Category Archives: Film

Have you ever felt or had a little reservation prior to watching a film that is caused by a certain relation or some kind of degree-of-separation about the film you are about to see?

I had one, and to be exact, I had a little reservation prior to watching Ray, simply for the fact that I was a little disappointed seeing another biopic-musical weeks earlier. That unfortunate film in which its musical spirit was unfairly removed is called The Buddy Holly Story, and had it not been for Gary Busey performance, I would surely have discontinued watching that soulless film. However, my worry has diminished the minute flickering flame appears on the big white screen, forming a sillhouette playing against the opening credits of RAY.

And what a soulful journey it was!

As the title itself suggests, Ray shows us the life of the genius legendary late Ray Charles Orbison from his traumatic childhood where he caught glucome at a mere age of 6 years old that left him blind for the rest of his life, to his rise of stardom that forever changed the modern music scene for the past 50 years. Along the way, we are shown with many interesting characters who have shaped the existence of Ray Charles and his music as what we have enjoyed until now. These characters did play and give major contributions in creating many of Ray’s hits, as well as occurences happened during the creation of those songs, allowing us as the audience to be given a privilege of private access in analyzing how his works like “Mary Ann” was made as he fell for his band’s singer and created the song based on her presence, or “Mess Around” was unintentionally created as he threw a tantrum to Margie, his backup singer, that ended up in a long argument over their decision to stay apart from one another personally.

Such an angle of storytelling allows Hackford to play around with his skillful direction in presenting Ray’s story through manners that the late genius himself would approve had he been alive: painfully glorious.
Ray’s achievement had to bear numerous hardship in his life, not merely on his physical disabilities, but also on his mentality going crippled with his drug addiction and womanizing-behaviour. Yet, through his songs, he spoke out his sentimentality and playful feeling at times, a genius who immersed himself fully in his works, and the way Hackford presented this story in condensed 152-minute duration that leaves us with tears, laugh and longing for more of Ray, clearly shows the masterful understanding of the music and the soul of the legend behind the glory.

Enhanced with a majestic performance from Jamie Foxx in the titular role that is destined to be the role of is lifetime, Ray looks amazingly believable, thanks to his uncanny resemblance that just simply blew my mind. Having been hid or put under shadow for a long time, Foxx finally deserved this rich attention, no matter how overwhelming it can be, for he gives a heartfelt resemblance as the genius himself. Not merely enough to be contented with piano skills, the way Foxx does his gestures as Ray has prompted us to really think that he embodies the utmost complete spirit of Ray.

However, one scene-stealer really caught my attention way long after the film ends: Sharon Warren.

A relatively unknown who shines in her acting debut (really!), she wrecks our hearts in playing the role as Aretha Charles, Ray’s beloved, good-hearted mother who determined to make a good living for Ray. She has this advantage for not necessarily sharing any scenes with other more established actresses like Kerry Washington or Regina King, and she does seize that chance by showcasing her unbelievable emotional acting skills that leaves us wanting for more of her. Seems that not enough screen-time for her in the film. When she weeps and bursts out her grievances, we are prompted to symphatize with her.

Ray Charles Orbison would surely be smiling widely from up above, looking down proudly of this film.
Salute!

Glossy! Glitzy!

Those are two words that kept popping inside my head upon walking out of the theatre where I watched this tale of Howard Hughes, one of the greatest, or perhaps the most eccentric men who marked his presence in film industry and aviation field like no other tycoons have ever done. As loaded with larger-than-life images and stories, somehow the plane that I boarded in this film never really took off.

In his latest ambitious effort to capture Best Director prize in Academy Awards, Martin Scorsese tried to put his hand in making another biopic this time, in a scope of epic scale that he has recently indulged himself in to, with the likes of Gangs of New York or recalling a decade earlier, The Age of Innocence. THE AVIATOR focuses on the time span of early to mid 20th century, the time when Howard Hughes name would guarantee admirations and smirks at the same note, just as eccentric as his behavior can be, the name itself similar to the word controversy spelt all around his presence. From a movie-mogul to planes-obsessed person, from Katharine Hepburn to Ava Gardner to numerous starlets, Howards Hughes’ story is the story Hollywood filmmakers are dying to have, as rich as films that Hughes himself might direct or produce.

Yet, as any epics that look splendid on the surface, so does the film.

Scorsese painstakingly put an extra effort in recreating certain looks that he wanted to achieve by using different degrees of color associated to the ‘film-look’ of the era in which any particular part of the story took place, gradually emerged into a more natural look towards the end of the film. Such a pleasant viewing for the eyes, and apparently those external elements of tuneful music, exhilarating set designs and costume design did not help elevating this film to a higher level where I don’t need to wander my mind away for almost three-hour duration.

Which would lead us thinking: what is wrong with the story?

As the film itself was meant to be a tribute to celebrate Hughes remarkable achievement in his peak period of time, which is why the timeline would only stretch from mid 1920s to 1950s, the story seems to be drifting apart in between glorifying his fame to retelling his private live which differ in a great contrast from one another. Certainly John Logan had to bear a difficult task in merging these two, not to mention that the script itself has been tossed around for years in development, suspiciously resulting in catharsis of mediating between the two, leaving different stories stand on their own.

The only thing that is able to keep me glued to my seat is the eclectic performance delivered by Cate Blanchett in her perfect-pitched impersonation as Katharine Hepburn. Not merely mimicking her accent or gesture, Blanchett went to the extent that she imbued the Hepburn persona within herself, so much so that while we could still see Blanchett on the screen without any exaggerated prosthetic makeup, we are taken to the state of believability that the soul of Hepburn was present in the film, thanks to Blanchett decision to play her character from within, and Hepburn’s over-the-top gestures were convincingly and vividly portrayed as if Blanchett has forever donned this role to her own character for a long time.

However, the same cannot be said to Leonardo DiCaprio who tries too hard to capture the eccentricity of Hughes by risking himself to certain unnecessary acts, only show to us that DiCaprio himself has not been able to shake off his own image as a dashing young actor in delivering the role. Looking at him in the big screen, one may not help wondering if Hughes did really raise his eyebrows all the time, or how unconvincing it is to see him alongside the grand presence of Blanchett as Hepburn. It does not help either when he bared himself on the screen to show Hughes’s near-madness mental situation, or his smirk face shown when he got obsessed with cleanliness to the extreme. Call it a curse of his handsome feature, yet DiCaprio fails to bring out Hughes’s eccentricity to convincing performance.

Whereas many people praise this film as the most accessible Scorsese film which he made this as a ‘less-personal’ work, on the other hand I find that decision is regretted as the whole film itself is buried under the applaudable gorgeous presentation. Surely, with all the rising hype and the buzz of the film being one of the best, I could only scratch my head and whispering to myself: One of the most over-rated films ever.

Like a fight, teardrops do fall, blood does burst out, sweat does drop, people do yell, shout and clap. Yet, like a fight, concentration is needed to win. Focusing on your inner strength would help you soar. And there is this huge amount of intensed feeling one can not escape.

MILLION DOLLAR BABY kicks around a classical rags-to-riches fairy tale of one’s determination towards her passion to do what she likes to do, and indeed, prevails to success and stardom. The object of this story centers on Maggie Fitzgerald, a forever-being-waitress woman at her mid-30s who long for a break out of her horrenduous life and found her oasis in boxing. When she sneaks herself in a boxing gym owned by Frankie Dunn, a retired athlete himself, and taken care of by his faithful friend, Eddie Scrap, she is merely being seen as a girl trying to do the impossible. Yet, her persistence wins over Frankie’s ego to train her and launch her professional career into a sensational and phenomenal boxer. However, one occurence would change both their lives in an unexpected way.

You don’t want me to reveal the big surprise, do you?

Then keep yourself seated well and just bear the first 30 minute or so if you find the scenes are a bit lengthy to concentrate on, for the real story begins to build up afterwards, with painfully real fighting scenes shown throughout. However, the power of this film lies mostly on the intensity built between the characters and the settings they are in.

And this is what Clint Eastwood has always done his best: intensity.
Intensed performances from his actors in portraying emotional conflicts within their characters, as captured vividly throughout his films, ranging from bravura performance of Forest Whitaker in Bird, to all-human like character of Gene Hackman in Unforgiven, to sensitivity portrayed by Meryl Streep in The Bridges of Madison County, to brooding Sean Penn does his career best in Mystic River, and the baby herself Hilary Swank who throws herself into complexity portraying the progress of an all woman from desperation to over-joyedness and plunge into falldown all over again. Swank does a justice to this series of great performances of actors in Eastwood’s films and obediently obeying the rules subconsciously set here: no over-the-top dramatic acting style needed, and the intensity of performances needs not be following a certain infamous ‘method’ either. As Maggie, who shifts dramatically from a mere waitress to a boxing star, Swank smoothly plays the character in her own way that eventhough we may not be able to see her immensely becoming Maggie Fitzgerald, unlike the way she magically did with her Brandon Teena in Boys Don’t Cry, we are unable to resist the feeling of being moved and admire this hard-willed character who does not stop fighting until the end of the story. Note how I choose not to use the word ‘symphatize’ here to describe our emotive feeling towards the central character here, as Eastwood aptly decides to portray Maggie in a plain-Jane manner, we can still see her flaws, her naivety and innocence which all make her simply human.

Second intensity that Eastwood excels in doing is, obviously, the intensed story of the film itself, that allows a certain decisive manner in how he wishes to present his film to be, and within the intensity of the story, we are able to see characters’ development that is very focused to suit the whole atmosphere of the film. Most of the times, we are taken into stillness of statutory presence of Freeman and Eastwood who command the scenes whenever they are in, and in the quietness, they deliver the subtext lines that serve well in drawing our attention deeper to the story.
In addition, haunting scores done by Eastwood himself in the tradition of similar simplistic music concept he did earlier in Madison County and Mystic River, gives an enhancement of moody atmosphere suited well to the whole context of this film.

As such, Eastwood prove himself to be alive and kicking hard by delivering this powerful film that punches hard in silence. Among the crowds of brainless, sound/visual effects-maddening trash, Million slips quietly and win over our hearts for its sincerity, plainness frank of storytelling that seems to be a rarity these days.

Those expecting over-melodramatic violence of wars, riots, unrests and alike, kindly be disappointed, for what you’re about to see is an honest and plainly real retelling of an overlook horrible act of human inadequacy from one man’s point of view. Nothing more, nothing less, just about the right proportion.

HOTEL RWANDA centers around Rwanda’s infamous genocide breakout as seen by Paul Rusesabagina, a hotelier who lives his life as the way a man of his age acts: happily settled himself surrounded by loving kids and faithful wife, Tatiana; superbly manages his business by shamelessly admitting the acts of corruption as the key to his survival, which has led him to ignorance of his surroundings.
Not until the gradual tension of the war slowly starts rubbing his attention and changes him from a material-minded businessman to be an unconditional hero who determinedly saves the people from succumbing themselves deeper to those unfortunate conditions.

Your curiosity may focus on the fact whether such a theme that could easily be the source of inspiration from any cheesy made-for-TV flicks is, in fact, cliché. Thanks to Terry George who aptly decided to put the spotlight of the whole hype inside the hotel so as to make an objective point of view towards such a sensitive issue like this, what we get to see is one of the most profoundly humane war stories that ever made to the screen.

By being humane means that George allows the audience to see clearly the progress in the characters’ lives, how Paul and Tatiana are presented as regular folks who, along with their fellow countrymen, never expect such an occurrence would come to their established life, how Paul as a family man would be exhausting himself from head to toe saving his family by doing what he knows best, bribing, stealing and making the best use of any chance he’s got, yet such so-called indecency act is naturally justifiable and accepted at confusing times like that. After all, George would never let any scenes of his wonderfully conceptualized film here fall flat to become mere linking images from one scene to another as each and every frame of story here would complete one another to form a continuous storyline that, simply, move the audience to tears.

For that effect, Don Cheadle carries the major task on his shoulder, and gladly I say that he succeeds doing so. Not necessarily imitating the titular role who is still healthily alive and kicking, and in fact was the consultant of this film, Cheadle adapts the role by interpreting the character on his own and embodies his psychological behavior very well to the extent that we are convinced to see the painful expression on several emotional scenes meant to wrench your heart. His adopted African accent is impeccable, and the chemistry that he made with Sophie Okonedo is painfully real, enchanting us even to the slightest during their brief romance scene that provides a sense of relief throughout the film.
Okonedo herself puts a certain air of bravery in her womanly role, a role of a housewife that has to provide comfort to her children, her husband and herself. Such a role that seems to be destined as object of condemnation in most films proves to be a meaty one, thanks to her believable acting that slips along the scenes well without necessarily stealing the spotlight from Cheadle.

A one feel-good drama that will leave you feeling fulfilled without shedding unnecessary tears. You will be moved, you will shout in triumphant full of joy.

BEING JULIA sparks the reminiscence of glorious old Hollywood days when larger-than-life characters often portrayed on the screen and be given serious considerations by putting them into, simply, good films. As the time progressed up to date where reality-look-alike has become increasingly boring, we turn ourselves to even greater contrast in those visual-effects driven films, and once in a while, a small film like Being Julia here is released to remind us how acting, a good one, defines the quality of a film in general and to the extent of lifting up the film from its fluffiness.

Take a look of the story. The aging diva Julia Lambert (Annette Bening in her performance of a lifetime) is at the brink of her downfall popularity, not even her husband who is also the theatre manager in which they formed together (played by Jeremy Irons who seems not being able to capture comic timings) could help her finding some excitement to satisfy her own self. Not until she encountered a dashing young American (Shaun Evans) when she embarked on an illicit affair, without her acknowledgement that she was being manipulated by him for his own agenda, i.e. providing a stepping stone for his girlfriend, a new starlet Avice Crichton (Lucy Punch). Or did she really not know?

Once she got to know the games played behind her back, then the real fun of the film begins.

The storyline may recall the similarity found in All About Eve, with a hint of playfulness a la Sunset Boulevard, and who can resist the combination of both? At times funny, nail-biting sharp bantering lines continues to march throughout the film, over-the-top gestures that provide comic elements, they are wrapped harmoniously under the direction of Istvan Szabo who certainly having a good time making this film. It may not be his best as that one is reserved for his glorious Sunshine, but to see the good elements of one enjoyable film are put nicely in such a watchable presentation that never falls out of the sync is an applaudable effort, isn’t it?

Moreover so with a grand presence of Annette Bening in the house.

In the tradition of films (seem to be) catered, crafted, designed and made to one particular actress playing the designated role of their careers, such as how All About Eve means Bette Davis, Sunset Boulevard refers to Gloria Swanson, Sophie’s Choice belongs to Meryl Streep, or recent examples would give Salma Hayek is destined to play Frida, so is Annette Bening who goes further in merely playing as Julia. Seeing this film from the very first minute to the end, we will be seeing Bening embodies and steps into her character so well that we begin to forget the presence of a certain often under-appreciated actress playing the role of her lifetime. Every lines shown in her face belong to Julia’s, so do the mimics, the gestures, the grandeur movements of hers that beyond the word believable. In other words that may seem to be overtly used for some meaningless promotional advertisements of bad films, yet you can rely on me this time, I proudly state that Annette Bening is Being Julia.

What a sweet revenge it is if she wins at the Academy Awards this time, for it means a tribute and a win to Davis, Swanson, and other grand actresses who never won playing roles they know better than anyone else: a diva.

At times, I have to close my eyes, block my ears, to avoid listening to words the characters say, for they are simply too painful to hear. Not that they are bad, but they are meant to evoke your utmost sense in dealing with lies, deception, and betrayal.

CLOSER presents a close look on how one has to deal with complexity in not just a relationship or two, or not even countable as those relationships are intertwined and tangled dizzyingly to one another. Take a look.

Meet Alice, a free-spirited American girl trying a piece of her life in London who, on one clear day, stumbles upon Dan, a struggling novelist who ends up being an obituary writer, who will be falling in love with Anna, a successful photographer at the height of her career, who will be taken by the charm of Larry, a doctor with typical male-chauvinist pig character inside of him, who will be longing for Alice’s presence at times when his life starts crumbling down.

Confused? We only reach the start. The core is much more interesting to see.

Once we peek at their domestic lives, we know that we can expect something different, unlike any other films dealing with similar theme before, for this time around, Mike Nichols has returned to his roots in theatrical/stage-y manner of presenting human interpersonal matters in a frank manner that to some extent shifts towards being blatant, blunt, and brutal, in the tradition of his own Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? or Carnal Knowledge, or Wit, or even Angels in America without any advanced visual effects. The shocking effects we can expect are Patrick Marber’s intimidating and manipulative words from his own play. The words are not merely written for the sake of having scenes that flow smoothly from one scene to another, but they are created thoughtfully and crafted through the ways they are uttered convincingly so much so that we will be leaving with questions whether those words are literally real, true or even deceiving?

Or do we begin to choose to accept the reality as the way we want to perceive it as is?

The way this film is presented without any clear conscience on timeframe actually enables us as the audience to choose the angle we wish to see and interpret the story, be it seen as a harsh, funny, witty or even dramatic rendition of human relationships, in any form. And the tendency to confront ourselves with words instead of action does actually happen in our lives, as we think that we can hide under the comfort zone of manipulations and lies, yet these two will actually trap us down deeper to the holes of continuous, endless fakes of reality.

Such a heavyweight theme, don’t you think? Yet, the way these sexual matters are told instead of meaninglessly shown would not giving you hard times or painful sitting through throughout the entire duration, and I can’t help questioning whether this is Nichol’s reason on the choice of the cast. Let’s see.

Julia Roberts in her furthest departure from usual roles she has played so far, provides a certain confidence in her uptight character of Anna, yet being bombarded with the regretful fact that the role was meant to be played by the always-reliable Cate Blanchett has hindered me from giving an objective view of Julia’s turnout here. I rest my case here. All I can come up with is how I do enjoy seeing Julia here, although the execution can be triggered to a higher level.

The same case happens to Jude Law, somehow is still unable to shake-off his own persona in playing the role of Dan that actually require the actor to bear his skin through his gentleness and sweet, tender gestures suggesting playful characters. Yet, Law only manages to barely reach the surface of the character as we can still see Law carrying himself here, somehow it’s hard for me to differentiate his Dan and his Alfie in another film of the same name.

That leaves us with two actors who, surprisingly, manage to hold their own screen presence in this film strongly and superbly: Clive Owen and Natalie Portman.

Playing a tart with deceiving heart that longing for truthfulness in other human beings she encounters in her life, Portman injects a strong dose of child-like feminine characterization to her Alice, suggesting that she can be fragile yet approachable at the same time; her journey in finding herself being loved faithfully by men surrounding her would mean sacrifice that she has to endure and that makes her strong, manipulative and decisive.

Clearly this is the most mature role Portman has ever played to date, and seeing her carrying her role with vivid understanding of a woman being victimized by her surroundings leave me feeling thrilled, as every minute of her screen time would be filled with surprises clearly shown in her facial expression, and it really is hard to believe that it’s been a decade since she made an outburst entrance in Leon The Professional.

Finally, if one has to single out one performance that stands out and apart from the rest, the noble honor belongs to Clive Owen, at last playing a role that deserves our attention and suitably match his charisma, his charm and his towering presence as a character actor. We can’t help seeing his character, Larry, here as a beast and as I wrote earlier, a typical male-chauvinist pig, and we get to the part of dismissing this character further as Owen plays the character in a menacing way, plainly honest in revealing his own truest fear and insecurity over his holdups. The rising of sensitive, new age guy has been clearly defied by Owen who gives macho-ism in his character here, and being Larry enables Owen to showcase his amazing range of acting skills that would be enviable to character-actors wannabe out there. Studious character that is played without being over-acted, Larry belongs to that rarity of characters who can be both loved and loathed at the same time, and Owen does his Larry convincingly that we begin to wonder on how this man, this particular character has been living around us all this time.

Being a human being with all the failures, the risings and the longing for boredom and steadiness in relationships, I can’t help myself reeling over this film. Never before sex, lies, truth and deceits are given an intellectual treatment with smart and witty lines peppered here and there, capturing not only your eyes but also your mind, captivating your senses to begin questioning:

What is truth?

CLOSER is all about the most sexually and sensually brutal film ever.

Finding Neverland tells the story of how Peter Pan was made. Or sort of.



It revolves around the life of J.M. Barrie at his utmost lack of creativity when everything he creates seems dull or being blasted out by both critics and audience. His marriage does not even help to inspire him, until one day when performs his ‘ritual’, i.e. walking his dog to a park, he stumbles into a woman and her four children who are not like any other uptight families of early 20th century in London, they freely express themselves despite the ailing health of the mother. Yet, the adventure that Barrie and this family share together prove to be an oasis in the desert for Barrie, so much so that he decides to create the magical works of Peter Pan, and his own relieving presence in the family gradually ascends into being a father-like figure of those four children.

What a straight-forward narrative drama, you may think. A typical family drama that only suits for lazy Sunday watching pleasure of made-for-television movie, you may presume.

Whereas this movie may fall deeply to the stated categories above, the fact that it soars high above any other currently released film prove that to make a good-feel film, it takes putting a lot of efforts in how much you rely yourself on the story and how much you inject your own emotional thoughts and beliefs to the whole process of filmmaking. As making comparison should not be allowed in reviewing a work of creative process, I can’t help scratching my head to notice that this beautiful piece of imaginative tale told in imaginary narrative is made under the direction of one man responsible for the grim and bleak of Monster’s Ball, i.e. Marc Forster himself.

Unlike Wes Craven that once gone too far outselling his soul when he made Music of the Heart, this time Marc succeeds in dwelling himself as a man with a lot of pure hearts and innocent views on the magical world of fairy tale, so much so the extent that the whimsical theme in this film can be smoothly translated into visually breathtaking images that at times can be both real and dreamy.

You will agree with the statement above once you get to the scene when Kate Winslet’s character at her worst health-condition is taken to her small garden that transcends into a journey of her lifetime. Or just wait until the very last scene when all you can think of is the gradual process of questioning your own eyes: What was it that I just saw for the past 100 minutes or so? Is this a true story? Is this a true fairy tale?

Who knows? I don’t and I doubt you will do. How can we spare a time to think of that when you are fully transported to a dreamland like this? Where you can indulge your senses to Jan A.P. Kaczmarek’s beautifully composed score that marks one of the rare cinematic moments in which music scores do enhance and heightened emotional values in watching a film. Where Johnny Depp gives an understated performance as JM Barrie that, despite being overtly praised recently, is a fine example of acting skills resulted from psychological approach that instead of merely being the character, Depp chose to be interpreting the character in the most logical sense suitable to the story. Thoughtful without necessarily falling into pretentious seriousness, seeing Depp as Barrie gives a sense of approachability value that audience can directly relate themselves to him.

Yet, in terms of acting-class performance, I would give my high credits to Kate Winslet, Freddie Highmore and Julie Christie. Reliable in making her characters she played on the screens distinctive enough to stand apart from the rest of the cast, this time Winslet is given a role of Sofia, a mother-of-four who holds up on her own, a character that may seem to be destined as an embedded supporting character, yet Winslet injects a strong dose of wits and confidence that makes Sofia a strong one and essential enough in determining the plotline, as her character slowly embodies the whole mood of the story. In the same understated kind of performance as what Depp gives to the film, so is Winslet’s turn with more subdued execution due to the nature of the character’s own destiny.

Whoever is Freddie Highmore? I can’t give you any satisfying answer as IMDB or whatever movie resource would provide you with one, yet what I can say about this boy wizard is that he does not only steal the scenes wherever he is in, but he completely hijacks them with his bravura performance as Peter, the rebellious among Winslet’s boys here, in such an applaudable turn that we would not be able to catch a glimpse of fact that he has to stand on his own along heavyweights like Depp, Winslet and of course, the evergreen beauty of Julie Christie.

Christie, who deals with her past-stardom era by making turns in numerous smaller roles, again proves us that she is way beyond the word ‘capable’ in giving a certain height and credibility to whatever roles assigned to her. As a mother of Sofia who never approves and gives a chance for Sofia to live on her own, the role of this kind may be played with nothing but merely smirk or usual highbrows, but this time, Christie imbues a certain determination that in the end, we sympathize with her character instead of dishing out hers.

Watching Finding Neverland is indeed finding our own self in the world of bewilderment and fantasy because if you believe in awaking your childhood sense, you will say: I do! I do!

Let’s get it straight and done!

The year 2004 was filled with film-watching experience like no other years have ever been.

The year marked my first entry to the real world of working life, of desk-bound stressful overworked and underpaid job, which most of the times left me feeling exhausted with a little energy inside to concentrate or even just a pay a little particular attention to the films I watched.



In brief, you can’t be more right, my dear readers … I often found myself sleeping and snoozing inside the cinemas! Especially during the first few minutes, especially when the films start at 7 pm which means that I need to rush down from my work that ends at 5.30 or 6 pm or even 6.30 pm at times, by the time I was rushed into the theatre, I’ve got to take a little time to catch my breath while staring at the big screen, starting to wonder if I have missed some crucial parts.

Familiar with the scene above? Welcome to the club then.

Alas, film-going experience has evolved to become an inseparable part of our enrichment in lives. Be it for social gatherings with friends, acquintances, lovers or haters in indulging over pop-corn flicks, or providing the food for thought in watching arts-y flicks during the festivals, previews, premieres, or special screenings, the feeling of being put inside a darkened room for two or three hours of your day and watching a presentation of certain human beings’ lives as seen by a certain set of eyes has always been stamped in our habitual routine that not even temptation of pirated DVDs can ever replace.

As the years go by, so does the memory of certain films.

Certain unforgettable films.

Whereas for the list of films presented below in different categories, they have shown certain distinctiveness to be qualified as films worth revisiting, or simply remembering. These films stand out from the rest of mass products unavoidable in the treatment of films as industry, and these films prove that believing in what you create in filmmaking process shall prevail and be reflected on the big screen.

You may find disagreement here and there as I have anticipated, after all, one shall not be controlled by other people’s opinion towards a certain work of arts. The beauty of film-going experience as a communal activity is that it detaches completely from forcing one degree of perception. In fact, when you sit comfortably in those plushy seats, begins your 2-3 hours adventure of your own, starring and directed by your own thoughts, the whirlwind may be loathed, or loved.

These are my journeys.

In alphabetical order,

PAR EXCELLENTE! category:

1. 2046 (HONG KONG)



The film that has tested the cinephiles and audiences’ patience is surely worth a wait.

The latest Wong-Kar Wai’s egoistical indulgence in film-making is presented in such a grandeur style where every single scene screams for ‘arts’ and having Christopher Doyle at the helm of cinematography has never been any better.

Captivating images that speak for themselves, combined with some soul-filling scores peppered throughout that strongly injects some indelible presence (now whenever I hear Connie Francis’ “Sibonay”, all I can think of is seeing Zhang Ziyi appearing for the for first time in the film) makes you hooked throughout despite its absurdity which only exist eternally in your mind.

Surely being a fan of his previous works himself, this is the time for WKW to head an ensemble of cast other director can only dream of.

Yet, I will single out Zhang Ziyi for surprisingly carries her role in such a slicky way that will simply makes you bewildered and longing for more of her. The confidence in her performance prevails above other actors, not even Tony Leung in his most brooding role ever, or Faye Wong in her understated presence, or Gong Li in her scene-stealing role.

The picture perfect of how stylish filmmaking needs not to be over-the-top, and manages to sexily subtle its morality.

2. ARISAN! (INDONESIA)

Oooohhh! If you follow this blog religiously, you may remember how I trashed this film in my posting about Festival Film Indonesia (FFI).

I did though, I admit that. Yet, since I only blasted the performances from some of the actors here, I can’t help giving this film a high credit, for stating out loud the supposedly-taboo or potential controversies that can be smartly avoided by playfully toying along some light touches without necessarily degrading the initial intention to … show-off!

In a sweet manner, indeed. The urban theme appearing on the screen is presented in such a way of terrifyingly real, yet, its gorgeouseye-candy appealing proves to be a treat for the eyes. Yet, the strongest point of the film lies on the chemistry of Nia DiNata and Joko Anwar. Unpretentious, dreamy, blatantly honest without necessarily degrading, Joko’s script managed to balancewittiness and harsh reality some people see towards gay and hedonism issue, and he tackled this potentiallyflickering problem by taking observer’s side who could give objective point of view and not being judgmental. With such a blessed script like that, it’s up to Nia then to give a certain direction, and the path she chosecouldn’t be more tuneful. After making me scratching my head and feeling puzzled upon watching Ca Bau Kan and its misled drive towards80s melodrama, we can sense Nia was indulging herself in her free-est way of freedom, exploring her sensitivityin seeing her society and translate her views to the camera as if she has been with us throughout all this time. An outsider with a high degree of curiosity who peeks into a circle that goes wider, she represents most membersof society in general.

An Indonesian film that will surely leave its mark in the history.

Oh, one more thing.

Arisan stands out as one of the most surprising film-going experiences I’ve ever had. And to that, I salute Cut Mini Teo.

Never be a household name in the recent hype of celebrity-obsessed entertainment world nor in sinetron, she delivered a superb performance to the extent that by the first time she appears wearing a loose red T-shirt, trying to seduce her husband, we know well that she has stepped into the skin of her character, Mei Mei, comfortably, that we couldn’t even think of any other actress perfectly fit into the role other than her. On why she was missed out in FFI nomination is definitely beyond my comprehension, as to my humble opinion that Tora Sudiro and Surya Sahputra should not be cast on the first place.

3. BEFORE SUNSET

Two long-lost lovebirds found each other again after their one-nite encounter over a night-ride on a train.

They talk.

And that’s what this film is all about.

The talk of two connected souls that have been cruelly separated by the arrogance of the world and its never-ending demands to bend down to manifactured rules, conceptions, or anything that fits the narrow-mindedness of “this-is-how-you-should-live-your-life” frame. Yet, there will always be a moment of bliss in such a hectic life, in one romantic afternoon among the streets of Paris, where they stand as the silent witness of how two emotionally-attached lovers need not be politically correct in speaking out their minds, where the sky is the only limit of all conversation topics in the world one can think of, where finally, confronting the truth resulted from the longingness of quenching heart’s contented thirst is the greatest adventure one human being has to endure and to be tested.

(aduh maap, gue jadi terharu pas nulis semua itu)

Once again, Richard Linklater has done and shown how psychological, philosopical screenplay needs not be rising our eyebrows to indulge on it, in fact, isn’t love in life itself is full of lyrical words?

With such powerful script crammed with emotional lines, it is only up to the actors to carry them, and Julie Delpy, my personal preference for the upcoming Best Actress nomination race in Academy Awards, magnifies the screen with her fragile presence which simply make us longing for her words, and never once to get bored with them.

Ethan Hawke, in a supporting performance seemingly intended to boost up Delpy’s, may not be giving a heartfelt performance he once did in Training Day, yet his relaxed, easy manner reflecting him playing as himself here does add essential relief to already-refreshing atmosphere.

A film to remember, indeed.

4. ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND

Have you ever been in love?

Then you know what it’s like to be in this movie. Literally.

Ask ourselves, how glad it is to be in love, at the initial stage. As the love itself progresses, you lure yourself to the web of entangled senses and illogical thoughts. Yet, at the end of it, you can only bear the pain so hurtful that you may decide to end your logic’s life.

Yes, we are all way too familiar with the story. But you may not be prepared to see this film, no matter how often you fall in and out of love.

For the first time, Charlie Kaufman’s mindful script gets a jaw-dropping visual shock that Spike Jonze himself never attempts to breach in Being John Malkovich or Adaptation.. Michael Godry, in his feature-film directorial debut, shockingly chose to go deeper by exploring what goes inside that tiny brain of Jim Carrey’s character when he goes through a painful breakup from his girlfriend, Clementine, played wonderfully by Kate Winslet who donned many inspirations of hair colors.

What we see mirrors what we actually think when we leave the door of a certain relationship, numerous memories filled the particles of brain, sometimes they are interconnected to one another, marking a difficult and unidentifiable pattern to trace. Thus, you can imagine how more complex it can be when you need to erase the memory of your past relationshipt that goes awry, and here’s what Godry excels at. The picturization of the brain itself is shown to see a collection of memories, they can be painful to remember or simply great to indulge in. The more you walk through the path of your brain, the more you realize that at the end of the day, the good memory prevails. The loving memory of how we begin the relationship, when the world is all ours in the hands of giggling lovers full of promises they speak to themselves.

The film is about revelation, that despite hatred, a relationship is built on love itself.

I shamelessly proclaim that I shed many tears upon walking out of the cinema after the film ends.

5. FACING WINDOWS (ITALY)



The first film in 2004 that I took a chance to do repeated viewings, all with paid tickets.

Imagine a world stands before you, a world of routine and normality where you are a mere humble, passive player getting stuck on them.

You’ll never know what a stranger may bring upon you.

An encounter on the busy streets of Rome in a daylight may cause your life a lifetime change at its own stake.

That’s what happens as we go along the life of Giovanna, a woman who has to sacrifice her 20s to be a breadwinner of the family, thanks to the love she bears with her down-with-luck husband, no matter that he has tremendous amount of unconditional love to her. When they stumbled upon an amnesiac, lonely old man who can’t seem to recall his whereabout, they discover that throughout the entire process of helping him finding out his existence, they do in fact helping their own existences that seem to crumble. Especially Giovanna’s.

From the hidden desire she has carefully kept from her dashing, charming neighbor to the revelation of past forbidden love, every characters in this film are connected by one boundary: unrequited love ahead of its time.

The tangibility of two-dimensional presences may be gone long enough, yet the memories of them all will forever linger on the minds and thoughts.

That is why, you will be forever put under the spell of the very last scene in this film where Giovanna’s set of sightings haunt and long for that memory.





6. IN AMERICA



At times lyrical, at times sentimental, most times autobiographical, and this time, Jim Sheridan has proved that his sensitivity is the greatest force of all.

Based on his own life experience of coming to America for the first time to try his luck, the film revolves around a family consists of a struggling actor (Paddy Considine who at both times shed and enhanced his unusual charisma), a faithful wife who goes the distance to save the mental of the family (always-underappreciated Samantha Morton in her less showy role), and their guardian angels (impossibly cute Sarah & Emma Bolger), all are bound in the longingness of stability, security and a little glimpse of hope from the toughness of New York.

Downluck after downluck, they stumbled upon one of their neighbours who happen to suffer from AIDS (played convincingly by Djimon Hounsou), and chose to live reclusively in his apartment, making him feared by his surroundings, except for that two angels who brought a bright shining light of life, and eventually brought the family itself up, although it does not necessarily mean complete …

In the tradition of recently released Nobody Knows, or Sheridan’s own My Left Foot, an inspirational drama needs not be cheesy, weepy, or worse, melodramatic.

When it comes to autobiographical picture, despite the subjective point of view the director wishes to hold, it is still considered the best to let the the occurences flow naturally,expressions caught on camera may be the sincerest acting showcases that suit well to a film of this nature.

Moving, inspiring and exhilarating as well, In America enhances my thirst for matured family drama like this.

Which turns out to be surpassed by a surprising entry from one bizarre family called …

7. THE INCREDIBLES

By any means, I challenge Pixar will be able to come up with something better and more magnificent than this.

This is it, the ultimate, the grandest, the one that defies all the common (mis)conception rules of how a good animation film should be.

C’mon, the first to get PG-13 rating, and ain’t that something?

The first Disney film that highly regards the presence of a mother as a strong-billed, decisive woman instead of a mere home-maker that will only get killed haplessly (yes folks, I’m talking about that Bambi!). Instead, Brad Bird places the role of Helen in such a vital position that it’s hard to detach her from the whole structure of the film.

Equipped with a strong sense of womanhood heard from the voice of Holly Hunter, Helen Parr, the Elastigirl would be forever noted down to history of Disney as the singular rarity of mother-character in Disney flicks, which not just tend but ALWAYS overlook this fact.

The fact that would impossibly be substituted even with the presence of such a sidekick character, a la … Edna Mode!

I wholeheartedly applaud the extra-ordinary ability of Brad Bird in coming up with a scene stealer who provide continuous hilarious laughter, and speaking of that accent, what is that? One linguist may scratch his bald head to come up with a scientific answer for this, as well as the original thought of superhero-costume-design!

No childish soundtrack, instead Brad opts for classy, jazzy swing.

No creepy talking inanimate object, instead human beings are presented at their most humane.

No sequel? We’ll see. 😉

8. KILL BILL VOL. 2

I happen to be surrounded by people who prefer the first installment. I understand why.

The first episode glares our eyes with shocking visual treatment which at times, resemble most to Japanese manga and anime, which surely will keep us captivated by those strong images. Whereas for the second installment, Quentin Tarantino departed greatly to what has been his cup of tea: punchlines, dead-panned dialogue, and this time, he enhanced them with a slick tribute to Italian western, and, old Chop-suay kungfu genre! No other director has been bold enough in making an attempt to this.

The result?

A defining contribution to the culture of pop cinema, again. Picking up what’s left on Kill Bill Vol. 1, Uma Thurman in her signature role as The Bride has finally completed her revenge. But as the saying goes, “It’s not the destination, but it’s the journey”, so does the film that revel in the process and the journey the character has to undergo before she reaches her ultimate destiny: to kill Bill, as simple as that.



Well, simple may be too simple to mention, for the entire film is wholly dedicated on bizarre elements of filmmaking peppered with surprising punchlines and banterings that at times look or sound silly and fake, as it is intended to be by Tarantino himself. The maniacal hysteria of Daryl Hannah or the brooding boredom of Michael Madsen, and the suavetowering figure of David Carradine whose character hints at fragility of a human being getting brokenhearted, they all help defining the characterization of the Bride as one helluva woman with a soft touch of delicateness, and who could be more perfect in portraying the character than Uma Thurman? The way she carries the sword, the way she stares at you, driving breezily in an open air, or the way she carresses her daughter, we see Uma not merely playing the Bride, she embodies the Bride.

In the response to the lack of strong woman character who can carry the film by herself, with a magic touch of lower-grade pop culture that has an art of its own, Kill Bill vol. 2 is one single contribution that deserves ahigh regard.

9. THE RETURN (RUSSIA)

How many times have we heard ‘growing up is hard to go through’?

How about ‘growing up is mentally challenging’?

Because it is the entry to one’s manhood?

One may call this film the most psychologically brutal film on puberty and on reaching the rite passage of adulthoodin a certain young boy’s life.

I am not sure whether I would be completely in agreement with that statement, for what follows may be strongly resembling that fact, yet what goes deeper between the characters, among the still images and wordless scenes, are more thought-provoking to explore. The smirks, the smiles, the coldness of Russian people as has been stereotyped for decades, have enhanced the calm, haunting look of the film.

The story itself revolves around a widow and her two sons at their teen years, suddenly have to face their father, the man they only know from a single photograph and he has been away from the family for 12 years. On that summer, the holiday trip proves to be one unforgettable journey that will change the course of their lives, forever.

Andrei Zvyagintsev cleverly shot the film in a bleak atmosphere without even a single glimpse of bright colors that would evoke a sense of joy, as he prefers to dwell on psychological inter-relationship among the three main characters, Andrey,Ivan, and their father.

As the film progresses, we will see that each other has kept their own hidden thoughts from each other, about each other, all these years as they are hopelessly trapped in their unfulfilled longingness of tender and care. Matched with a gorgeous landscape any budding filmmaker can only be jealous of, Andrei tactfully brings out the utmost inner acting from the two young actors who are relatively newcomers, and we can see that he gave a considerate amount of freedom for them to interpret the characters they play on their own, resulting on unbelievably natural performances that slip along the whole film perfectly.

Such a terrific swansong for Vladimir Garin, the young actor who played as Andrey, as this would be his one and only film he ever made.

10. THE TRIALS OF HENRY KISSINGER

My top-10 list ends with … an ex-minister?

Not just another ex-minister to my opinion since, well, he is the one who caused the change of many major turmoils, strategically and sporadically spread through certain keypoints that have shaken the whole world.

Within 80-minute duration of the film, the shortest among listed here, we are presented with horrifying footages that provoke many eyebrows-raising questions on the foreign political policy of United States.

After all, this is the story about Henry Kissinger, you may love or loathe him or both at the same time, but he has stood on his own, delivering many regulations, orders or acts that were condemned and praised altogether. One of the most dismissed-by-large recipients of Nobel that I can think of in recent history.

Welcome to the world of documentary, at the time when truth seems to be blurred with fiction.



You may claim that fact has become stranger than imagination, the harsh reality can be transformed into a pop-corn flick.

The reason of choosing The Trials of Henry Kissinger over Fahrenheit 9/11 or Super Size Me or Capturing the Friedmans, a few documentaries I felt lucky to see last year, could be addressed to his stature of being a larger-than-life real-life man who has gone to extremes by himself in handling political situation in such a way they had affected and altered (literally) the lives of millions. The presentation of the film itself may not be bold or innovative a la those films mentioned, yet Eugene Jarecki, the director, let his findings speak for themselves.

Like a conductor who only conducts beautifully composed piece of Strauss and still resulting in something pleasant for the ears to hear, so does Eugene here. The truth of Henry Kissinger may be objectionable, yet, history has noted.

Are we done? Not yet!

These films below are following closely behind. Ladies and gentlemen, you have no idea how much you are gonna miss if you chose to skip these films.

In no particular order,

HIGHLY COMMENDATION! category:

DOGVILLE (Denmark) resonances American way of life in a chilling manner that only Lars Von Trier would be able to direct convincingly, with the best role Nicole Kidman has ever played on screen so far.

LAST LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE (Thailand) with its dreamy-like whimsical quality proves that you can get your own film eventhough Christopher Doyle’s doing the cinematography.

LOST IN TRANSLATION states loudly in its silence that each and every one of us needs some recognition and acknowledgement of our existence, not necessarily having romance attached.

EVIL (Sweden) portrays the youth anger and rebellious manner the way James Dean would be proud of.

THE MOTORCYCLE DIARIES (Argentina/Brazil) charms even those anti-revolutionary style of Che Guevara with an honesty and innocence of road-trip adventure

21 GRAMS is a puzzle of human minds and their fate that will leave you thinking over about death and redemption. Naomi Watts at her darkest and most intense role ever.

BIG FISH leaves your eyes wide open in amazement that Tim Burton should have directed Forrest Gump!

THE WEATHER UNDERGROUND may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but as harsh as a political movement should be, so is the film.

SPIDER-MAN 2 belongs to those rarity of better sequels, and this time, it defies the common concept of how a superhero should be portrayed and thereby, I accept that Sam Raimi is one visionary director.

MARIA FULL OF GRACE (Colombia) and its bleak portrayal of drug smuggling makes a way of a newly born star named Catalina Sandino Moreno.

SUPER SIZE ME shows that a nail-biting documentary can be freakingly hilarious!

HARRY POTTER & THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN is the darkest, yet the most accurate adaptation of the beloved whiz-kid story so far.

MEAN GIRLS is my pleasant surprise of last year, thanks to Tina Fey and her unbelievably tickling script that evokes genuine laughter throughout!

JAPANESE STORY (Australia) may resemble Lost In Translation a lot, yet Toni Collette carries the vehicle on her own very well, so much so that you could not help feeling symphatized.

MYSTIC RIVER has an exceptional ensemble of cast, and with the superb line-up consists of Sean Penn, Tim Robbins, Kevin Bacon, Laura Linney and Marcia Gay Harden under the titular direction of Clint Eastwood, expect a strong dose of good dramatic acting.

THE SEA INSIDE (Spain) leaves you smiling widely over its lift-up mood and this time, Alejandro Almenabar roams his imagination freely.

ZATOICHI (Japan) stomps its feet hard, loud and cheerful, like you’ve never seen any Japanese martial arts films before!

THE BARBARIAN INVASIONS (Canada) strikes off preachy, tear-jerker element and substitutes it with an insightful look of capitalism in telling the story of a family starts crumbling down.

LOOK AT ME (France) is painfully real and refreshing at the same time in presenting manipulative people only to stumble upon honesty and innocence that prevail at the end of the day.

SPELLBOUND sweeps off my feet over its cutesy portrayal of obsession and American dream, through a spelling contest that, believe it or not, has become a cult!

What is the Mecca for film?

Hollywood?

Unfortunately so.

Being the center of the film universe, Hollywood has been arrogantly dictating the world on how to showcase films, be it foreign-language films, which can be pretty exhilarating at times, or simply their fake, artless, commercialized, mass-produced products to the extent that it does not take any beggars to smell them as stinkers.

These films shamelessly prove my point above.

(note that the list of film below reflect what appeared on cinemas in Singapore for commercial releases, festivals, or other special screenings from the period of 1 January to 25 December 2004, by using the order of the month when I watched them)

(secondly, I do not write about these films’ synopses!)

DISHONOR! category

1. THE SINGING DETECTIVE

Whatever happened to the supposedly suave, charming, witty Dan Dark in the film portrayed as a brooding, neurotic, confused, amnesiac, and hopeless singer played by Robert Downey Jr. as if he needed to be injected with a bloody loads amount of heroine? One can’t stop wondering how possibly bad it can be if the screenplay writer himself did, in fact, write the original television scripts in which the films is based upon! After numerous bad adaptations from stage to screen, or from words to screen, now comes the masses of the batch from googlebox to big screen … The Mod Squad, anyone?

By the way, I still lure myself to the jazzy soundtrack sung with a debonair style of Downey himself. At least! Something worth noting can be derived from this messy film!

2. GOTHIKA

Halle Berry does indeed shamefully capitalize her recent status as The Star in forking out gigantic sum of money by appearing in whatever being offered to her. All these one-word-title films seem to assemble themselves marching to the garbage can, noting that you do not miss much, in fact, you do not need to be bothered watching them.

The mischievous poster and trailer did offer a good promise of a thriller film wrapped in a chilling, bluish look, only to suggest that throughout the painful 100-or-so minute of watching this film left me giggling and laughing. Oh dear!

3. STUCK ON YOU

Many puzzling queries rolling over my head:

– Do you really need having two directors in making a grossed-out flick?

– Whatever happen to the insertion of pure naturalism in previous Farrelly Brothers’ flicks?

Look, you may accuse me of being too serious in appreciating arty-farty flicks, yet I applaud There’s Something about Mary which I think is superbly done and Cameron Diaz has never been at ease with her perfectly placed comic timing, and Shallow Hal gives Gwyneth Paltrow a rare opportunity to showcase her range of acting skills. Sadly, similar notions could not be applied to this film which somehow lost its intention halfway throughout the film, while indeed it tries to capitalize the life of a Siamese twin, we were not given a slight chance of their insights which may boost the plotline.

What were Meryl Streep and Cher thinking when they agreed to sign in as cameos?

And speaking of Eva Mendes …

4. OUT OF TIME

She stole the show from the obviously-tired presence of Denzel Washington! In a wrong movie, though …

While the film clearly paid its tribute to the slick, stylish, slightly-noirish good cop vs. bad cop genre from previous decades, enriched with Miami background giving a relaxed atmosphere to the story, the film couldn’t help from falling flat in entertaining, or simply providing some sparks of interest in following the plot twists which were just predictable even if you fall asleep halfway through.

5. THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT

What if?

That’s what the tagline of this film says.

What if … the movie is not made?

Better. I won’t get Punk’d!

There’s a great difference of a smart film and a film trying hard enough to be smart, clearly the abovementioned film belongs to the second one by dangerously venturing into a theme which has a great risk to be brough up: time-travelling. Moreover, without any logical explanation accompanying the dizzying, puzzling scenes scattered throughout the duration of the film very much done in an MTV-influenced style, what appears on the screen would only evoke a sense of visual amazement without prompting the mind to question the viability of the plotline. The compromised ending was simply something forced to fill in the necessity to end the prolong story.

6. LITTLE MEN (Kazakhstan)

My Singapore International Film Festival (SIFFest) journey this year had to begin with such a shaky start, due to the wrong choice of film which certainly arose my curiosity on how the film got selected in the first place.

Perhaps the festival committee really wished to explore to as varied countries as possible, which I find it pushy to some extent, that’s beyond my comprehension.

However, to sleep during the screening done in one sunny afternoon where no trace of sleepiness was found would only strengthen my point on how the film failed to make itself as something worth-watching, as simple as that.

Audience may quick to point out on the slow pace of the film, although that might be redeemed by giggling in a silly way on some funny scenes, which are not meant to be funny on the first place for sure. The bleak presentation of otherwise a lift-up mood on the struggle of two salesmen facing the toughness of the world they live in only left me with an impression that living on Kazakhstan does indeed ask you a great deal to survive there …

7. TROY

Yay! Finally, I’ve come to my so-called favorite entry, simply because this film has a great dis-honor to be THE WORST FILM OF THE YEAR!

I found myself on a great shock of horror upon going out from the cinema while all I could grumble was, “What was that? What was I watching just now?”, which of course, all boiled down to one single question:

“How could one make such a horribly terrible film?”

I may not particularly blame Wolfgang Petersen though, or in fact indeed I do, for he did not inject his sense of artistry and sensibility as what he did superbly in his previous works a la Das Boot, or even U-571 if you ask me.

Topping the senseless direction is the horrendous butchering touch, removing the human-ly elements in the initial poem written by the great Homer, which turned out suggesting that the film is somehow based on blurping lines uttered by Homer Simpson instead.

What a waste of big budget, big biceps (of Brad Pitt), big stars, big, in the sense of grand, presence of Julie Christie and Peter O’Toole, big, nuanced performance from Eric Bana, and it’s a big bomb dropped on the knees of Hollywood to start realizing their biggest failure of the year.

8. THE STEPFORD WIVES

Lesson learnt: Never launch an attempt to modify something highly regarded as a cult!

When the original film was released on 1975, the timing couldn’t be more perfect as the world had just been awakened by the rising movement of female liberalism, thus both the novel and the film, in a lighter sense, proved to help providing some thought-provoking reactions.

If only this new remake would dare enough to do the same, not stripping those elements and replace them with unnecessary glossy images and dry, unfunny jokes that not even the A-list actors seemed to bother to immerse themselves on the lines.

Seeing the lineup of talented actors here who have often crossed one genre to another easily, we can’t help asking one thing: What were Nicole Kidman, Glenn Close, Matthew Broderick, and Bette Midler thinking when they read the script?

And enough of the suddenly-too-familiar cameo appearance from Larry King in many films, including this one!

9. THE WHOLE TEN YARDS

One can only wonder, how could that possibly be, the predecessor was a good example of how a mob comedy flick can be full of punchlines and smart jokes, while the sequel, being the sequel itself, has to try desperately hard for merely trying to be funny?

One can only wonder why there wasn’t any chance of putting the right comic timings from Matthew Perry in his usual slick style, Bruce Willis in sometimes-merciless expression, or even Amanda Peet with her manipulative girlish smile would actually work well for this kind of film.

10. THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW

I know that I should not expect much from Roland Emmerich film, although his involvement in The Patriot somehow did lift up my slight believability that this man can still deliver a decent film after some “little-known” horrible pieces of junk called Independence Day or Godzilla.

Or not being a fan of action-adventure genre myself, I still find Twister entertaining, but the same reeling definitely not going to others, which include the latest offering this time, playing fool around on what’s supposedly a potential, strong theme of global warming which has been a major issue for the past few years.

Again, for the sake of milking cash by covering itself under the clout of ‘entertainment’, we were presented with mindless visual effects and thin storyline that put the charms of Jake Gyllenhaal, Emmy Rossum and Dennis Quaid aside.





DISAPPOINTMENT category,





because THEY ARE JUST SIMPLY BAD!



Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason suffers from both being sequels and adapted from a sequel novel as well, and both the novel and the film receive exactly the same lukewarm reviews, yet Renee Zellwegger, Hugh Grant and Colin Firth certainly enjoy their holidays here.



Bride and Prejudice shows that Gurinder Chadha needs to learn a lot about masterful skills to make a Bollywood musical and not to compromise the essential elements of singing and dancings that are supposed to make audiences tapping on their feet; however, seeing Aishwarya Rai at her utmost ease is worth the admission ticket itself.



I, Robot is an example of making a blockbuster film, put an A-list star, the box-office guarantee that overshadows everything else in the film, not to mention the ripping off the understated theme of power and oppression that could make the film a major thought-provoking work of arts, yet it chose to fall flat.

because THEY CAN BE MUCH BETTER!



Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow is applaudable for its daring use of technology that matches really well to the storyline, yet one can’t help seeing that Gwyneth Paltrow seeems to be out of place since her character is unforgivably reduced to be a mere background. If only the scriptwriter adds in a lot of punchlines here and there, making her character a la damsels in 1940s films, the film would be just perfectly complete.



5×2 (France) tells its story in a way that made Memento and Irreversible memorable, yet this latest outing from Francois Ozon fails to match the hilarious, shocking elements usually found on his previous works.



Beautiful Boxer (Thailand) has all the potentials to be one admirable and adorable film that has a universal appeal due to its unusual choice of theme. However, Ekachai Uekrongtham, the director himself, is trapped into the cliche of compromising in making a feel-good flick, not to mention carrying the burden of telling a real-life story.

Final Note:

I remember this particular quote found in SIFFest’s forum board a few years back, in which the quote itself ws apparently coming out from some renowned director, he said that if you are watching a horrible film, you’d only lose your $8 and 2-3 hours of your day, whereas for the filmmakers, they lose millions of dollars.

How do you want me to react to that statement?

Notice how I insist in not using ‘Top 10’? Why does it have to be ‘top’, suggesting that these 10 DVDs would be on ‘top’ of any other DVDs, while we can’t help championing what many people have been campaigning: arts should not be put in competition. Again, this debate will drag on another issue how films have to be treated separately from ‘arts’, or have films achieved a special place in arts, it will just nicely serve the endless mind-boggling discussion while the ship has sailed away far from the intended destination …

No ratings given (if your curiosity is really that freakingly high, ask me personally about the ratings I gave to these films) as I believe that such an intangible, fragile works have to be appreciated with an open mind and objective point of view, which will exclude any existence of numbers and figures.

No ranking orders either as they are scatteredly placed to avoid any preference, the fairness of arrangement that I can think of lies on the date of viewing itself.

These are 10 DVDs which gave me a thrill and pleasant film-watching experience that I personally will be more than excited to revisit and relive the experience:





Central Station (1998, Brazil)





What appears on the surface as a typical sappy flick of how a sudden appearance of a stranger in a woman’s life would change her character and life altogether proves to be completely wrong.

Fernanda Montenegro in her worthy Oscar-nominated role shines in a chilling, uncompromising portrayal of an anti-heroine facing a tough life every second and minute of her life in the slums of Rio de Janeiro, only to be confronted with an innocent presence of a young kid hopelessly searching for his father, the journey taken together would be a trip their lives have been unknowingly prepared.

Walter Salles has all the good qualities in his hands, a tight, well-written script enhanced with a breathtaking, gorgeous snap shots of Brazilian panoramic view that only adds this already beautiful film an additional magic.

Touching, without being a tear-jerker.

Inspiring, without being preachy.

And finding oneself, without compromising honesty.





400 Blows (1959, France)

Anyone citing any films on growing-up-is-hard-to-go-through story would definitely have to include this psychologically brutal film mirroring reality in a convincing manner. An autobiographical of Francois Truffaut? Well, what is not autobiographical whenever we surrender ourselves to immerse in our works? A certain influence contributed in it would be marked in a certain extent, resulting how ‘personal’ your works turn out to be.

Which is what makes 400 Blows compelling to watch, something you can’t even find in the future Antoine Doinel series as Truffaut may had been trapped into the dangerous territory of sequel-making. A continous threat, indeed.





Days of Wine and Roses (1962, USA)

To date, at the time of writing, a mere mention of the title, just the title, still gives me a shudder and a certain degree of … fear. Fear of being one, an alcoholic. An acute alcoholic who worships the majesty atmosphere in being taken to a seemingly realm world of blunt and illusion. An acute alcoholic who seems to be unable to kneel down picking up the shattering life broken into puzzling pieces. An acute alcoholic who drowns himself, willingly and unwillingly at the same time, to a place of longingness and loneliness.

Mind you, this is a Hollywood film, the one that goes beyond a manufactured norm of censors, the one that was painstakingly created to give a chilling effect thanks to the superb performances from Jack Lemmon and Lee Remick who amazingly step into their character’s skins, so much so that you can’t help wondering, do they, or don’t they? They might be doing the torture of themselves, which translated into an amazing showcase of pain and disgracefulness of alcoholism.

No smile, no laughter, no flirtatious look, no usual cracks of nice, sweet Lemmon.

No glance of beauty of those enviable blond hair of Remmick.

If you think Blake Edwards only does his best at Pink Panther series, think again. Think of how a master in slapstick, physical comedy will do in his darkest hour yet.

Repeated viewing? Think again.





Jules et Jim (1962, France)

How nice it is to see two entries from Francois Truffaut here, considering that I often detest his works made in 1970s to be exact, but along with 400 Blows, Jules et Jim marked his entry as an auteur in an era of what they refer as French New Wave cinema, a ‘little’ breakthrough in the history of filmmaking, unconventional, rebellious, yet you can’t help reeling for more.

And who wouldn’t fall in love, condemn, and empathy with Jeanne Moreau as she began to wane in the tragedy set by herself?

Being an audience of modern cinema myself, I can’t help trying to trace how this film would evoke a sense of sentimentalism in a relationship-of-three going to make the companies overwhelmed by the outburst of emotional feelings a la Neil Jordan’s The End of the Affair, or in a little shift of pace, Alfonso Cuaron’s Y Tu Mama Tambien …





His Girl Friday (1940, USA)

Even when I just began typing the title, I found myself smiling widely while staring at this notebook, rekindling the good memory still lingers on my mind when I remember how jolly it was watching this film, enjoying every single minute, and I mean every second of chattiness, witty lines and everything that makes this cleverly written film as a towering landmark of screwball comedy.

Not even today, way past of Tom Hanks-Meg Ryan era or at the hype of Before Sunset and such, can romantic, comedy, or combination of both make a good use of punchlines which are skilfully crafted and catered at a great speed that wouldn’t leave you a hiss of chance to catch your breath from laughing.

Cary Grant, being an actor named Cary Grant himself, may be only doing what he does best as usual: suave, charming, a gentleman’s gentleman who dares risking himself as an object of ridicule while still maintaining his charisma that will surely sweep off every ladies’ feet and be envied by other guys in the room, but in doing so, he couldn’t be any better here under the masterful direction of Howard Hawks, whom I have to tip my hat off in being one of the few directors who defined romantic comedy itself along with the likes of Ernst Lubitsch and such.

Of course, in an era of tough woman, Rosalind Russell bares and blends herself whole-heartedly in her Hildy Johnson character, a smart, sassy, independent, smart journalist Hollywood can only dream of, which would forever be carried over to her other performances, notably those she did superbly in Auntie Mame and Gypsy.

Not even just a filler for your rainy Saturday afternoon, I can see myself going to put it highly on my library …





Zelig (1983, USA)

I was fooled!

Oh dear good old Woody Allen‘s films, how you never fail to amaze me, to the state of glee!

If you think that this time around Woody Allen still sticks his nose to usual theme of psychological problems of modern human beings in their own paranoia, narcissm, insecurities and longingness, all I can say is that you can be right, but you can be wrong as well. The subject, Mr. Zelig himself, no matter how you may analyze and interpret him as having a mentally-challenged mind, he lives and breathes himself like a chameleon. At least we’ve got one thing clear, but a mere narration of this story would only bury this film deep down underneath his other great works.

This time around, he made a documentary. Or shall I say, a ‘documentary’? You watch it yourself, you decide, because I can’t stop giggling now, a few months later, that …

I was fooled! In a much delightful way!





Breathless (1960, France)

Jean Paul Belmondo in his dress-to-the-nine suit, that hat, that cigarette at the corner of his mouth, taking a stroll along a pedestrian corner in Paris, humming, only to be interrupted by the lovely sound of …

“New York Herald Tribune!”

Jean Seberg in her tight T-shirt, short hair that strengthens her sassiness instead of being boyish, appearing from the right side, walking slightly brisky, and turning herself around Belmondo to begin their short, sweet, murderous affair …

Those indelible images that captured and melted hearts of many filmgoers at that time, and until now, I am sitting here casting my mind back in one hot Thursday afternoon watching the two rascals indulging themselves in their own time that seems to stand still.

How I was transported to their world of dangerously addictive crime of passion without even realizing that a certain presence of a director did mastermind this all, and certainly the world would always welcome Jean-Luc Godard as the most prominent director, the most reliable and knowledgeable film scholars-cum-film critics the world of cinema would always be able to rely on for all his outsanding works that speak for one thing: a film can be unflinchingly cool.

Now I know why Bernardo Bertolucci was in despair of making a tribute by presenting this annoying film called The Dreamers …





Young Frankenstein (1974, USA)

Not just a little giggle, I am now laughing!

Such a zany, insane yet brilliant this ‘mad’ man who goes by the name of Mel Brooks, master of parody whom Wayans brothers and other aspiring cheap comedy directors should take a lesson or two that parody itself need not be grossed out to generate good laughs. It all lies on the writings, that’s what this madcap film trying to say, and how to make it comical at the same time.

One can only wonder what went on in Brook’s mind when he directed the film, or rather, what were Gene Wilder and Brooks thinking?

A genius, a superb film indeed!

And do consider this trivia: The cast and especially Mel Brooks had so much fun and were so upset when principal photography was almost completed, that Mel added scenes to continue shooting.

See? I can’t even give my proper comment here, hahaha! Ask me, just ask me personally! 🙂





Black Orpheus (1959, France/Brazil/Italy)

A Greek tale of Orpheus and Eurydice gets a Samba treatment that helps to launch and refine a new genre of Latin jazz as what we see today. Surprisingly faithful to the core of the original story, this film is as blatant as it can be in portraying the real low-life of Rio de Janeiro, completed with innocent, naive romances that would seem to go nowhere as their fate could only be destined and shattered by the Death, in a presence that seem to make a good joke of Ingmar Bergman’s Seventh Seal. Still, with maddening and deafening projected images of that (in)famous Rio carnaval serve as a platform of the story, watching the film seems like surrounding yourself with a pulsating beats of laid-back jazz while sipping a fuzzy warm of chocolate coffee in one hot Saturday afternoon, yet you feel distance away from the reality as you position yourself under the shower of fabricated air.



Addictive.

Darling (1965, UK)

Many people would be quick to point out Midnight Cowboy should be considered as John Schlesinger‘s main breakthrough in presenting a gay character explicitly.

I place that notion to this film, on top of other sexual freedom wraps the film in a cold, unpretentious manner which greatly helped make the film stands the test of time, no matter how it is considered ‘mild’ by today’s standard … of what? Bare-it-all sex? Isn’t it better to have it subdued?

And isn’t it better to have it suited and tailored perfectly fitted to the era where the characters breathe their lives in?



Watching Julie Christie transforming herself on the mask of many characters we seem to be unable to trace the roots would only enhance my admiration to her terribly believable persona that she holds until today, a glowing innerself she projected out to the character she embodies well, and witnessing her breakdowns was one of the very few difficult times I had to bear throughout countless film-watching experience.



How can one envy of all the willingness to rebel in an era of being opressed while keeping the good elements of both sides …

55 films over 365 days.

Not many, don’t you think?

Yet, it can be perfectly described as a struggle, to truly watch and examine those 55 films in a year, when immersing oneself to a world of imagery and dreams has become a luxury I always look forward to.

Whenever my fingers tip-toed along the shelves of Esplanade Library on a certain day or night, whenever any 30-minute would be well-spent spoiling myself over fabulous collection of DVDs and video cassettes, whenever a sudden additional load of a few pounds filled in my bag, I made sure that those films were meant to be appreciated, just like any finer things in life.

Mistakes, errors, disappointment encountered, a few of them indeed, for no matter how hard you keep your standard up, stumbling upon undesired ones might make us regard the counterparts deeper, and more honest.

I may not equip myself with a good excuse over the horrible selection on the films like The Big Bus which shows that a spoof flick may work hazardously to the film itself, or some promising works that only work best at the surface, at the mere concept or ideas turned horribly wrong like Scenes from A Mall or films that could knock everyone off yet unclear in the direction taken, like Searching for Debra Winger.

In a spirit of the late Frank Sinatra during the holiday spirit, melancholy season towards the end of the year, I can only mutter:

“Regrets/I have a few/But then again/To few to mention …”

I present to you my list of DVDs I have seen from the period of 1 December 2003 – 30 November 2004. They are worth your time, your piece of mind, your laughter, your tears, your anger, your joy, your bitches, your word-of-mouth, and your repeated viewings.

HONORABLE MENTIONS

Tears of the Black Tiger (Thailand, 2000)

How should one revive a dying genre when the audience seem to be contaminated with formulaic films? Apparently, Wisit Sasanatieng was daring enough to blend the spaghetti-Western theme with your below-average soap-opera story of love lost, and found, and shattered. The result was beyond expectation. A visual feast enhanced by dazzling images and imaginative settings, in a lush colors that spark vibrancy of what would be a mere dramatic cliche.

If you are familiar with Visa advertisement card, look out for scene stealing turn from the taxi driver guy on the ad!

Brief Encounter (UK, 1945)

Long time ago, I always thought that this film dealt with theme of outer space, alien, extraordinary creatures, hey don’t point your fingers, we do encounter them briefly as suggester by those B-grade sci-fi flicks 🙂

Yet, this is David Lean in his pre-Doctor Zhivago or Lawrence of Arabia days, those Hollywood glamour days. This is David Lean at his utmost frankness layered and covered with emotional restraints perfectly conceived by Celia Johnson and Trevor Howard who went to their extreme in baring their souls upon this tale of unrequited love. After all, Lean placed a remark to the filn industry that never looked back ever since: infidelity is a grandeur.

Truly Madly Deeply (UK, 1991)

Can’t help noticing the pattern that right after David Lean’s film, the next on the list is the film from a director widely regarded as the modern Lean due to his magnificent magic in adapting impossibly-adaptable literary works. And like Lean himself, Minghella’s first work actually allows us to see another side of his sensitivity towards domestic matter, wrapped in a feel-good humor and ability in transcending dreams into reality.

Sadly, the film was not widely known for its time release coincided with another similar film, no matter how sappy and over-the-top melodramatized the latter is, but no actress can pull it greater than Juliet Stevenson in portraying a widow in grief over her husband’s death while her emotional mind still clinging on to him. More than just a pleasant romantic comedy, the film’s surprise twists throughout will surely leave you hooked and long for more.

Bullets Over Broadway (USA, 1994)

Any devotees of Woody Allen’s films would be quick to note that this film is commonly treated as his last good work over the last decade, which I can’t agree more (ok, I still marvel his Sweet and Lowdown). Any film of Woody Allen set in his homeland, New York, with a set of characters showing the diversity of the city’s vibrant and dynamic pulse of life would only show his excellence in understanding the depth of filmmaking, and surely would enhance his penchant on lingering over old-school jazz. Broadway at its peak on ’20s, how can you go wrong from that?

How can you go wrong when your usual list of cast always boast a superb ensemble of A-list actors?

In brief, quoting Dianne Wiest in her Oscar-winning role as an aging diva Helen Sinclair here: “No. Don’t speak.”

They Shoot Horses, Don’t They (USA, 1969)



The dance scene, no, the derby sequence, wait, no, the whole film itself would be forever immortalized in numerous episodes of any television series or films trying to depict the turbulent times of Depression era. A young Sydney Pollack, full of idealism, brought Horace McCoy novel into an uncomprising film which might be painful to sit through in some parts, not to mention that the unbelievable turns from every single cast would enhance the effect of grim. Little the director himself knew, that this film would be highly regarded as part of 70s filmmaking movement, daring, anti-establishment, and honesty on storytelling.



A Man and A Woman (France, 1966)



When you find yourself in love, when you indulge yourself over the feeling of longingness, when you relive every single second of the rollercoaster ride of upheaval emotion, your mind start wandering freely, your gaze will reflect your desire, your gasp will sound like a relieving breeze soothening the chaotic heart. Claude Lelouch masterfully captured those senses and skilfully crafted this film by relying on an amazing presence of Anouk Aimee who ignited sparks in every turn she made, in every stare she tells directly to the camera, and at her intimate scene with Jean-Louis Trintignant, she defines how sex scene in films should be created: passion and desire that comes from within.



Same Time, Next Year (USA, 1978)



An affair that has lasted for more than a quarter of a century. From a naive, newly-married woman to a megalomaniac. From a paranoia husband to a man of freedom. From a constant set to wonderful changes of character-development seen in the very front of your eyes. Here’s another look at infidelity shown in a feel-good manner and wittiness over bantering clever punchlines, yet the vivid portrayal of characters caught haplessly in the changing of times that span from a naive 50s to rebellious 70s make us wishing how we could become them. One of the most indelible turns from Ellen Burstyn, she conceived her role (or roles, I would say) perfectly, as if she herself breathes on it.

The film that I would always wish to adapt myself.



Band of Outsiders (France, 1964)



This film would mark the height of New Wave French cinema, as afterwards, with the world heavily focused itself on wars, somehow the coolness and style derived from everyday life has never been resurrected. Jean-Luc Godard played along with the gangster genre, injected the film with a straight narrative plot and voila! Anna Karina, Sami Frey, and Claude Brasseur formed a ‘two’s a company, three’s a crime’ presence that would take almost four decades later for Bernardo Bertolucci to pay a tribute in his The Dreamers. I can’t extend my comment as my mind’s filled with one word to sum this film : FUN!



La Promesse (Belgium, 1996)



I picked this film by coincidence, not knowing what film should I chose to meet my quota of 4 films that I can borrow for a week from the library, and I came across its cover which filled in the critics’ comments. Yeah, those so-called artwork designs really got me this time!

Yet, hardly I regret seeing this. In fact, watching this Belgian film exploring the tough life of its (mostly) illegal immigrants proved to be one of the few occurences in film watching where I had to applause over its decision to leave the film open-ended. Think of a good growing-up film combines with a darker version of Dirty Pretty Things, what you’ll get is an unforgettable ride in a fast pace of thrills in reality.



Manhattan (USA, 1979)



Like you, I also put Annie Hall as one of my favourite films. Like you, I also find Woody Allen is at his utmost peak of creative sharpness during this era. But to me, Manhattan tops it all with his more comprehend understanding on mature, adult, heterosexual relationship in a much more complicated yet endearing manner. Woody Allen may not be able to play any other character than himself, Diane Keaton may not completely shake off her Annie Hall persona yet, Meryl Streep may not be given enough exposure in her character’s lesbianism, the film itself may lack of quirkiness in which Annie Hall is more favorable, but Allen excels in his exploration of The Big Apple and its longing for stability in love, marking Manhattan, to me, a must-see for everyone wishes to understand essentiality of emotional fulfillment in a relationship.



DISCOVERY MENTION

Kal Ho Naa Ho (India, 2003)

I can sense a lot of smirks in the air.



“What a crap!”

“Aaarrggghhh … Bollywood!”

“Nehi nehi!”

“Goodness! What are you thinking?”



Do you want to know what I truly think?

I think this film was blessed with its well-thought setting in New York, allowing the atmosphere of the whole film to roam freely, not necessarily bound by the cliche, overused and poorly conceived stage set in Bombay. Yet, the director, Nikhil Advani (in his remarkable directorial debut here) manages within the limited space of The Big Apple to capture the feel of New Yorker and the city’s immigrants as reflected on the characterization of his actors here, at times silly, at times taking life as it is, at times struggling with their cultural identities.

It may still be artificial as any other Bollywood formulaic products, thankfully, perhaps taking a lesson or two from Douglas Sirks during his glorious days, Nikhil Advani believes that you can still deliver a knock-out film that will sweep off the audience and the critics’ feet over its believability, its superb editing, and its well-conceived direction.

For the first time, I applaud Shah Rukh Khan for having understood enough not to let his usual over-the-top dramatic presence hinders us from appreciating his character, his low-key performance proves good for him in showing that he can truly act, well, although I prefer for the top billing to be given to Preity Zinta as she manages to carry her role with her charismatic ingenue. However, my salute goes to two supporting actors.

Saif Ali Khan, despite his other-worldly handsome look which may work against him, does a surprising job gradually rising from a mere sidekick to be an inseparable element of the story, while maintaining his comic timing that never seems to get off-key. There’s a sense of relief for everytime he appears on the screen, be it a comical scene or a serious one, he’s never caught offguard, completely blend himself into his role in such a relaxing manner one can only wonder if it is his true persona or a mere acting.

In contrast, Jaya Bachchan delivers an understated, terrific performance as a mother burdened with a guilt and seeking redemption in her religion and detachment from her own root. Perhaps, she feels more freedom whenever she doesn’t have to act along her partner that will always surely overshadow any actor acted alongside him: Amitabh Bachchan.



Yes, I can’t believe I could give such a lengthy comment on a Bollywood film, but I speak honestly as I could remember even when I finished watching Kabhi Kushi Kabhie Gham, I did question terribly amount of flaws in the film.

The same experience did not occur with this film, in fact, it’s the other way around.

— Wait! It’s not over yet! Look out for THE 10 DVDs of The Year, coming up next! —

Whoever created that list of hoax nomination last time, I salute you, for fooling me and to the extent of some reputable newspapers in believing your well-crafted lies.

Proficiat! It took some guts to come up with that, some critical, thoughtful process which surely cost you all a lot.

I can relate to it, because this is exactly what has been happening to me, for the first time in my blogging-history, ada rasa keterpaksaan buat nulis gara-gara nominasi palsu ini, jadi begitu nominasi resmi nan official was officially published, oh well … Beban moral dong ah buat nulis!

In addition, something, or rather, a few things might hinder me from giving my best shot in commenting:

Marsinah and Mengejar Matahari.

I have not been able to witness myself these two works from two directors coming from a totally different background and interest. Argh! The unfortunate side of not being there …

Anyway, may I have the envelope, please?

Best Picture:

– Ada Apa Dengan Cinta?

– Arisan!

– Eliana, Eliana

– Marsinah

– Mengejar Matahari

Nauval says:

Wow! I always have this opinion (and proudly stick to it) that Indonesians are great story tellers when it comes to domestic lives or the likes of them, and the past winners of this category show how both filmmakers, critics and audience in general would reel in peeking at other people’s lives, dramatized in such a manner that need not be greatly departed from the actual bases, unless, a towering theme, larger-than-life, presented in a grandeur style, showy and flashy scenes throughout the flick will surely sweep this coveted prize off (think of Tjoet Nja’ Dhien).

Take a look at the nominees once again.

A good-hearted teen-flick, 101:Introduction to Gay Life, a mother and a daughter confronting egos and emotional ride over one-night trip, Norma Rae with a tragic ending, and friendship that has to be tested.

No swords-and-sandal epic, no literary works done half-baked, no art-y, confusing, high-brow works. As simple as it can be, the jury decides to choose the flicks that matter most to public, how they can see themselves on it. After all, we are living in an era of reality series, and there can be no greater guilty pleasure than seeing how the lives of us we lead every single hour being blown up in a gigantic size.

Straight to my prediction, AADC?, Arisan! and MM would surely benefit from its box-office takings, while Marsinah and Eliana, Eliana have to rely on badly-needed and strong word-of-mouth to get noticed. Worry not, this is not the popularity contest a la that particular award, and I hope that the jury will pick Eliana, Eliana for its smart subtlety on urban life context enriched with psychological and emotional insights, enhanced with the use of digital format to emphasize on its real-look.

Hey, a digital film as a best picture, that doesn’t sound bad, ay?

However, the daring take of a certain social issue once considered as something taboo to be brought up (some people still think so, oh please!), completed with a candy-for-the-eye presentation will be likely to sweep off the jury’s feet. Arisan! manages to bring the controversial issue into the surface of public’s attention without necessarily creating a stir or a heated furor, sort of.

To silence people with a charming style, ain’t that a big WOW?

I salute AADC? for its breakthrough in awaking the film industry after a long sleep, however, being labelled as a teen-flick may prove to be a boomerang in getting this award.

The friendship theme of Mengejar Matahari does not hold a potential to be considered as a best picture, and last but not least, Marsinah, truly has a shot with its strong political theme, outdated as the issue might be, sorry to say, so is the film which did not manage to bring up the public’s attention again, when it was just needed.

Will win: Arisan!

Should win: Eliana, Eliana

Should have been nominated: Pasir Berbisik

Best Director:

– Rudy Sudjarwo (Ada Apa Dengan Cinta?)

– Nia DiNata (Arisan!)

– Riri Riza (Eliana, Eliana)

– Rudy Sudjarwo (Mengejar Matahari)

– Slamet Raharjo (Marsinah)

Nauval says:

Congrats, Rudy! You knock down the supposedly stiff competition with your honest works created with full-of-heart good-feeling nature, and being ‘the one who revolutionized’ surely helps you getting an extra remark.

Yet, my vote goes to Riri Riza for his most mature work to date, proving that he is truly one serious filmmaker whose works have come from a long, thoughtful process, and taking the socio-demographical issue of urbanization by reeling in the psychological side wouls definitely need to be applauded.

BUT then, how can a Best Picture winner declared a true winner if its director is not awarded as well? I can only recall that way back more than a decade ago when Cinta Dalam Sepotong Roti was announced as a best picture winner, Garin did not get the award as a best director, which went to Imam Tantowi instead for Soerabaia’45 (why nobody remembered this film, it’s beyond my comprehension!).

Nia has shown in her Arisan! how smart she is to tackle the gay issue well without being exploitative or vulgar, creating an intelligent view of the alternative life some people indulge in.

Hmmm … Slamet Raharjo?

Will win: Nia DiNata

Should win: Riri Riza

Should have been nominated: Nan Achnas (Pasir Berbisik)

Best Actor:

– Derby Romero (Petualangan Sherina)

– Nicolas Saputra (Ada Apa Dengan Cinta?)

– Tora Sudiro (Arisan!)

– Tosan Wiryawan (Marsinah)

– Winky Wiryawan (Mengejar Matahari)

Nauval says:

Wish I were there when the nominations were announced so I could feel myself the experience of amazement when this name was mentioned: Derby Romero.

Woohhhoooo!

I couldn’t stop giggling, scratching my head, thinking: What? Why? Does it have to? Is it necessary?

Boy, worry not, just come to the event on 11 December, sit back, relax, do NOT prepare any speech, just … sit there, okay?

(What was the jury thinking?)

Enough of cursing Tora Sudiro. Enough. If the dear jury would like to award an actor with a challenging role, get this right: not to a bad actor.

Can’t comment on Tosan and Winky (do they really share the same last name?), but judging from the recent win of Winky in MTV Indonesia Movie Awards for Best Cry, well, doesn’t it prove that he’s dramatic enough?

Tosan’s leading role in a film that carries a title and theme revolving around a single figure of a woman may be hard to get noticed, after all, Slamet Rahardjo was not awarded in Tjoet Nja’ Dhien, and the late Tuti Indra Malaon’s signature role was in Ibunda.

Okie dokie, who’s gonna win then? One name has not been mentioned yet, as hesitant as I can be, with a deep sigh of having to give up to a necessity, just keep silent, make a history of awarding a heartthrob, and I mention the name only once.

Nicolas Saputra.

I can’t believe this.

Will win: Nicolas Saputra

Should win: (have a strong curiosity for Winky Wiryawan’s performance)

Should have been nominated: FERRY SALIM (Ca Bau Kan) — he outshines them all!!!

Best Actress:

– Christine Hakim (Pasir Berbisik)

– Dian Sastro (Ada Apa Dengan Cinta?)

– Dian Sastro (Pasir Berbisik)

– Jajang C. Noer (Eliana, Eliana)

– Rachel Maryam (Eliana, Eliana)

Nauval says:

Dian Sastro. She’s that gem, isn’t she? Look at how the two roles greatly differ from one another. I love her scene with Dessy Fitri when they two rolled over the field, and who could forget the emotional scene when she is asked by Didi Petet to touch herself? Add in the fact that she has won rave reviews and several awards for her performance there, not to mention her ability in standing tall along some legendary actress from Jambi has benefitted her in many ways she can’t imagine herself. Her double nomination shouldn’t hurt her chance here.

Yet, I immediately fall in love with Rachel Maryam with her nuanced performance in Eliana, Eliana. Carrying the title on her shoulder alone, while the camera never seems to move away from her brooding expression throughout the flick, she manages to convey the character inside, comfortable in Eliana’s skin instead of merely acting as, this is the kind of performance that will always get underrated.

I still stick to my opinion from previous post that Christine and Jajang have better shots in supporting role category.



Will win: Dian Sastro

Should win: Rachel Maryam

Should have been nominated: Cut Mini (Arisan!), Lola Amaria (Ca Bau Kan), Ria Irawan (Biola Tak Berdawai)





Best Supporting Actor:

– Didi Petet (Pasir Berbisik)

– Djaduk Ferianto (Petualangan Sherina)

– Mang Diman (Ada Apa Dengan Cinta?)

– Slamet Raharjo (Pasir Berbisik)

– Surya Saputra (Arisan!)



Nauval says:

Enough of Surya, worse than Tora, that sums it all.

As much as I salute the initiative the long overdue recognition of Mang Diman’s existence in the entertainment industry, I can’t help the fact that his role is too small to be even considered as as scene-stealer.

As much as I agree that Slamet Raharjo’s role is one essential key linked the two main characters there, you have to be patient in watching his performance there, and suddenly … gone!

As much as I love Sherina in her adventurous film, it’s Djaduk Ferianto whose presence will always linger on the memory. He inhabits his Kertarejaksa character so vividly, I often find myself humming his song “Akulah Kertarejasa …”.

As much as I have to endure a seemingly endless trip in Pasir Berbisik, it’s Didi Petet who saves my day in one of his very few antagonistic role, convincing in a chilling show-off, his smirk is unbelievably terrifying.



Will win: Didi Petet

Should win: Djaduk Ferianto

Should have been nominated: Joseph Ginting/Robby Tumewu (Ca Bau Kan)





Best Supporting Actress:

– Aida Nurmala (Arisan!)

– Ladya Cheryll (Ada Apa Dengan Cinta?)

– Megarita (Marsinah)

– Rachel Maryam (Arisan!)



Nauval says:

This will be the last time I say this: the good performances of leading roles in Arisan! come ONLY from Cut Mini and Rachel Maryam. No further explanation needed.

Which is to say that Rachel has a lock in this category, her comic timing never gets off-key, she has a sparkling presence, looks like making a strong statement that sidekick role needs not to be under appreciated.

I don’t bother about the rest.



Will win: Rachel Maryam

Should win: Rachel Maryam

Should have been nominated: Henidar Amroe/Jajang C. Noer (Eliana, Eliana), Christine Hakim (Pasir Berbisik)



———————————————————



Have a fun celebration! Please, I hope this is the official list! 🙂