Changeling

Woman's whisper, mother's cry

Triangle

Over and over again

(this review contains spoilers)

Insidious

(103 min, 2010)
Plot: A family looks to prevent evil spirits from trapping their comatose child in a realm called The Further.
Director: James Wan
Writer: Leigh Whannell
Stars: Patrick Wilson, Rose Byrne and Ty Simpkins

Inside us.

If you have to steal, steal from the best. That must have been James Van's motto when he was making “Insidious”. The film is filled with scenes that leave you with the sense of deja vu when you see them. Scenes that are clearly inspired by the legendary movies of horror genre such as “The Shining”, “Rosemary's Baby” and “Poltergeist”. It's hard to see something original in cinema nowadays. Everything has been already shown, told, shot. But the thing with horror movies is that they have to achieve just one thing in order to succeed. They have to scare us.

From the chilling beginning to the very end “Insidious” wrecks your nerves. Shadows, ghosts, demons, distant footsteps, scary little girls, creepy old lady, weird paintings, mandatory twist in the end, ghost hunters – all the ingredients are here. But there is something more – the awareness. The creators know full well that they are using cliches and familiar tricks. They don't try to pretend and they simply make the most of it. It all works because they focused their attention on scaring the audience. Watching “Insidious” is like taking a tour around haunted house attraction. You expect what's inside, you suspect what lies ahead, but you still experience fear.

Shutter Island

(138 min, 2010)
Plot: Drama set in 1954, U.S. Marshal Teddy Daniels is investigating the disappearance of a murderess who escaped from a hospital for the criminally insane and is presumed to be hiding nearby.
Director: Martin Scorsese
Writers: Laeta Kalogridis (screenplay), Dennis Lehane (novel)
Stars: Leonardo DiCaprio, Emily Mortimer and Mark Ruffalo

Rat in a maze, audience in despair.

 
I really wanted to like this movie, but I can't. I was so hyped to see this – I love Scorsese's work – Goodfellas, Casino, The Departed – the guy is a legend. I like Leonardo Dicaprio a lot – he created mind blowing performance in “Revolutionary Road” and he is a very decent actor – I haven't seen him screw up a performance once. He makes great choices, he always delivers and he is very charismatic – that man is pure anger – he yells like insane in every single movie of his and that's gotta come out of somewhere – he is too good at it. I love actors like this – passionate, memorable, driven.But here, there is simply no connection between his acting style and the movie. The casting was first thing that went wrong.

„Shutter Island” is not engaging, boring and has terrible, terrible editing - few days ago I stumbled upon porn movie on tv - God knows it had better editing. I know Thelma Schoonmaker
who is responsible for this, has 3 Academy Awards and it only makes me more surprised – what happened? Nobody can defend such horrid editing – it was awful, it took the focus away from the movie. And what's even worse – it was splendid and exceptionally well done in flashbacks scenes. Very uneven work, but mostly just plain bad.

And that's the problem with this movie – it's uneven and nobody knows what's going on and what should be done. Scorsese doesn't know how to show the story, the scene were Dolores appears in cell next to insane criminal was truly awful, I have no idea how a director of such fame and class could do something like this, actors are generally confused as if they didn't read a script at all, the editor and music supervisors, were, I assume, high during making of this film.

The music is obnoxious, chaotic and inflicts actual pain. I don't know, maybe it was intentional. Some of the pieces fit the movie quite nicely and create very dense, creepy atmosphere. But as a whole it's impossible to listen to the soundtrack album before taking a massive amount of pain killers. I tried to do that – I couldn't. And for the love of God, I listen to Slipknot sometimes.

Fur: An Imaginary Portrait of Diane Arbus

(122 min, 2006)
Director: Steven Shainberg
Writers: Erin Cressida Wilson, Patricia Bosworth (book)
Stars: Nicole Kidman, Robert Downey Jr. and Ty Burrell 

Those who know us best, leave all too soon. 

(spoilers)

Lionel Sweeney will die.
But not before changing Diane Arbus forever.

We meet Diane when she enters nudist colony, then the movie goes back in time – Diane is wealthy, married with kids. Her husband is a photographer and she helps him with trivial things, like fixing models' hair or setting up the lighting, basically being an assistant, whilst ignoring her own talent.

Diane is weird – she likes exposing herself to strangers, she is fascinated by bizarre things, she seems peaceful, but suddenly she bursts into tears. Her husband doesn't understand her, he is fascinated by her, but their relationship is weak – he doesn't see inside of her, but how could he, if Diane has no idea who she really is and what she wants.

And then she meets Lionel, her enigmatic neighbor from upstairs. He makes wigs, his friends are circus performers. And one more thing – he suffers from rare disease which causes abnormal hair growth. Diane is fascinated with him from the first moment she sees him and under the pretext of wanting to take his portrait she enters his house and his world. He is forward, he is interesting, but most of all he is free. He is not living in a cage like Diane is.

As their friendship progresses Diane is spending more time focusing on herself, her work. Lionel helps her in finding her inspiration, in unleashing her personality and eventually in setting her free. He appears to be a bit of a collector – looking for bizarre people and helping them in finding their way. He is too sure of himself when Diane first goes to see him, he knows exactly what to ask her. It's like he knows that type of people inside out, he has experience with them and it brings him joy to influence Diane so much. Without meeting him she would probably live her life trapped, until her death.

Black Swan

(108 min, 2010)
Director: Darren Aronofsky
Writers: Mark Heyman (screenplay), Andres Heinz (screenplay)
Stars: Natalie Portman, Mila Kunis and Vincent Cassel
 

Demons laugh within.

“As I lie here and stare
The fabric starts to tear
It's far beyond repair
And I don't really care
As far as I have gone
I knew what side I'm on
But now I'm not so sure
The line begins to blur”
- Nine Inch Nails, “The Line Begins to Blur”

In my many years of being a movie fan I have never waited that eagerly for a movie. Having read both versions of the script I was sure that this idea can't fail, especially in the hands of Darren Aronofsky, who has never made a bad film. The movie mixes many fantastic films within itself, but the core of it and the reason why it's Aronofsky's best film is that apart form fascinating characters the story takes us deep into the protagonist's state of mind. We travel down the rabbit hole of insanity along with Nina, we are scared, happy and exhilarated when she is and we can't never guess what will happen next.

The movie follows the story of extremely ambitious and dedicated ballet dancer Nina Seyers (Natalie Portman in a performance sure to win Oscar). Nina is very hard working, unfortunately she lacks true talent and passion. She lives in apartment with her overprotective mother, former ballerina (Barbara Hershey). After persuading the director of the new version of “Swan Lake” Thomas Leroy (Vincent Cassel) Nina surprisingly gets the lead role of Swan Queen. The role consists of playing both shy and fearful White Swan (which is essentially the personality of Nina) and sexual and malicious Black Swan (which Nina has no idea how to dance). As Nina struggles with her role, new dancer, free spirited Lily (Mila Kunis) appears in the group and seems to be perfect for the role of Black Swan. To make matters worse, the ballerina of great fame, Beth, retires and blames Nina for her downfall...

There is so much drama going on in this story, it would be sufficient for few separate movies. The core of this film lies in the rivalry and physical similarity between Nina and Lily. Nina, most likely a virgin is a good girl – she lives with her mother, I suspect because there is no reason for her to move out. Her entire life is her dancing. There is a strong possibility she became a ballet dancer because her mother wanted her to, but regardless of the reason, this is her life now and her dancing and success are the only things that matter to her. Nina is very much like an innocent child, although being in her late twenties – her room is pink, it's filled with stuffed animals, her mother tucks her in every evening and turns on music box with a ballerina's figurine turning around to the theme of “Swan Lake”, sounding like a creepy lullaby. Nina is working way too hard – her body is ruined, she has eating disorder, she is freakishly skinny, her nails break and she has a nervous tick – she unconsciously scratches her back till it bleeds.

Strange Days

(145 min, 1995)
Director: Kathryn Bigelow
Writers: James Cameron (story), James Cameron (screenplay)
Stars: Ralph Fiennes, Angela Bassett and Juliette Lewis

Never fade away

“See... I can get you what you want, I can. I can get you anything, you just have to talk to me, you have to trust me. You can trust me, 'cause I'm your priest, I'm your shrink... I am you main connection to the switchboard of he soul. I'm the magic man... Santa Claus of the subconscious. You say it, you think it, you can have it.”

Lenny Nero (Ralph Fiennes) deals in dreams. Formerly an LAPD vice cop, he now deals in illegal 'squid' recordings - recordings made directly from the cerebral cortex of the participant, which allow the viewer to feel and experience everything the participant experiences as if they were there. One of life's perpetual losers, he ekes out a lonely, miserable existence at the end of the millennium, still pathetically yearning for his beautiful ex-girlfriend Faith (Juliette Lewis), a beautiful singer, and is dependent on his friend Macey (Angela Bassett). But Lenny's life is about to be shattered; when he is anonymously sent the recording of the brutal rape and murder of a prostitute, he and Macey soon find themselves reluctantly embroiled in a dark web of murder, blackmail and intrigue amid the civil unrest surrounding the suspicious death of an influential, politically active rap singer.

What's the best thing about memories? The fact you can replay them in your head, long after the event you're recalling took place. And what's the worst part? It's that they fade away. With time, as with videotapes that have been used too many times, the details dissolve in time – you can't remember the color of someone's eyes, you can't recall anything about the background. The sound of voice escapes your memory, the sense of being there is with you no more. What if you could play the same memories, over and over again, feeling what you felt when you experienced them, in the loop, on repeat, as many times as you like?

Sucker Punch

(110 min, 2011)

Director: Zack Snyder
Writers: Zack Snyder (screenplay), Steve Shibuya (screenplay)
Stars: Emily Browning, Vanessa Hudgens and Abbie Cornish

One flew over Heavy Metal island

I wanted to like this movie. I really did. I thought this can be an interesting film, where there are different secrets and mysteries to uncover under all the visual effects, where the innuendos and hidden meanings create truly disturbing picture. Unfortunately, although “Sucker Punch” had a lot of potential it is ultimately a very flawed mess of beautiful visuals, gorgeous actresses, plot-hole filled story and confusion. Nonetheless, it's nowhere near being the worst picture of the year and it's still an entertaining movie. The problem is, that the film is not fun when it should be and it's at its best during brief moments untainted by presence of dragons, Nazi zombies or robots. But those moments are simply too brief.

A young girl (Baby Doll) is locked away in a mental asylum by her abusive stepfather where she will undergo a lobotomy in five days time. Faced with unimaginable odds, she retreats to a fantastical world in her imagination where she and four other female inmates at the asylum, plot to escape the facility. The lines between reality and fantasy blur as Baby Doll and her four companions, as well as a mysterious guide, fight to retrieve the five items they need that will allow them to break free from their captors before it's too late...

The biggest problem with “Sucker Punch” is that it's a mix of things that do not fit together. When Baby Doll stays in the asylum she imagines the whole place as a glamorous brothel. And if Snyder just ended the fantasy element there the movie would have had a shot at consistency. Unfortunately, when Baby Doll performs her dance and goes into some kind of trance state, she goes into another fantasy, where she fights undead soldiers, futuristic robots, dragons...Given how the movie is set in 50's and the girl imagines all of that it makes you wonder....how? Why? Wait...how again? The fantasy scenarios have no reflection in the real world at all, they are horribly out of place in the movie. The CGI is impressive at times, but more often than not, it looks too fake to get inside this world and forget you are watching a movie. If only those scenes were somehow anchored in the Baby Doll's real world – just a figurine of dragon in her room would explain that whole sequence. Unfortunately, Snyder doesn't even attempt to patch this all together and we never get explanation as for why exactly a teenager in the 50's imagines the things she does.

The Constant Gardener

(129 min, 2005)
Director: Fernando Meirelles
Writers: Jeffrey Caine (screenplay), John le Carré (based on the novel by)
Stars: Ralph Fiennes, Rachel Weisz and Danny Huston

The Ghost of Her.

“You want me to come home. But I am home.”

British diplomat Justin Quayle (Ralph Fiennes) meets the impulsive activist Tessa (Rachel Weisz), marries her quickly at her behest and takes her on diplomatic mission in Kenya. When Tessa is brutally murdered, Justin decides to investigate her death against the strong wish of his superiors to let the matter quietly disappear. He discovers a powerful mystery involving the members of the British High Commission and the not-so-savory business practices of the multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical industry. In the process of learning the secrets of his powerful enemies, Justin must learn all of his wife's many secrets as well and he finally gets to know her.

I saw “The Constant Gardener” years ago and it had a powerful impact on me. The movie is masterfully made and the story is complex but built around unique love, one that's not often seen in the movies. Justin and Tessa meet in passionate circumstances. He is peacefully giving the lecture and she suddenly starts yelling at him, demanding answers for why England is at war and why are diplomatic procedures ignored. Justin tries to answer her politely and calm her down, yet she keeps yelling. Everyone else leaves and embarrassed Tessa apologizes and invites him over for a drink. They talk, laugh, make love. Soon Tessa asks Justin to take her to Africa with him. Enchanted by interesting girl he agrees and they marry.

After.Life

(109 min, 2009)
Director: Agnieszka Wojtowicz-Vosloo
Writers: Agnieszka Wojtowicz-Vosloo, Paul Vosloo
Stars: Christina Ricci, Liam Neeson and Justin Long

Dead or alive?

(spoilers)


“You can laugh
A spineless laugh
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you
Now we are one in everlasting peace”
- Radiohead, “Exit Music (For a Film)

“After.Life” deals with a subject that is very popular and I'm sure all of you sometimes wondered about it. What happens after we die? Is there nothing or something,
basically unimaginable for human mind? Each religion has a view on afterlife, because it offers a promise – the ultimate promise of continuity. No, you won't cease to exist. There is something more. But the movie goes beyond that, maybe even not focuses on it, whilst touching the subject. Despite its title “After.Life” is more like one of the episodes of HBO hit and absolutely superb series “Six Feet Under” where the morticians were able to talk to the deceased.

After a horrific car accident, Anna (Ricci) wakes up to find the local funeral director Eliot Deacon (Neeson) preparing her body for her funeral. Confused, terrified and feeling still very much alive, Anna doesn't believe she's dead, despite the funeral director's reassurances that she is merely in transition to the afterlife. Eliot convinces her he has the ability to communicate with the dead and is the only one who can help her.

Mulholland Dr.

(147 min, 2001)
Director: David Lynch
Writer: David Lynch
Stars: Naomi Watts, Laura Harring and Justin Theroux 

Dream a little dream of me...

A lucid dream is a dream in which the sleeper is aware that he or she is dreaming. When the dreamer is lucid, he or she can actively participate in and often manipulate the imaginary experiences in the dream environment. Lucid dreams can seem extremely real and vivid depending on a person's level of self-awareness during the lucid dream.*

(spoilers)

Dreams are elusive. We often forget what they were about, we have difficulties remembering even the tiniest details. For a filmaker to present the dream universe with sound, music and cinematography is enough of a chalange, but to do that with plot structure and the construction of entire story, to show the logic of a dream by using dialogues, objects and symbols - that's a true craft and the most beautiful of arts. I've only saw three movies in my life that achieved that - Cameron Crowe's „Vanilla Sky” and Ingmar Bergman's „Wild Strawberries”. Third one is David Lynch's „Mulholland Drive”.

I often read about the movie before I see it. Before watching MD I've read almost everything I could find about it – I knew that David Lynch's films require massive preparation before watching them. And „Mulholland Drive” is one of very few movies that loses absolutely nothing once you know the plot, the ending, all the twist and turns. Because seeing it unravel on a screen is such a unique, fascinating expierience that even tough the movie was horribly disturbing, even scaring, I will come back to it many times.

The story is incredibly simple – Diane Selwyn' lover Camilla leaves her and annouces her engagement to a movie director. Both Diane and Camilla are actresses, Diane being unsuccesful one. Diane feels manipulated and brokenhearted and she hires a hitman to kill Camilla. She goes to sleep – her dream lasts for first 4/5 of the movie. After she wakes up she sees a blue key, a sign from the hitmen that Camilla has been killed. Diane, consumed by her guilt kills herself.

Suspiria

(98 min, 1977)

Director: Dario Argento
Writers: Dario Argento , Daria Nicolodi
Stars: Jessica Harper, Stefania Casini and Flavio Bucci

Haunted Wonderland

A young American dancer, Suzy, travels to Europe to join a famous ballet school. As she arrives, the camera turns to another young woman, who appears to be fleeing from the school. She returns to her apartment where she is gruesomely murdered. Meanwhile, the young American is trying to settle in at the ballet school, but hears strange noises and is troubled by bizarre occurrences.

“Suspiria” made by famous director Dario Argento in 1977 is one of the most remarkable horror movies. Its visual side with vibrant colors is so fascinating you can't take your eyes off the screen. The music by Goblin is eerie and builds up the suspense to extreme levels, sounding a lot like a creepy lullaby which would put you to eternal sleep. The insane visuals, with different shades of red, blue and yellow glowing from the screen and unique soundtrack are perfect for the story, filled with mysterious foot steps, whispers, screams and desperate cries for help. All you have to do to be scared during this film is to turn it on, turn off the light and make sure the speakers are working.

The setting of ballet school is genius – innocent ballerinas, wearing white are mercilessly killed by mysterious stranger. The scariest part of the movie is its atmosphere and because of omnipresent evil even outside the doors of the ballet school the characters can't feel safe. It's not important why the things we see happen are taking place, as the characters in the film we have to accept they do and focus on observing the events carefully. The film has amazing sequences of murders which are bloody, but in a fashion that's quite far from reality. It's more of, to use modern example, “Kill Bill” kind of violence, but the build up to it is truly chilling. The most notable example and the scariest scene of the movie is the scene which later inspired one of the killings in “Saw” series and I'm sure when you see “Suspiria”, you'll know what scene is on my mind. Because of the long run time and the theme playing in the background the intensity of it is almost unbearable. The violence and the creativity in which victims' lives are ended is also frightening.

Repulsion

(105 min, 1965)
Director: Roman Polanski
Writers: Roman Polanski (original screenplay), Gérard Brach (original screenplay)
Stars: Catherine Deneuve, Ian Hendry and John Fraser

Fear. Solitude. Madness.

(spoilers)

A Belgian girl, Carol (Catherine Deneuve), works as a manicurist at a London beauty salon. While having lunch, a good looking young man, Colin, spots her and makes a date for another evening. She shares a flat with her sister Helen. Her sister's married lover, Michael takes Helen abroad for a holiday. Left alone in their flat, Carol's moments of catalepsy and hallucination increase and deepen into madness

“Repulsion” is a fascinating portrait of growing insanity – the movie centers around one character, repeats certain situations and uses a lot of symbols, which are easy to decipher but at the same time they remain very clever and build disturbing and eerie climate of the painful isolation.

Carol is incredibly beautiful, shy and fragile girl who lives with her sister Helen. Her sister knows that something is not right with Carol – she genuinely worries about her when she's going away, but she is not concerned enough to see the signs of her sister's madness or to get her psychiatric help. Michael, her boyfriend, points out that Carol should see the doctor, but Helen quickly dismisses his suggestion, almost worried that someone noticed there is something wrong with her younger sister. Perhaps if Helen wasn't so busy with her life and paid more attention to Carol, the tragedy would never happened. But can anyone blame her? She was just moving on with her life, after all she lived with Carol, kept her company, was the person Carol talked to the most.

Swimming Pool

(102 min, 2003)
Director: François Ozon
Writers: François Ozon (screenplay), Emmanuèle Bernheim
Stars: Charlotte Rampling, Charles Dance and Ludivine Sagnier

Author's journey.

(spoilers)

“Every secret of a writer's soul, every experience of his life, every quality of his mind is written large in his works. “
- Virginia Woolf

“Swimming Pool” focuses on Sarah (Charlotte Rampling), a rigid and conservative, yet successful English mystery writer. Sarah's personal life and new novel take a dramatic twist when she meets her publisher's sexy, free-spirited daughter Julie (Ludivine Sagnier) at his gracious mansion in the French countryside.

The movie is a great thriller, but also can be viewed as a meticulous study of author's mind and creative process – the plots, the events, the characters, that after a while start shaping into a book. “Swimming Pool” greatest assets include fantastic acting and intriguing story, which in the end, will turn out to be something completely different from what you assumed in the beginning.

Sarah is a middle aged woman, who writes mystery novels filled with sex and blood, although she lives peaceful life. She is not very fond of people – when her fan asks her for autograph on the subway, she pretends she isn't a famous author. She keeps her interactions with people short and distant. Sarah lives her life alone, depriving herself of many joys – she eats healthy meals, she doesn't have a boyfriend, she doesn't live a wild life. We may suspect she did once, but now she settled for peaceful existence. But her mind is still where it was when she was young – creating crime stories, using its vivid imagination to create complicated plots and colorful characters.

Sarah stays in her editor's house where she meets his daughter Julie, a complete opposite of her. Julie has casual sex, eats whatever she wants, swims in the pool naked and uses life to its fullest. As the time passes two women start to bond, Sarah is fascinated to hear about Julie's life and starts to write book about her. She is also borrowing a little from her lifestyle, but still decides to intervene when Julie goes too far in her encounter with men, feeling somewhat protective of her.

The writer is fond of Julie enough to help her cover up a certain incident that will take place next to a pool. We find out at that point of the movie, that Sarah would wish her life was just as her novels, filled with danger and excitement and she doesn't have a problem with morally reprehensible deeds – she doesn't experience second thoughts or guilt, she just does what needs to be done.

By the end of the movie a very clever twist arrives – Sarah is leaving her publisher's office, after informing him she found new one and plans to publish the book she always wanted to write, that differs significantly from her previous work. When she is on her way out, his daughter, Julia appears. She looks similar to the one we met in France, but she is clearly not the same person. Sarah is not surprised, she and Julia don't even exchange quick “hello”. Why? Because Sarah imagined Julie, her personality, her story, the events that took place in the mansion. Her look in the end of the movie is a playful expression that author has when he is confronting the view of a person she carried in her mind with the real Julia. She's not insane or anything like it – she's well aware that Julie was her imagination – she is dedicating the book to her because she is thanking her for inspiration.

“Swimming Pool” is a fantastically constructed film, something that is indispensable in the thriller – I loved how the director used colors and other devices to suggest a little bit about characters. Sarah's coldness is reflected in blue color, Julie's passion and youth in red. The book Sarah writes in the end is entitled “Swimming Pool” - red letters on blue background. I believe because of that book Sarah finally let the playful, joyful side of her outside and now she lives a happy life. The plot also includes many red herrings and false leads, for example the phone call to the mansion from the publisher. It is impossible to figure out the ending before director decides it's the right time for it.

The Machnist

(101 min, 2004)

Director: Brad Anderson
Writer: Scott Kosar
Stars: Christian Bale, Jennifer Jason Leigh and Aitana Sánchez-Gijón

Nightmares of the guilty.

(spoilers)
“I am denial guilt and fear
and I control you
I am the prayers of the naive
and I control you
I am the lie that you believe
and I control you”
- “Mr. Self Destruct”, Nine Inch Nails

Trevor Reznik (Christian Bale) is a lathe-operator who suffers from insomnia and hasn't slept in a year. Slowly, he begins to doubt his sanity as increasingly bizarre things start happening at work and at home. Haunted by a deformed co-worker who no one seems to think exists, and an ongoing stream of indecipherable Post-It notes he keeps finding on his fridge, he attempts to investigate what appears to be a mysterious plot against him and, in the process, embroils two women in his madness.

This could have been a great movie, but for me – it's only good. I don't like movies from my own country but when a Polish film dealing with the subject of crime and guilt (“Dług” - “The Debt” in English) tops foreign production – then believe me, it's bad. The movie failed in the crucial thing – the character. Trevor is brilliantly portrayed by Christian Bale, his character is very well developed. But I didn't care about him, at all. Why? I am an empathetic person and I can relate to many things in movies, but seeing an asshole who, out of sheer stupidity, kills a child and then runs away is something I will never (I hope) be able to relate to. I should be sad about what's happening to Trevor – he looks so harmless and sad, but when the truth is revealed I was a bit sorry his arm was rescued in one of the scenes. Killing someone by accident is awful, but understandable. Killing someone because you are not looking at the road while you are driving is not an accident – that kind of stupidity must have been growing for years. No, I definitely can't feel sorry for someone like that.

Match Point

(124 min, 2005)
Director: Woody Allen
Writer: Woody Allen
Stars: Scarlett Johansson, Jonathan Rhys Meyers and Emily Mortimer
 

Game of lust.

(spoilers)

“All people seem to be divided into "ordinary" and "extraordinary". The ordinary people must lead a life of strict obedience and have no right to transgress the law because ... they are ordinary. Whereas the extraordinary people have the right to commit any crime they like and transgress the law in any way just because they happen to be extraordinary.”
- Fyodor Dostoevsky, “Crime and Punishment”

Tennis pro Chris Wilton (Jonathan Rhys Meyers) takes a job as a tennis instructor and hits it off immediately with one of his students, wealthy young Tom Hewitt (Matthew Goode). Tom introduces Chris to his family and Chris falls quickly into a romance with Tom's sister Chloe. But despite the growing certainty that Chris and Chloe will marry, and the enormous professional and financial advantages that come Chris's way through his relationship with the delighted Hewitt family, Chris becomes increasingly intrigued and eventually romantically involved with Tom's fiance, Nola Rice (Scarlett Johansson), a struggling American actress

Lust. One of the seven deadly sins, the force that drives people towards sex, success, greed. It's like fire, if you play with it without being careful – you will get burnt. The problem with the characters in “Match Point” is that no one is being careful – here are the people driven only by their selfish needs, without caring about others or the consequences of their actions.

Who would thought that Woody Allen will shot a thriller, let alone in London without many jokes in it and without one character that would be the standard one for Allen movies usually played by Woody himself. “Match Point” is viewed as something new in his work, although I've never looked at it like this – after all “Match Point” shares a lot, maybe even too much, with another Allen's movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors”. In fact the whole story, the crucial events in it, are almost exactly the same. There is a lot of irony in “Match Point” but the one surrounding the movie, the fact that most “original” Allen's movie made in years is yet again him recycling old ideas, is probably the funniest part.

The Ring

(115 min, 2002)
Director: Gore Verbinski
Writers: Ehren Kruger (screenplay), Kôji Suzuki (novel)
Stars: Naomi Watts, Martin Henderson and Brian Cox

Before you die, you see the ring

Rachel Keller (Naomi Watts) is a journalist investigating a videotape that may have killed four teenagers (including her niece). There is an urban legend about this tape: the viewer will die seven days after watching it. If the legend is correct, Rachel will have to run against time to save her son's (David Dorfman) and her own life
There is such thing as good remake and “The Ring” is the proof for that. The movie is one of the first classic horrors of 00's – almost everyone saw it and it's completely unforgettable. It also started the flood of remakes of Asian horrors - “The Eye”, “Dark Water” and “The Grudge” among others. None of them, with the exception of few amazing moments in “Dark Water”, even compares to “The Ring”, though. I bet after watching it every person freaks out about hearing the ringing of the phone or picking up the coffee mug and seeing a ring. In 2002 “The Ring” was something new and exciting in horror movies, nowadays films from this genre still borrow from this movie, although it didn't invent any the things included in it, along with other remakes of Asian horrors it only made them popular. Years after seeing the movie for the first time, I still feel uneasy when I look on switched off TV set, because I'm scared I'm going to see weird reflections in it. And I remember how scared I was during the first 7 days after I saw this movie.

The prologue of “The Ring”, which is cliched but very well made, suggests another teen horror. But then we meet Rachel, fierce and brave woman who is raising extremely curious son, Aidan (Who calls his mom by her name and not by simple “mom”?) we realize this is not just another silly horror movie. There is some family drama in the story, which brings interesting connections to the players involved. Rachel's curiosity is partly professional and partly mandatory, since she watches the tape. That tape is one of the most fascinating things in the movie – it's abstract, genuinely creepy, interesting and you simply can't get it out of your head. The images from it, all equally disturbing and unsettling, are placed throughout the movie. After Rachel watches the tape the phone rings and quiet voice informs her she has 7 days left to live.

Revolver

(115 min, 2005)
Director: Guy Ritchie
Writers: Luc Besson (adaptation), Guy Ritchie
Stars: Jason Statham, Ray Liotta and Vincent Pastore

Well, fuck me, Guy. What have you been reading?

After seven years in solitary, Jake Green (Jason Statham) is released from prison. In the next two years, he amasses a lot of money by gambling. He's ready to seek his revenge on Dorothy (Mr. D) Macha (Ray Liotta), a violence-prone casino owner who sent Jake to prison. He humiliates Macha in front of Macha's lieutenants, leaves, and keels over. Doctors tell him he has a rare disease and will die in three days; Macha also puts a hit out on him.
After you see this movie you're gonna experience two things – headache and a feeling you saw wonderfully directed mess. After you read a little bit about the movie, you're still gonna have a headache and you'll discover something which will make it worse – there is no key, which is guaranteed to work, to unlock the secrets of this movie.

Apparently, to understand the plot you have to have rather wide knowledge about enlightenment and Buddhism. I have neither of those, because I don't particularly care. Don't get me wrong – I think every religion is interesting and I love reading about them but I hate when a movie, a separate art form, requires me to read books to understand it. I read “if you don't understand the movie don't worry, just read few books about Buddhism” in the opinions of people who actually got the movie. Well, I neither have the time nor “Revolver” is interesting enough for me to dwell in the religion and books to look for meanings. If I wanted to read a book about religion, It'd be a book about my religion. So apparently, Guy Ritchie made his movie for a very small number of people comparing to all the movie goers there are, and everyone else may be in pain during this spectacle.

Lost Highway

(134 min, 1997)
Director: David Lynch
Writers: David Lynch, Barry Gifford
Stars: Bill Pullman, Patricia Arquette and John Roselius

The case of too many "?"

When Fred Madison finds a video tape on his doorstep that shows the interior of his house, he's convinced that someone has broken in and calls the police. Things get really complicated when he finds another videotape showing him killing his wife, and the police arrest him because his wife really was murdered! Then he disappears from the prison and we start watching the life of a young man who works in a garage

Let me tell you a little about me and David Lynch movies. After I saw “Blue Velvet” I couldn't get rid of certain images from it, like Isabella Rosselini singing, lit by this amazing blue light on stage for years. When I was watching Twin Peaks, I couldn't wait to see what happens next and few times I nearly got a heart attack. When I saw “Wild at Heart” it was so good I actually enjoyed the movie that contains both Nicolas Cage and Willem Dafoe in it. And after I saw “Mulholland Dr.” I most likely read every single thread on imdb about it. That's how much those movies moved me – I had to find answers, I couldn't stop thinking about them. You know what I did after I saw “Lost Highway”? I made myself a cup of tea and started reading Newsweek on the balcony.

Because I don't care. So far every movie I saw made by Lynch was made with this amazing passion, with this love for making movies. This one as much as still being wonderfully written and inspired is just dull. It features all of Lynch's best moves – one story suddenly changing into another, blue light, red curtains, individual outstanding scenes (like the moment Pete sees Alice for the first time, love scene, transformation scene), but it just didn't feel “alive” to me. I see characters yell, cry, smile but I can't feel emotions in it. I couldn't get interested with this movie, I kept waiting for something to happen and blow my mind away and it never happened.

But there are some great things in “Lost Highway” - very dark and curious use of music (except for Rammstein which doesn't go with Lynch surrealistic world at all), nice choice with casting of Bill Pullman and Patricia Arquette, couple of goofy detective and their awesome and hilarious exchanges (“Fucker gets more pussy than a toilet seat.”) and already mentioned, outstanding scenes and insanely disturbing and creepy moments. There are huge minuses, though - Balthazar Getty who plays Pete is awful and the story doesn't make much sense. I'm sure if you devote enough time you can get to the bottom of this, but it's not because I actually see the signs of any sense in “Lost Highway”. I believe in Lynch – if “Mulholland Dr.”, “Twin Peaks” and other of his films made sense, this one must be as meticulously constructed too, especially that Lynch said something about it he doesn't say often - “there is one correct answer”. I looked a little and there are theories – doppelgangers, the Devil, the loop – as interesting as they sound, they don't make sense and can be easily abolished. With “Mulholland Dr,” one interpretation explained it all. Here it barely explains half of the stuff we see on screen.

The acting is all right, but nothing spectacular. Arquette mostly just wanders on screen, but has some good moments, particularly the one where she strips for mister Eddy. Pullman is very good, but the best performance is Robert Blake's Mystery Man – one of the creepiest characters in Lynch's movies. However nobody apart from Blake stands out – everything is very forgettable.

I can forgive Lynch making a movie that is boring and too complex. But the movie is forgettable and that is something inexcusable. It had all the right elements but it failed. As much as I admire story that carefully crafted I think Lynch overestimated his viewer. With “Mulholland Dr,” we care enough about the characters to dig deep. But here? Why should I care about crazy jealous man and cheap whore? I didn't. The characters here don't have life in them – they are Lynch's puppets in his theater of grand confusion. And this time I simply don't wanna play.

60/100

Salt

(100 min, 2010)
Director: Phillip Noyce
Writer: Kurt Wimmer
Stars: Angelina Jolie, Liev Schreiber and Chiwetel Ejiofor
 

 Who is Salt?

As a CIA officer, Evelyn Salt swore an oath to duty, honor and country. Her loyalty will be tested when a defector accuses her of being a Russian spy. Salt goes on the run, using all her skills and years of experience as a covert operative to elude capture. Salt's efforts to prove her innocence only serve to cast doubt on her motives, as the hunt to uncover the truth behind her identity continues and the question remains: "Who is Salt?"

Now that is what I call a good action movie - the fact pace picks up soon after the beginning and it never let's go. The movie is very engaging and keeps you on the edge of your seat, slowing down a little, as most action films, in the third act when it's all about fighting bad guys and saving the world.

Interestingly, the lead role was written for a man and the original plan was for Tom Cruise to play Salt. But then the story was rewritten and agent Salt became Evelyn Salt. It's a fantastic change. Had Cruise played the lead the movie would be like better version of “Mission Impossible”. But with Jolie...ah, Jolie.

We root for Evelyn, although we don't know much about her and she remains a mystery – is she really a Russian spy? Or is she being set up? From the first scenes, when we see her tortured we feel for her. Also, comparing to another action heroines played by Jolie, Salt is surprisingly feminine – I didn't expect that. In first scenes she has blond hair, looks innocent and her voice sounds so soft, that when the action scenes begin you are really shocked. Her first escape is one of the most amazing parts of the movie, because you totally didn't see that coming – woman so skinny and fragile winning with all the guys and using really clever techniques to get out of a trap. However, when she picked up a fire extinguisher I was surprised her arm didn't break off.

Jolie is supposedly the only female action star in Hollywood. It's hard to disagree with that statement, I don't really consider Milla Jovovich to be a star and I guess she is the only competition. Angelina reportedly did most of her stunts for the movie, which even when the plot requires only watching not thinking with all the almost impossible things going on, I find that to be the most unbelievable. If she truly jumped on that track she would break into tiny pieces. But when you watch “Tomb Rider”, “Wanted” or “Salt” you forget about it. She's convincing – maybe it's because of her tough and cold eyes – you look in them and you know one thing for sure – no wonder she is so hard to catch.

What I like about Jolie's performance here is that she mixes her action and dramatic skills, for the first time. In “Wanted” she just looked pretty and played cool character, here she plays complicated woman and gets to display all kinds of emotions. Jolie is the best thing about this movie and the reason enough to see it. Plus she is so amazingly gorgeous I couldn't keep my eyes off her.

Somebody wrote that this film is better James Bond movie than all the recent Bond films. I agree. The formula is pretty much the same, especially near the end of the movie, except for one crucial difference – Salt really is all alone. She can't trust anyone, she has to figure out all by herself. And watching her do that, how clever her actions are and how complicated her schemes turn out to be is immensely fun.

The movie for the bigger part is very fun to watch thanks to great cinematography and as usual, very good score from James Newton Howard. The story itself may not be original, but there are certain scenes, including the final kill of the movie, that are unlike anything I've seen so far. The only complain I really have apart from the weaker third act is the fact there was not much of chemistry between Evelyn and her husband. Also the guy who played him was so far out of Jolie's league I thought he will turn out to be her brother.

The film features nice performances from Liev Schreiber and Daniel Olbrychski (one of the best actors from my country). But after the movie is over you won't be able to decide – whether you prefer to see Angelina in her dramatic roles (like her fantastic work in “Gia” and “Changeling”) or easily knocking out guys in films like this.
The story may be simple at first, but then various twists and turns arrive. They are not especially impressive, but still because of those “Salt” keeps you thinking a little more often than average action movie, trying to figure out both the plot and Evelyn's motivations.

We are having very good summer season in theaters. “Salt” is definitely one of the biggest highlights and one of the better action films in recent years. There is a gate left for possible sequel and I'm hoping for it. I'd rather see that than another Bond movie. I think women make far more interesting spies than guys do and Salt...she would probably win with 007. Without any martinis or sex in between shooting at her targets.

74/100