character who is scared and lacks the assertiveness required to make decisions.

Sharknado! (2013)

Nova Clarke: "We're gonna need a bigger chopper."

By Anthony C. Ferrante
With Ian Ziering and Tara Reid

A movie that got famous because people made fun of its silly plot on social medias, I only heard of it on IMDb but it was enough for me to remember the title and the silly idea. When it came out, I couldn't resist watching Sharknado, I mean, come on.

Sharks in a tornado. Enough said!

When you see the cast you know what to expect, Ian Ziering and Tara Reid are notorious actors from the 90's, not necessarily notorious for their filmography but for failing to ever convert after the 90's into doing other good movies. It is actually pretty funny to see them paired up here.

The movie is so over the top and badly written that it is more funny than anything. The worst part is actually the special effects which look like those animations you have to watch when you try to learn to drive and you have these little blue cars and red trucks that have to stop at the red light. That is actually what I was reminded of.

The many clichés are either fun or bad depending on whether you take them seriously, however, when you watch a movie called Sharknado it's hard to take anything seriously. Everything they leave, whether it's a building or a vehicle will explode few seconds after their departure. The loser dad will reconnect with his ex-wife over the protection of his children and the evil new boyfriend of the mother will die a painful death. In fact, anyone who talks a little too much dies a violent death soon after.

The dad is ultimately driven by a sense of duty to save everyone and his normal reaction to seeing a seemingly empty school bus is "I'm gonna get on the bridge and rappel down there"... yes, really. The lack of realism in the sharks actually prevent any scary moment and the horror doesn't work that well, it actually works better as a disaster action movie. There is no real reason to see Sharknado but if you do it's highly unlikely that you'll forget it. It's just so silly all the way through, you will be part of the people who've seen Sharknado. Whether you want to let that info be known is up to you.

I liked: References to Jaws.

I disliked: The CGI. Even the theme music is awful. The script writing.

18/100
Although I did laugh a few times because it was so over the top, most of the time was spent shaking my head in disbelief.

The Patience Stone (2012)

The Woman: "How is it possible to live with a bullet in the neck? You are the one that is wounded and I am the one that suffers."

By Atiq Rahimi
With Golshifteh Farahani, Hamid Djavadan and Massi Mrowat

I heard about The Patience Stone before it came out while I was browsing through Golshifteh Farahani's filmography and upcoming films. I was eager to see it.

A wife watches over her husband who got shot in the neck during the war. The husband is not responsive and the woman runs out of money to pay the pharmacist and she has to use a mix of water and sugar to keep him alive. When the war intensifies, the woman has to hide her two daughters with her aunt and she keeps visiting her husband at great risks. However, an interesting relationship develops as the woman starts talking to the husband and telling him secrets she would never tell anyone. A tale says that one can confide in a stone, called the patience stone, and the person starts feeling better and when all the secrets are told, the stone will explode and the person will be freed.

The movie is really beautifully filmed and through the raw corners of a desolated house, the hands of the wife caring for the husband or the tank that seems to shoot through the window they all culminated to create a very colorful painting of a war ridden place. The woman is multilayered and really well portrayed by Golshifteh Farahani.

The movie takes an unexpected turn when it develops a very sensual vibe and even though it first felt out of place, it grew on me to be believable and that it was useful to the film. On top of that, there are other themes that find their way in through the film like the condition of women, insanity and of course mere survival. The condition of women is not much of a surprise, whenever we see a movie dealing with the situation in Afghanistan we are bound to find a dose of it, but the other themes were good surprises. The movie does not deal with war although it is a war movie, war is the canvas to the oil painting that are the characters.

Speaking of characters, one shouldn't expect too many of them, we will only learn about the husband through the wife's words and we will barely hear the daughters. We are clearly dealing with a movie centered on a woman character and it really blossoms when we see that we are not dealing with a perfect woman or a bad woman but we see a woman trying to live with her flaws and trying to cope with the burden of her husband that won't die to set her free.

The real tour de force could be that the movie empowers a woman in a situation where most women are powerless. The character of the young soldier is ambiguous but represent another form of oppression and is possibly just another casualty of war. The movie left me with very good impressions although I had some reserves on the whole experience, it overall felt like a great piece of work tied together.

I liked: Colors. War. Strong woman character fighting through her flaws. The patience stone metaphor.

I disliked: Confuse at times. I wish we had more background on the secondary characters. The ending could have been more striking.

78/100
Golshifteh Farahani shines in this role that occupies the entire movie. This unnamed woman could be a lot of women.

Black Fish (2013)

Howard Garrett: "To this day, there is no record of an orca doing any harm to a human in the wild."

By Gabriela Cowperthwaite
With Tilikum

I have always found the orcas, also known as the killer whale, to be one of the most gracious and fascinating animals but it is also one that induces the most respect by its sheer strength and size. I am intrigued by such documentaries and the cover is really beautiful.

Black Fish follows the life of killer whale Tilikum who claimed the lives of three humans so far and keeps entertaining people in an amusement park. Rather than seeking the mistakes that the trainers could have made, the documentary tries to analyze the life and conditions of captivity that were combined in order to create a whale that could kill out of frustration.

This documentary combines some rare but beautiful images of orcas in the wild with recordings at amusement parks as well as interviews with people involved in either the capture, the study or the training of orcas. The documentary is quite clear on its take on captivity and by all accounts it really seem that humans created a ticking bomb by putting a young male in a small tank along with females who would bully him constantly.

Through various techniques of deprivation of food, light and freedom we learn about the whale being attacked by its peers and then taking its frustration out on the trainer. The worst part is however to come and what I think is really seen as the worse element of all is the fact that for reasons of pure business and advertisement the whale was sold but the accidents were covered up and the new trainers would never know the full extent of the whale's past.

Scientific facts and other attacks were constantly hidden from the personal working with the whales. While the story finally ended up in front of a court of law, the publicity stunt and denial appears to continue. The story is exposed in a pretty grim way with flabbergasting facts piling up on top of each other when it really is clear that it is all a money issue.

Some parts are not quite clear and for example the relation with the park in Spain where another whale killed a trainer wasn't really clear. The fact that they imply that because Tilikum is a male breeder then they take the risk of creating killer babies whales might be far stretched as one should not necessarily blame the children for the mistakes of their parents. In the end we feel a little disgusted by human behavior in this state where entertainment and money rule over the well being of animals and the safety of their trainers.

I liked: Great topic. Pretty clear and straightforward. Exposes its ideas and follows through.

I disliked: I would have enjoyed more information on the orcas in the wild. The owners of the whales refusing to defend themselves gives us a one sided version, but this can't be blamed on the documentary makers but on the owners.

74/100
It's a great documentary for anyone interested in animals care and entertainment, although it is quite depressing to see the sheer sadness of captivity.

This Is The End (2013)

Jay Baruchel: "You hear that? It's the soundtrack of us going insane."

By Evan Goldberg and Seth Rogen
With James Franco, Seth Rogen and Jay Baruchel

IMDb had been praising This Is The End for a while before it even came out so I knew about it and I wasn't sure if was gonna like it but I wanted to see it. These comedies are very uneven and I find myself really enjoying some while some others are just boring. I didn't really know what to expect here but I liked the idea of apocalyptic setting.

The movie starts with Seth Rogen meeting Jay Baruchel who's flying to Los Angeles for a weekend of wild partying. While Jay thinks it'll just be the two of them, Seth has actually planned to attend a party at James Franco's. When they get there, Seth meets all his friend and Jay feels left out and decides to go out to buy some stuff but at the convenient store they witness weird apocalyptic events and most of the people there get sucked into blue halos. Seth and Jay return to the party where no one seem to have noticed anything and assume that the two of them are just stoned, but soon enough the earth shatters and a big hole creates in the front yard of the house. After many casualties, a few of them finds themselves locked in the house with no idea what's going on outside and limited supplies.

The funniest aspect of the movie is the fact that they are all playing their own role and when things get heated up they actually bash each others' movies and choices. A lot of stars actually appear as cameos as well, some not even really saying anything. Sadly, the discussions and jokes are mostly of the body fluids level and it gets old pretty quick, leaving us with the situational apocalypse and rationing of food as the main source of entertainment.

The demonic possession was also one of the fun moments with the mimicking of the scene in The Exorcist (1973). The acting can be quite annoying at times but it shouldn't be your main grudge against the film. I laughed out loud a few times but overall it wasn't the most hilarious comedy I've seen recently. It is creative and tries to point out the quirks of these stars by putting them in this closed and dangerous situation. Most of it is over the top and that was to be expected.

I liked: Playing their own. References to their careers. Apocalypse.

I disliked: The level of the humor is pretty low. More could have been done with the budget and cast.

51/100
You'll probably laugh a few times, overall I'd say it'll suit the fans of the crew.

Le passé / The Past (2013)

Marie: "Je suis là pour combler le vide laissé par ta femme."

By Asghar Farhadi
With Bérénice Bejo, Ali Mosaffa and Tahar Rahim

I was eager to see Le passé because I have enjoyed Iranian movies a lot recently and Asghar Farhadi is one of the most talented writer of intricate stories. I was surprised to see he decided to set his next film in France but was expecting a lot from it.

Marie is a French woman with two daughters. After living with the daughters' father, she married Ahmad, an Iranian man who left her and went back to Iran. Now, Marie has met Samir and wants to marry him but since she is not yet divorced from Ahmad they have to do it and it is the reason for Ahmad's return to France at the start of the movie. What could appear as an issue is in fact solved quite easily when both willingly agree to the divorce with no requests on any goods whatsoever, but with Ahmad back around, Marie wants him to help her with the eldest daughter, Lucie who keeps running away from home. But through discussions with Lucie, Ahmad might discover the depth of the new home situation...

Except for the language, those who have seen Asghar Farhadi's movies before should not be too unsettled. We have the same atmosphere, the same kind of troubles arising and most importantly the same ways of not saying what should be said by saying what shouldn't. While the main character and praises went to Bérénice Bejo in her portrayal of Marie, I think the most interesting characters were the males in Ahmad and Tariq who surround Marie. They both have their own issues but to see them in the same room was simply powerful. Far from the usual jealousy of men who have been in a relationship or marriage with the same woman, we see them starve for a truth that seems to be suffocating the family.

The pivotal character of Fouad, Samir's son, is also interesting as he is deprived of a mother but finding a new home. The principal interest of the movie lies not only in its plot, but in the fact that we are dropped in this situation with no clues whatsoever on everyone's relationships to one another and through the whole film we discover the multiple layers of the story. Every level of relationship is taken on as we have husband and wife, boyfriend and girlfriend, mother and daughter, stepfather and daughter, father and son and also employer and employee.

The movie might disappoint in some aspects, for example it brings in characters and focuses on them for a while and then forgets them. While we do learn about them slightly afterwards, it might feel unfinished. Their impact on the story is not well known and one will draw their own conclusion which might be something that is true for most of the movie. There is a mystery and it occupies a good part of the movie but it seems not even interesting as the real focus is to see characters evolve and react about it. While they are all searching for the truth, we can't help but ask why? Why are they trying to find this or that when they created a problem in the first place. Are they not responsible? And these questions are what makes the movie so interesting because they are all legit and so are the characters reactions. Even with its loose ends, we don't really mind that much as the journey saw the characters grow.

I liked: Multifaceted script. Scrutinize the human behavior. The issues are very real and graspable.

I disliked: Some down time because of the change of perspectives. Characters who avoid the real questions.

78/100
Although I found it less remarkable as Farhadi's previous efforts, I would still recommend it as a skillful analysis of human behavior.

Safety Last! (1923)

The Boy: "Oh, pal- She's just got to believe that I'm successful - until I am"

By Fred C. Newmeyer and Sam Taylor
With Harold Lloyd, Mildred Davis and Bill Strother

I met this classic silent movie by accident, it had a very good rating and seemed like a classical comedy so I decided to see it.

Safety Last! depicts the story of a young boy who goes to the city to make a living. He is desperately in love with his fiancé and spends all the little money he makes as a store clerk to impress her with gifts. She deduces that he must be pretty rich and decides to surprise him by visiting him. However, he won't tell her the truth of his situation and decides instead to pull a miracle by doing a publicity stunt that should allow him to get married... at the risk of his own life.

The movie reminded me of classical comedies such as The General (1926) or The Kid (1921) and most of the comical relief stem from the same kind of situations. However, I found Harold Lloyd to lack the charisma of Charles Chaplin or Buster Keaton. Nevertheless, the situations that arise at the store are quite funny and if they might not get you to cry out loud you'll probably smile for a good portion of the time.

The film culminates in the stunt which is a pretty impressive climb of a building. This looks both hilarious and dangerous. Situations arising from it are both absurd, like animals stopping the climb and endangering him, and breathtaking when he is hanging in the void.

I have to admit that I enjoyed the time where he was at the shop trying to act like he owned the place in front of his fiancé more than the climb as it felt annoying to always see the pal run away with the cop, although, it was to be expected.

I liked: Funny situations. Comical slides. Impressive stunt.

I disliked: Some of the events were too forced to be comical. The story ends abruptly.

73/100
It's the kind of movie you can watch with pretty much anyone and you are guaranteed a few laughs.

Primer (2004)

Narrator: "They knew that the easiest way to be exploited is to sell something they did not yet understand."

By Shane Carruth
With Shane Carruth and David Sullivan

I first heard about Primer when I watched Upstream Color (2013) which was written and directed by Shane Carruth as well. I was intrigued by his style and I decided I should see his first and widely acclaimed first film Primer.

Four young engineering friends have come to create a device but they diverge on what real use it can have and what path they should take with their creation. While two of them slowly shy away from the project, the other two keep experimenting with it and realize the machine has some very intriguing scientific prospects. As they keep going further in the possibilities of their machine, their lives become more and more bizarrely hectic.

Primer is one of the hardest movies to get into, as we are bombarded in a technological world which we don't know anything about. We don't know what the characters are trying to achieve and their discussions are so narrowly scientific that it is impossible to follow for an every day person of my caliber, yet I can feel their emotions, what drives them and I can feel their thirst to explore this device.

Quickly, it becomes all that matters to them and by proxy it becomes all that matters to me. When you start grasping slowly what the device is about you are it with another massive surprise that also requires your brain to adjust to new data. This reaction brings another reaction and basically you are pulled into it while having nothing consistent to grasp your hands on, but you know it has the potential of being really interesting. In all honesty, I think it is the kind of movie that I probably would get a lot more on a second viewing because I would get focus on the little clues here and there instead of trying to gather the whole picture together all the time.

The movie is ultra low budget so there is not much to say about the actual directing; you can tell it's well done but it's not misleading or helping you out, it doesn't hold fancy shots, but it gets you into this world you don't fully understand yet feel compelled to grasp. These are both very good and annoying feelings in a movie: it's good because you realize the actual effort put into the writing and you know there is more than meets the eye, but it is also annoying because you feel like you don't have enough data, or time, to process what is going on a lot of the time.

The acting is restricted to a bare minimum with most of the movie being about the two main characters, Aaron and Abe.

I liked: Really mindbending. Interesting kind of sci-fi.

I disliked: Unsettling and very little data to work with. I probably didn't really get it.

63/100
It's a pretty cool look in a (pseudo) scientific world but it's definitely not an easy ride.

It Happened One Night (1934)

Peter Warne: "What makes you so disgustingly cheerful this morning?"

By Frank Capra
With Clark Gable and Claudette Colbert

As a movie among the IMDB top 250, I have wanted to see It Happened One Night for a while. I never got around to do it and I couldn't say why, a few months ago, I decided to watch it. I didn't however until tonight.

Rich heiress Ellen Andrews is detained on a boat on the coast of Miami by her father. The father doesn't want her to leave the boat because she just married an air pilot that he doesn't like. After negotiations that don't go well between father and daughter, she simply escapes by jumping off the boat. Penniless for the first time, Ellen finds herself in a bizarre situation. Peter Warne, a young journalist, hops on the same bus as Ellen but their journey to New York will be full of obstacles.

The movie really shines in its clever and comical dialogues. The character of Peter Warne is really witty and sarcastic which never fails to contrast with Ellie who tries to act in control of everything while she never had to care about anything. Peter's motivations are unclear and at first it seems he is only driven by the profit he can make off of the situation but we realize that they are both in fact quite lonely characters. Despite their many disagreements it is interesting to notice the chemistry develop.

Through accidents and strange situations we see them get closer and we end up with a full on romantic comedy. The romantic element only grows with the movie and doesn't feel forced down our throat like it often is in movies of the genre. If one reads the IMDb trivia, it is funny to realize how pretty much everyone involved felt like the movie was worthless and that it wouldn't work but it went on to win all the Oscars it was nominated for.

I can't say what the secret ingredient appears to be, it didn't appear to me clearly while watching the movie and I personally didn't feel like watching the best movie I ever witnessed, however, I have to say it was one of the greatest romantic comedies I've seen. The actors clash is maybe what remains the most as we have the clever, sharp looking charmer Clark Gable facing the always seen from her good profile, young and lost Claudette Colbert. Somehow it works and the metaphorical wall of Jericho falls between them. In many aspects, their penniless journey reminded me of any Chaplin movie involving the bum and his struggle to hop from here to there while using as little money as possible. It's a great trick that seems used a lot in old comedies and works still, to this day.

I liked : Clever dialogues, particularly in the first half when they meet and are really wary of each other. Proto-romantic-comedy.

I disliked : The singing scenes were pretty bad. Had its down times, especially with the investigation for Ellie.

81/100
I can't say it has a particularly special ingredient but it works through and through, you will be entertained and probably laugh quite a few times.

Mammoth (2009)

Jackie Vidales: "Did you know that we are made of stardust?"

By Lukas Moodysson
With Gael Garcia Bernal, Michelle Williams and Marife Necesito

I wanted to see Mammoth for a long time, it wasn't directly after I watched Fucking Åmål (1998), but following it I investigated Lukas Moodysson's work and watched Lilja 4-ever (2002) and at that time I decided I should see Mammoth (2009). That almost took me a year though.

Mammoth follows the Vidales family and the people that gravitates around it, from New York to Thailand with ramifications to the Philippines. Ellen Vidales, the mother, is a surgeon in New York, she works the night shift and doesn't spend nearly enough time with her daughter Jackie who is mostly taken care of by Philipino-born nanny Gloria. Gloria has two boys who are taken care of by her own mother back in the Philippines. Leo Vidales, the husband and father, owns a successful video game company and while a backpacker at earth, he is travelling to sign a major contract in Bangkok, Thailand. With separation being both physical and emotional the family will have to hold tight in order to make it through this journey.

The daughter's interest in astronomy might have been a metaphor of the balance in the solar system, their distance and inter-connectivity and the same thing that happens to humans in a family. The proponent of the butterfly effect theory might find this movie to be a perfect example of chaos indirectly unleashed from thousands of miles away.

I really enjoyed to follow the construction and deconstruction of these relationships, through the care and supervision of someone over someone else. Every character here takes care for someone else, yet they do not care as intensely for the person they should be looking over and therefore they feel left with nothing. Leo cares for a young Thai prostitute, Ellen cares for a young boy between life and death at the hospital, Glora cares for Jackie. I liked this dynamism and was really thrilled with how it was going until the movie takes a sudden turn and decides that it's not good to care for strangers and so bad things have to happen to call back the care to a more direct person. This is something that annoyed me, the movie created troubles for all the characters at the same time so they could refocus and have to reconsider their priorities in adversity.

I think it would have been more clever and constructing to have characters deal with this supervision they had and have to balance them instead of having that link broken by accidents and mishaps. Somehow, the message that shines through this choice is that we need adversity in order to see the good things we have.

To a degree, I agree, it is a good message and the movie passes it along brilliantly, however, it would be more enriching to learn to look back. It was a decision that the director (and writer) made which worked, but I think more could have been done. Sadly, Leo had to behave so bad after being so good.

On other notes, I have to say the great selection of songs from Ladytron was amazing and they carried their eerie sound through to the screen perfectly. The acting was good but I can't help notice how Michelle Williams' character was looking exactly like Lilja in Lilja 4-ever, she is the closest you'll find to an American actress to what is on the poster of Lilja 4-ever. I enjoyed the fact that we were both in New York and 2 countries of Asia at the same time, sadly, child prostitution and abuse is once again the name of the game to film in these countries. While dark and gritty, the film takes a fresh look at human relationships.

I liked: Great build up story lines and characters. Great music. Acting.

I disliked : The need to destroy things by force. Some inconsistencies in Leo's behavior.

71/100
The act of caring is scrutinized to dissect the good and bad out of it.\

Virtuosity (1995)

SID 6.7: "You're frightfully inadequate for a deity Darryl."

By Brett Leonard
With Denzel Washington, Russell Crowe and Kelly Lynch

I think this is the kind of film that is quite fun to see 18 years after they came out. Most movies wouldn't age that fast but when a film wants to predicts a technology that will be upcoming or what the world will look like, it usually appears pretty impressing when it comes out but it ages really quick. In fact that's the main reason I decided to see Virtuosity, on addition to its great cast, I wanted to see one of those virtual-reality flick of the 90's.

In a near future, the law enforcement trains policemen to chase after dangerous killers in virtual-reality. Lieutenant Parker Barnes was a police officer but was tricked by a killer who captured his family and ended up killing everyone at the scene after he saw his family dying. Parker Barnes is now in jail but he is one of the best cop in the virtual-reality. Training one day, he catches SID 6.7 but SID 6.7 kills his partner by tricking the program and frying his brain. The virtual serial killer manages to escape the virtual world and starts threatening people in real life, with real consequences. Parker Barnes is offered freedom if he manages to catch SID 6.7, only to discover that SID 6.7 is made of many real life killers profiles, including the one that killed his family.

Although it appears quite polished the movie looks really old, simply because of this virtual-reality that is supposed to look futuristic but looks pretty bad. It is not necessarily something that one should hold against them as it simply was using the techniques at the time. However, the lack of real interesting story and characters development cannot be excused in the same way. Russell Crowe's portrayal of the serial killer is actually the best part of the movie, he is quite exuberant, fit and it's great to see him in the role of the evil guy. Denzel Washington, while being good, is simply cast in what he is famous for, grieved man looking for redemption and battling evil with the good. Even the duo of actors can't really save most of their scenes as their discussions are simply based on taunting each other. The movie is filled with action however and there isn't much space for down times. The plot is overall pretty silly and forgettable.

I liked: No downtime. Pair of actors.

I disliked: Quite bad script and story. No real investigation or serial killer profile. The cyber-virtuality talks just sound bad.

33/100
Watch it to make fun of it, it'll be as good as a bad comedy.

Rang-e khoda / The Color of Paradise (1999)

Mohammad: "They all run away from me because I'm blind. If I could see, I would go to the local school with other children but now I have to go to the school for the blind on the other side of the world."

By Majid Majidi
With Mohsen Ramezani, Hossein Mahjoub and Salameh Feyzi

It must have been around the time that I watched Bacheha-Ye aseman (1997) (Children of Heaven) that I heard about The Color of Paradise but I didn't decide to see it yet, it was only about 2 months ago when I was going through a phase of picking up some Iranian movies that I decided to see The Color of Paradise.

In Tehran, the school for the blind children closes early for the summer and all the parents have come to pick up their child. Mohammad is the only child left and when his father finally shows up, he doesn't go to Mohammad but to talk to the director of the school saying he can't take Mohammad back. The director won't let it happen and Mohammad goes back to the village with his father and is wholeheartedly welcomed by his grandmother and his two sisters. However, the father whose wife died is trying to set up a new marriage with a woman from the village. Mohammad is a burden for him and he doesn't want him around so the family of his potential new wife would accept the wedding. In the mean time, Mohammad is allowed to follow his sister to the local class and impresses everyone by catching up their lesson with his own school book in braille. The father decides to give Mohammad to a local blind carpenter who could take care of him, allowing the father to go ahead and get married.

The Color of Paradise is a moving and emotional movie before anything else. Seeing Mohammad struggle to climb a tree in order to put back a bird back in its nest is really heartbreaking while it metaphors the situation of himself being left out at school with his father nowhere to be seen. There are many scenes like this one, slow and full of meaning in the most simple things of life, like Mohammad reading braille on the rocks at the bottom of a river.

No matter how good these scenes are, a few of them appear to be a little overtly dramatic for no real purpose, the addition of very sappy music and slow motion actually becomes too much. Fortunately, these remain scarce. The relationship between father and son is quite complex but we never know how to feel towards the father whether we hate him for being so cold and trying to put distance from his son or whether we pity him for being so powerless and so indecisively lost.

I think many of the relationships could have been explored further, the grandmother for one, but also the carpenter who genuinely seems to want the best for Mohammad and even though Mohammad might not enjoy the work he would enjoy the company of a skillful and independent blind man, this was cut short by the carpenter's reaction to Mohammad opening up, which made me feel a little hassled. I was moved by the movie but not as much as I was when I was watching Children of Heaven and I think the reason was that in Children of Heaven the children had goals and desires and dreams but in The Color of Paradise it seemed that Mohammad was just moved around against his will and sadly couldn't even buy himself time to enjoy his surroundings, be it his family or birds. It is however a very potent movie against prejudices and a beautiful way to say that even if we're not all born equal, we should respect everyone.

I liked: Moving, touching. Metaphorical. Mohammad's way of discovering everything.

I disliked : Quite sad. Some over the top dramatic effects. The character of the father.

73/100
A moving experience that might leave you perplex or entirely melted.

World War Z (2013)

Andrew Fassbach: "Mother Nature is a serial killer. No one's better, more creative but like all serial killers she can't help the urge to want to get caught."

By Marc Forster
With Brad Pitt, Mireille Enos and Daniella Kertesz

As a huge zombie fan I am always eager to see a new zombie movie, even though I am wary of big budget ones as the best zombie movies tend to be really low budget. Still, I wanted to give it a shot

Gerry Lane retired from his job as a crisis manager for the UN so that he could quietly live with his family. But on a random day, stuck in traffic his family witness what looks like a rabies/zombie attack and they have to fight for their life. Fortunately, the UN appears to need men of his caliber and they come to rescue them with an helicopter into a safe, middle of the ocean naval base. However, the only reason they are allowed to stay is because they want Gerry to work for them and escort a doctor to South Korea where they believe the epidemic started. Gerry first refuses but as they threaten to kick his family out, he has to accept and with it all the danger.

Even though I was excited to see it, I kept my hopes fairly low in order to not be too disappointed. Well, WWZ turned out to be interesting, certainly not original but I didn't get bored. It really felt like they were mixing a few genres or even a few other movies together in order to create a good package. We had the evacuation and saving of the humanity of 2012 (2009), the building escapes and running zombies of 28 Days Later... (2002), the world wide epidemic of Contagion (2011) and of course the scientific labs full of dead of Resident Evil (2002).

Well, that quite sums up the good things in the movie, these themes are all interesting but it felt a little recycled and put together. Ok, I'll admit it, I hate running zombies, zombies should walk with a limp and it annoys me to no end to see them running faster than humans, even more when they actually jump from roofs and create dead human zombie towers to reach heights. I guess this adds for a more fast paced type of action which was clearly the goal here. This and the very happy Hollywoodian ending were my too major reasons to dislike the movie.

I find those running pursuits with shaky camera to be really detrimental to the story lines of any movie but I guess this is how action movies work nowadays. A part from these, personal, quirks the movie is quite enjoyable. The zombies are not really terrifying but some of them look pretty cool. The world tour we embark on is also interesting and the scenes in Korea (which might not be Korea at all) and those in Jerusalem are great and add to the diversity but also the widespread aspect of the pandemic.

The character development is not that important as long as the story continues and it works that way here, we are not attached to anyone's life in particular we just want to see humans and zombies die... or find a vaccine or a cure. The unrated version has some great bashing into skulls for those who actually thought it was a horror movie, it's not really but you at least get some. Overall, it is a great mixture of genres for the largest audience possible.

I liked: zombies! eating people! World tour feel. The amount of zombies. Zombies on a plane. Zombies in Jerusalem.

I disliked: The feel of 2012 with zombies. Shaky camera and very action movie drive. Happy ending.

60/100
It's not for the zombie fans, but it'll content them, as well as the action fans and the adventure fans. Yes, it might sound a little commercial.

Breaking the Girls (2013)

Sara Ryan: "Don't you wish that killing could just be legal?"

By Jamie Babbit
With Agnes Bruckner, Shawn Ashmore and Madeline Zima

I decided to watch Breaking the Girls mostly because it is directed by Jamie Babbit. She was involved in The L Word but I also enjoyed her other movies such as the lesbian cult classic But I'm a Cheerleader (1999), the mysterious The Quiet (2005) or the queer political satire Itty Bitty Titty Committee (2007). On top of that, the writers listed Guinevere Turner who signed one of the best novel adaptation in American Psycho (2000). I was hopeful, even though the rating was pretty low.

Sara is a law school student but works as a waitress at a bar to help with her scholarship. She has a crush on Eric, the son of the professor, but Eric is taken by Brooke. Brooke doesn't like Sara very much and when she sees her stealing tips from the bar she tells the boss and Sara gets fired and sees her scholarship taken away because of it too. Luckily, the same night she meets Alex, a young girl who invites her over and the two fool around. Sara think they should remain friends but Alex has greater plans in mind and might become dangerous when pushed.

The movie was an absolute disappointment and when I thought it couldn't get worse, it actually did. It starts off fairly well, even having some good music (you can't go wrong with Uh Huh Her) but as soon as the "crime" elements come in, everything spins into disaster.

The characters are not believable, the motives are far stretched, it is very inconsistent and everyone seems to have a born talent to plan murders for any profit. They also all happen to have dark background stories which might turn out to be lies, or not, depending on circumstances. Some visually good scenes can't help make this thriller good. The acting also happens to be below average which doesn't help its case. The legal aspects which could have been interesting, after all they are legal students, are all overlooked and we have no idea how one gets released from jail or why someone gets convicted. The proofs are very convenient and the characters when walking into a room with a corpse just love to bend over and grab the murder weapon... just to be sure.

I liked: The music. Under 90 minutes.

I disliked: Everything that had to do with the crime(s) which sadly becomes the main focus after the 25 first minutes.

20/100
Some good scenes and a good song have a hard time saving this big mess of a criminal frame.

The Kite Runner (2007)

Baba (Father): "Take care not to let these things fester. Time will only make it worse."

By Marc Forster
With Khallid Abdalla, Zekeria Ebrahimi and Ahmad Khan Mahmoodzada

I wanted to see The Kite Runner for a long time but it is only when I was seeing the IMDb for World War Z (2013) and realizing the director (who is Swiss, I didn't know that) also made The Kite Runner that I remembered I wanted to see it.

In the 70's in Kabul, Amir and Hassan are best friends. However, their friendship is unusual as Hassan is the son of the house servant while Amir lives with his wealthy father. Hassan and Amir love to fly kites and play a game where one manages to cut someone else's string to let their kite free and win it as a trophy. Amir doesn't stand up enough for himself in his father's eyes but Hassan is always here to defend him, while Amir reads stories to Hassan in return. Being the son of a servant and also belonging to a different ethnicity (Hazara), Hassan is bullied by an older boy. When the bullying gets bad, Amir withdraws his affection from Hassan and soon the soviet occupation happen. Amir and his father escape to Pakistan and then the USA. A few decades later, Amir is now a succesful writer but a phone call from an old friend will have him dig back in memories and places he never missed.

The first part of the movie with the boys in Kabul is really beautifully filmed and I would consider it the strongest part of the film. The story is interesting and full of political and historical context but those come out mostly in the second part. The first part is much more emotional and the friendship of the boys is complex and one's feelings can sometime be hard to decipher, but this might be the case with any young boy in such context.

I found the movie to get a little winded up, pardon the pun, once the father and son moved to America. The return to the homeland is good and contains a good dose of shock value on the political mindset of the early 2000's but it doesn't pair up with the first part in my opinion. The ending is sweet for those who enjoy an emotional ending I think this is how it should have ended. The main issue I have is how everything unfolds in a botched return and escape from Afghanistan.

I liked: Beautiful and touching. Such a different setting.

I disliked: The bullying and the aftermath are annoying. Weaker second part.

74/100
An original movie with a few loose ends but worth watching.

The Clinic (2010)

Cameron: "It's perfectly normal to have strange dreams during pregnancy."

By James Rabbitts
With Tabrett Bethell, Freya Stafford and Andy Whitfield

It was after watching Adore (2012) that I discovered The Clinic through a bit of actors and actresses IMDb stalking. The movie looked interesting with a great premise so I decided to see it.

Beth and Cameron are a young couple that travels through Australia to go visit Beth's mother for Christmas. In the middle of nowhere, a car chases them and they drive off the road. Unscathed but a little shaken up, Cameron decides it is better to spend the night there and they head into a motel with a creepy manager. In the middle of the night, Cameron can't seem to sleep and he decides to go out and seek some food leaving his pregnant wife to be alone at the motel. After experiencing the oh so unfortunate lack of fuel, he comes home and discovers his wife is missing. Police doesn't seem too cooperative, while we see Beth waking up in a bath tub filled with ice... and a big scar where her pregnant belly was.

If you have read the little story line you probably realized that the movie starts with a ton of clichés already. Leaving a wife alone in a creepy motel is probably the fiance's award while the car dying of lack of fuel is oh so sad. If the movie hadn't been placed in the 70's in order to make sure there's no DNA testings available, I'm sure their mobile phones would have lacked reception. However, the movie had great ideas. What goes on in the clinic is original, while not entirely knew as it calls to mind some other movies of the genre, it is great potential and the women trapped there could form a great survival team.

Sadly it doesn't really ever deliver as the mystery is quickly revealed and the story slowly unravels. A few twists at the end can't really save it. The movie is not particularly scary except for a few stitching and unstitching wounds... Also, they manage to make cows look scary which is in itself a decent feat. The story line of the husband was absolutely disappointing. I also wish we knew more about the women present at the "clinic" since these are the characters we had to get to learn and see behave.

I liked: Some good core ideas. Nice settings, these abattoirs were pretty grim.

I disliked: Falls into clichés. Disappointing. Fails to capture the viewer's full attention.

36/100
It tries to cash on the horror of losing a child and the maternal instinct but it fails in many aspects where other movies with the same idea did a lot better.