Scribez

I am tonight, a man on a mission. I will be putting aside my modesty when I write this blog. Those thinking that I am blowing my own pipe will actually realize that they feel the same way deep inside. For tonight, I am angry-as-hell at a pathetic group of people hell bent on ruining a good vibe - The Pretenders (and to a lesser extent, The Wanna-be).

What ripped my facade of tolerance and fueled my rage today was a statement by a man of stunted intellectual abilities claiming that he has been an Iron Maiden fan since he was in the 6th grade. His favourite Maiden album being Brave New World which he claims to have bought in 7th grade. That would be in 1997-98. The album of course came out in 2000. As a Maiden fan and a serious music buff, I was shocked at this blasphemy. It is understandable that such a statement would be uttered to raise one’s position in a social circle. It is also inevitable that such statements will now be flying around since Maiden will be performing in Bangalore. We got into an argument when I revealed the true time of release of the said album. As expected, he lost his temper and I lost mine. My rage stemmed from the fact that every song that the bastard had in his computer came from my collection. His social networking site profile shows the name of every artist who’s song he has burned and taken from me. And he thinks he can argue with me on music?

This incident only serves as a starting point to my rant. There are people who claim to be big fans of serious films. Any attempt
at discussing any of the “admired” films reveal the shallow depths of their
understanding of the film and the searing heights of their illusions of
grandeur. The same goes for games. Idiots who claim that Half Life is boring because the graphics are dated. The same goes for books. Idiots who claim that they are fans of The Da Vinci Code and go around talking about Magdalene and The Priory like they’ve researched about it for years.

The main point that I am trying to discuss here is that these fermented remnants of bovine excreta don’t have a point of view of their own but keep peddling articles and reviews from other sources as if it’s their own ideas. I must point out that there are those who use the same said sources to enhance their understanding rather than define it. I see no harm in this form of growth. Everyone does that, you shape your ideas based on others’. But to claim that these ideas are your own is indecent and below human dignity. There are many who mock me for my tastes but secretly they
wish they had it. One develops a sense of identity by first assuming
others’ and then growing into their own (ofcourse there are the
counter-culturists, but again, they grow into their own identities as well).

When a wanna-be tries to up the ante on you, you get pissed. Not just because the credibility of his argument is suspect, or the fact that he will not accept his fault when all is revealed, but also because it is demeaning to your ego when a person of clearly inferior intellect tries to undermine yours. The target of a pretender’s verbal diarrhea is always the intellectual. By proving that he is superior to the intellectual, the pretender basks in the false sense of his superiority.

I was a pretender once. There isn’t anyone anywhere who hasn’t claimed to have done this or done that while he never has. But slowly, I grew older and a bit wiser. The lies and deceits that one creates around one-self to exude a false aura of superiority slowly begins to appear pointless and you realize your real worth and standing in the world, which mostly amounts to nothing. This is a humbling experience. Your ego hurts a bit. But finally you become comfortable with who you are, your beliefs, your tastes and your history.

powered by performancing firefox

Rating: 8/10

By now, we know that Alejandro Gonarez Inarritu is a great film-maker. He has directed two more brilliant movies (21 Grams, Babel) and two amazing short films (one of the 11 in 9′11″01, and one for the BMW series). But in his debut film itself, he shows his prowess.

The plot consists of three intersecting stories, linked by an accident shown at the start of the movie. There is Octavio, in love with his sister-in-law, Susana. He decides to fight his dog in order to make enough for them to leave his brother and mother for ever. The second story is of Valeria,a famous model and Daniel,a magazine publisher, who leaves his wife for Valeria. They are also affected strongly by the accident. The third involves an old revolutionary, Chivo, who now does “jobs” for a sum. He longs to talk to his long-separated daughter (who thinks he’s dead).

The plot will invoke comparisons with Pulp Fiction, but the similarities are (mostly) superficial. This movie is more emotional, less “fun”, but almost as entertaining.

The themes follow from one story to another. The first and the second share a theme of betrayal and infidelity, and the second and third are both about lost glory. There are subtle and rich implications present in all stories (How do you trust a person who has betrayed someone, even if he betrayed them for you? Will you yourself, if given a chance, kill a man who you paid to have killed?)

But there is almost nothing these stories share superficially, except the accident, and dogs. Dogs are important to all three stories. The trained dogs do wonderful jobs.

The acting is uniformly good, although some actors shine more than others, particularly Goya Toledo (Valeria), who is intense, and Emilio Echevarría (Chivo), who says much with his eyes. Watch how Emilio’s voice trembles during the penultimate scene of the movie.

Inarritu amazes with his direction in his debut film. The pacing is excellent, and so is the editing. The atmosphere is heavy. The moie is slickly shot, and Inarritu directs with a moving camera, which involves us immediately in the action. Reminds me of Scorcese.

There are problems, however. Most of them lie with the story. As I said, these movies share almost nothing superficially, and the movie feels like three stories, not one. The first story is a rather cliched one, and is saved only by Inarritu’s blazing direction. “Daniel and Valeria” deserved more time, as it is the most heart-wrenching story of the three.

This also affects the structure, as we cannot return to the earlier stories after we move on (unlike 21 Grams, which handled 3 stories in parallel). The structure feels fragmented, like Pulp Fiction, which was able to avoid this difficulty by entertaining us thoroughly. Here, we get emotionally involved, and it is dissapointing to not return to Valeria’s story after Chivo’s tale begins.

But Inarritu succeeds at making a strong debut, and tell three disconnected stories, covering a range of emotions and situations equally well. At times he is playful, at times dramatic, at times stylish, but always brilliant.

Notes:

-I was particularly impressed at how he intercut the sequences to show the time order of the events.

- Two characters from different stories turns lights on-and-off when they are uneasy.

- The middle story is almost unconnected from the other two, which are more strongly connected. Again reminds me of Pulp Fiction, and the place of Bruce Willis’s story in it.

- Inarritu reportedly said that “Love’s a Bitch” is not an accurate translation, so I don’t know whether the title is meant as a pun or not.

Edit: Added a note about structure.

—-

Anonick

I am a film addict. At this point who isn’t? I remember a time when mentioning names like Wong Kar Wai or Akira Kurusawa in a conversation would result in raised eyebrows and sneers. Now, every other dawg is an Almadovar fan or a Fellini freak. I really don’t know how much of the works by these directors are being understood by this new wave of (pseudo?) cine-philes. My fix of films come from the good old pirated CD/DVD dealers in Cochin. There is this little shop where the dude will get me any movie I ask for, even if no one else wants it; he’d get me one copy. We have a relationship going back over 5 years. There is a whole black market of pirated stuff here and it is quite efficient. I have found gems in these shops that are not found in bigger metros like Banglore and Chennai.

The new anti-piracy drive by the Govt. is a blatant attempt at killing my supply of illicit escapism. Here’s what is happening-

The Police are raiding stores and DVD/VCD rental shops, and confisticating everything they have. My good friend, the pirate of cochin had his entire collection confisticated. This man is not only a pirate, he is a serious movie buff. He has 3 versions of Citizen Kane with him- DVD conversions of varying quality. He is a collector and supplier par excellence. But it’s all illegal. The cops even confisticated blank CDs and DVDs. All in all, this brother lost over Rs. 9 lakhs in merchandise. Woah!

I know that piracy is wrong, that it is illegal and kills the movie industry. But here is my argument for it. The Malayalam film industry is a con. The home videos are of such low quality that you’d wonder where the Rs.300 you shell out for a DVD is spent. The conversion is bad- some of the older films are actually converted from video cassettes. There are no multiple audio tracks. There is no bonus material whatsoever. A rough estimation by me pegs the true value of these DVDs (including a generous profit) at about Rs.120. The pirated version is only Rs.100. So why shell out more for the same shit. The legal version of the DVD should provide the consumers with some incentives for it’s purchase.

I don’t always go for the pirated DVDs; I have a collection of original DVDs (foreign films) too. There is quality in conversions and a slew of bonus features that I wouldn’t get in a pirated DVD, so I have no reservations in paying the price printed on it’s back. Some of the films that you really want never make it legally to the CD/DVD shops. Films by Ozu, Kobayashi, Kar Wai, to name a few, are not there on any shelves in any CD/DVD shops selling legal DVDs. Ordering it online is an option, but I’ve done it and I’ve gotten a broken disc with me to remind me to never try that again.

Another point I’d like to raise is the censorship of original DVD content by the Censor Board. The original DVD of Irreversible by Gasper Noe is actually 16 minutes shorter than the actual film. Y Tu Mama Tambien has been cut too- very abrupt cuts. The pirated DVDs feature pristine conversions and no such censoring. Not to mention, films like The Last Temptation Of Christ are actually banned in India and piracy is the only way of getting it.

So in a country where good films seldom reach theatres, where there are no incentives for buying an original CD/DVD, where half the films that do reach legally are censored, why should I buy or wait for an original DVD? I agree again that piracy is illegal. But in many cases, it is the only option. It is a thriving business because of this, even with the raids on. I can still get the DVDs from the pirates of Cochin and I will keep buying it.

powered by performancing firefox

Director: Pedro Almodovar

Rating: 8.5/10

There is a vein of dark humour that runs in all of Almodovar’s films. Volver is no exception. Though Almodovar simplifies his narrative, he still layers it with his usual repertoire of wit, sensitivity and not to mention- an obsession with women. Penelope Cruz excels under her mentor’s directing again (after All About My Mother). This is by far her best performance to date and long expected one.

The plot revolves Raimunda (Penelope Cruz), her daughter Paula (Yohana Cobo) and Raimunda’s sister Sole (Lola Duenas). Raimunda lives with Paco, the two have a very cold relationship. The events lead upto Paula killing her father after he tries to make moves on her. The film uses converging parallel narratives of Raimunda and Paula trying to get rid of the body while trying to re-build their lives and that of Sole being visited by her dead mother. There is also the story of Augustina, whose mother left her 4 years before and she hopes to find out what happened to her. All this leads to a powerful, emotional and revealing conclusion that is definitely Almodovar’s.

One of the problems I had with this film was it’s pace- the film meanders a bit here and there. But over all, the acting, the directing and the script holds you by the balls (and thats the sign of a good film). Cruz is divine. I am rooting for her to win the best actress Oscar this year. The cinematography by Jose Luis Alcaine and editing by Jose Salcedo is good, but then again, this is a director’s film. the music by Alberto Iglesias is forgettable, but the song Volver, sung by Penelope Cruz stays in your mind.

On Almadovar
There are very few directors who capture women on screen as well as Almodovar (Wong Kar Wai is the best for me). The way he frames the actors and the way he nurtures the characters in a film is quite intriguing. He is an auteur beyond compare and arguably one of the best directors alive. But what makes his films tick? As I mentioned before, there is always the dark humour, but I feel the reason why his films stand out is because he is a humanist. He cares about his characters and he cares about what they represent. Almodovar talks not about death in this film but about the “rich culture surrounding death”. Discussing philosophy in a simple narrative is Almodovar’s gift.

On Cruz
Cruz is beautifull, Cruz is divine and with this film she shows she is a great actress too. Her range and depth is used exceptionally well here. I liked her in Vanilla Sky but I loved her here. The screen oozes with her presence and her energy. She brings a poignancy and believability to the role of Raimunda. Penelope Cruz succeeds in making us care for her character. This is not method acting; for this to happen you need a screen presence and charisma that only true stars can bring to a film. Cruz is…(I better stop).

Though a film that I thoroughly enjoyed, it is not without problems. There is the occasional drift into melodrama and the ending that leaves a few too many questions unanswered. But overall I was won over by Penelope Cruz’s performance of a lifetime and Almodovar’s great direction. As artists, the mentor and the apprentice seems to have reached a level where both are now peers.

(p.s. I saw it on pirated DVDs. Take that Indian Police.)

Review by: bApHoMEt

powered by performancing firefox

Dear Santa

I have never asked anything from you. Well, I don’t believe you exist. I whistled at the proof that Santa doesn’t exist. Besides you’d never fit in a chimney.

But desperate times need desperate measures. I am as desperate as a pig being taken to a pork factory, I swear. I need you to exist, physics be damned. [1]

Ok, so here’s the thing: I need a girlfriend. I dunno how to say this in Icelandic (I could use BabelFish, aber Es saugt[2] ), but I assume you speak English (and read it). Otherwise just post this in some free translation thingy on the net. And if you’re free, image search “Queen Elizabeth”… wowie!… (See? I’m so desperate…)

Here it’s again: I need a girlfriend. A girl who’s my friend and who’d like me to bang her. No, wait, I move to strike that from the testimony… er… letter. I mean, I need a girlfriend. Hope you know what that means. That beard would’ve attracted quite some girls ;-).

Well, can anyone give such a simple request for Xmas? NOOO! People will be asking for world peace, or enlarged organs, or such. I bet you’ll be proud of me for this.

Well, what else? Oh, yeah, how’s Rudolph? (Sorry, I don’t know the other’s names.) And how’re the elves? Snow white? [3]

Have a nice Christmas. I know you can go faster than light [4] . And carry 321,300 tons. Go, Santa!
Your believer,

Anonick.
P.S. Hmm… I don’t have a big enough sock for a girlfriend. [5] Place her beside me on the bed, will ya?

Notes

1. ↑ I need to write an apology letter to Einstein now, darn.
2. ↑ which means “but it sucks” in German. Ah, why do I need to explain jokes…
3. ↑ Oops, that’s another story…
4. ↑ Must add that in the apology letter to Ein.
5. ↑ And I don’t want Thumbelina.

——

Anonick