Great Expectations (1998)

85/100 (1998, 118 min)
Plot: Modernization of Charles Dickens classic story finds the hapless Finn as a painter in New York pursuing his unrequited and haughty childhood love.
Director: Alfonso Cuarón
Writers: Charles Dickens (novel), Mitch Glazer (screenplay)
Stars: Ethan Hawke, Gwyneth Paltrow and Hank Azaria

Let desire be your destiny

“She'll only break your heart, it's a fact. And even though I warn you, even though I guarantee you that the girl will only hurt you terribly, you'll still pursue her. Ain't love grand?”

Loosely based on the novel by the same title by Charles Dickens, “Great Expectations” is one of the most underrated movies I've ever seen. It's an absolutely spellbinding love story between poor artist Finn and fascinating and rich Estella. Both of them come from different worlds, but its their inner freedom and innocence that will ultimately bring them together.

Estella and Finn meet when they are little kids. He lives with his sister and her boyfriend, he is poor, simple, uneducated. But he has great talent – he paints wonderful, extremely unique pictures. Estella is being raised by her bizarre aunt Norma (in the novel it's Mrs. Havisham), who was left at the alter years ago and since then has progressively descended into madness. Norma raises Estella as a weapon against men. Cold, calculated and manipulative, ready to do anything to bring them suffering.

American History X

(119 min, 1998)
Plot: A former neo-nazi skinhead tries to prevent his younger brother from going down the same wrong path that he did.
Director: Tony Kaye
Writer: David McKenna
Stars: Edward Norton, Edward Furlong and Beverly D'Angelo
 

Heading Towards Redemption

I have to say, from some time now I despised Edward Norton. After I saw his, what can I call it....work in "The Incredible Hulk", "Italian Job" and "Pride and Glory" where he was so bad he actualy made Colin Farrell look amazing and Farrell is nowhere near 'old' Norton (I mean from „Fight Club” times) league, it was impossible for me to recall why this man is a good actor. I mean sure, he was good in "Fight Club", but the character of the Narrator and the writing in this film is so incredible, it would actually take a real talent to screw this up. Then I saw "Painted Veil" and he was very good, but still the vivid image of his performance in "Pride and Glory" wasn't gone. But tonight I finally saw "American History X" for which Norton was nominated for Oscar and whilst the movie is from 1998 and what Norton does now is far from perfection I certainly cannot call his performance in "P&G" proof he isn't that good anymore. It was simply a bad judgment on his part, because clearly he is a great actor.

The movie is definitely not easy nor pleasant to watch - but it is gripping from the first moment. The story of former skinhead who is redeemed after spending 3 years in prison reminded me of "A Clockwork Orange" in terms this is also, from what I gathered, a cult movie for many and in both cases it shows incredibly troubled individual with certain ideology and his transformation. But as much as I appreciate “A Clockwork Orange" and there is no doubt that it is a good film, I was never a fan. It said a lot of things but I think statements shown in "American History X" are far more powerful, perhaps because they are so skillfully presented on screen.

A Perfect murder

(107 min, 1998)
Director: Andrew Davis
Writers: Frederick Knott (play), Patrick Smith Kelly (screenplay)
Stars: Michael Douglas, Gwyneth Paltrow and Viggo Mortensen

Crime without punishment.

Millionaire industrialist Steven Taylor (Michael Douglas) is a man who has everything but what he craves most: the love and fidelity of his wife (Gwyneth Paltrow). A hugely successful player in the New York financial world, he considers her to be his most treasured acquisition. But she needs more than simply the role of dazzling accessory. Brilliant in her own right, she works at the U.N. and is involved with a struggling artist (Viggo Mortensen) who fulfills her emotional needs. When her husband discovers her indiscretion, he sets out to commit the perfect murder and inherit her considerable trust fund in the bargain.
- imdb

The movie is a remake of Hitchcock's “Dial M for murder”. I never saw the original version, so maybe the fact I like the new one a lot has something to do with it. The movie is not very original – it features the most common triangle in the history of the cinema - cheating wife, older, wealthy husband, artist with criminal past. But the characters are extremely well developed and the movie has elegant, classy ambiance and great tension which is the key to making a good thriller.

We should probably sympathize with Emily, the wife, but we just can't. I don't know whether it is because she is cheating on her husband or because she is played by Gwyneth Paltrow – who is very cold, detached and aloof in the movie (sometimes I got Mia Farrow vibe from her). Emily is clever, but in the ending of the film you'll see she's not really a victim. It's a damn shame that director didn't use the alternate ending which was a lot better and where Emily's actions are crystal clear. The theatrical version requires you to think about the title and how well it fits with the final scenes of the movie.

The viewer can't really like the artist either – even if he has the noble face of Aragorn. His actions are just too strange, and he seems to be nothing but a coward. Thankfully, Mortensen is a great actor so at least the character wasn't boring as another passionate artists who are distractions for married ladies (I'm referring to bland Olivier Martinez in “Unfaithful”). Mortensen gives his character a lot of depth, his motives aren't clear but he seems to be torn – between escaping an obvious mess and staying with the woman he loves.

So helpless viewer shifts the sympathy towards the husband. And it's not hard to root for Douglas's character, precisely because he is played by Douglas. He's an amazing actor with a very captivating on-screen persona – everyone remembers his amazing work in “Wall Street” and “Falling Down”. Here he is a lot like Gordon Gekko – brilliant, clever, calculating. Stephen is obviously immoral and ruthless, but he is also interesting and his brilliance is fascinating – the way he plans the whole thing is flawless. It's a thrill to see Douglas on screen, he crashes Paltrow's and Mortensen's performances, although the two of them is doing a good job.

The movie is very stylish – big residence, artist's loft, galleries, modern offices. Settings that are necessary for each thriller about adultery and murder. James Newton Howard's music sets up a pace for the film and brings in few eerie moments. Certain scenes, especially the key scene of the movie are extremely well done and won't fade away from your memory..And the script is very good – there are no plot holes, everything we see in the movie, every single scene is necessary, every line of dialogue has a purpose. The narration is clever – we see the actions of all three key players, we know what they know, we know what they want to do, but the movie still manages to surprise us.

With all of this “Perfect Murder” is a very decent thriller, it's not too predictable – when you are watching it you kept waiting what's gonna happen, but when the movie is over you'll not be surprised the events unfolded the way they did, because you saw it already, in dozens different movies. But the film is worth watching because it's not easy to find a good thriller anymore, so even if the film is not bringing anything new to the genre, we should still praise it for sustaining the suspense and keeping the audience interested

66/100