No Angels. Only Demons.

A valuable lesson was reaffirmed when I came out of the theater after tolerating Angels and Demons for more than 90 minutes (And the movie was still going on). The lesson was 'Garbage In, Garbage Out'. A trashy book can only give birth to a trashy movie if not worse. The demons of this movie are going to haunt me. For a long time to come.

Ron Howard's Angels and Demons had the honor of becoming the third movie I left half way in the theater. The same thing had happened with the book. There are few books I have left unfinished. This was one of them. The movie is a complete waste of time, money and energy. Just within half an hour, it will leave you exhausted with its unbearably haphazard screenplay and a camera work that trivializes the art of movie making. The actors will leave you breathless, not with their stunning acting, but with expressionless faces and senseless dialogue deliveries. There are so many problems with this movie that this can be taught in a course like 'How not to make a movie'.

The entire movie is about some insane man who poses as a follower of some imaginary bizarre ancient cult 'Illuminati', taking the Vatican hostage with a stolen 'Anti-matter' from CERN. I know it sounds ridiculously funny. God knows what I was thinking when I decided to go for it!

In this agonizingly long movie, Robert Langdon, the Harvard professor runs around the Vatican churches, following some directional clues given by the statues of saints. A big problem with the movie is lighting. It seems that the entire movie was shot in twilight without the camera lights. How can a director be so ignorant about visual look of a movie escapes my reasoning. I am not claiming that I am very attentive in listening to dialogues. But I have a reasonable ability of understanding dialogues of a movie without much effort. However, dialogues in this movie are hardly more than whispers. And the background score (which by the way is completely out of place), adds to the inaudibility of those whispers.

The size of this post would have been five fold if I had stayed till the end of the movie. Fortunately for you and me, I did not. So you won't have to bear with me and my stinging attacks on the movie anymore and I preserved my own sanity as well.

Movie Review: X-Files: I Want To Believe

So do I. I want to believe that Chris Carter could actually make an inane movie like this and spoil the reputation of a series as brilliant as X Files. I want to believe that David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson agreed to play the roles of Mulder and Scully again for this movie. I want to believe that a sequel can be as bad as this. But I find all this quite unbelievable. Though unfortunately everything is true.

At the risk of sounding overly critical, I must say that the movie is extremely banal, predictable and lacking what makes a movie successful - substance. For those who are fans of the series X-files, including me, know that it is about supernatural and paranormal activities. The two FBI agents Fox Mulder and Dana Scully unravel the mysteries of the inexplicable phenomena including UFOs etc. This movie is nowhere near the original theme. It goes down the path of a psycho thriller movie which is as lowly and teen-like as 'I know what you did last summer' and others in the same category.

** Potential spoiler warning **

Several people end up missing and a priest who is a convicted pedophile, has divine visions about these missing people. This is the only so called paranormal phenomenon involved in the movie. And the whole issue is treated with so much banality that it remains neither a Christian-movie (like Christian rock music) nor does it become a supernatural thriller. The dialogues are some of the worst I have ever heard in a Hollywood or a Bollywood movie. Some of the scenes are so annoying that you feel like leaving your seat and going back to office on a Saturday evening.

Some of the infantile scenes include,

1. Agent Scully is now a doctor and is treating a boy who is terminally ill. All of a sudden, one fine morning she comes up with an idea of applying Stem Cell therapy on that kid. And guess what she does! She opens her internet browser and opens our good old google and literally types 'Stem Cell Research'. Then she randomly clicks on some of the links and she prints out a report out of it in a few minutes with title 'Stem Cell Research' and the next day she goes into the hospital, prepares the operation theater for the surgery and operates upon that boy!

Way to go, Google !!!!

2. Scully and Mulder are standing outside the FBI office (For no apparent reason) and they look at the portraits of G.W. Bush and Edgar Hoover besides the entrance and without any relevance, the X-Files theme music starts playing (For those who are not aware of that, X-Files theme music is a pretty spooky one). If the attempt was made to make us laugh with a completely childish Bush-joke, it failed miserably.

3. Mulder's car (The director is apparently a huge fan of Ford cars as they are all over in the movie) is pushed off a hill by the bad guy and falls several feet in a trench. And yet, like a superhero, Mulder emerges after a few hours from the car and goes on to finish the villains in their own home ground.

4. Mulder's jokes and particularly one dialogue - a degenerated, crude and offensive joke are annoying. I wish the script writer did not attempt to show off his own humor. Or the lack of it.

5. What is with this pretending to solve moral issues pleaguing Christianity? Is the director trying to convince Christian community that Stem cell research is good after all? Is he trying to showcase the divine God-granted powers of priests who have visions and hear voices of God? Even those priets who are convicted pedophiles? I don't understand. What has it got to do with X-Files for God's sake? Why? Why?

And the list goes on and on. The movie was so bad that I would write this director off my movie watch-list for years to come. I beg anyone who has any plans to watch this movie not to do so. Do yourselves a favor. Stay home. Go out for a walk. Read Washington Post or NY Times but do not watch this movie.

Movie Review: Pulp Fiction (1994)

Style, style and more style. John Travolta, Bruce Willis, Samuel Jackson, Uma Thurman and above all, direction of Quaintain Tarantino. Can you expect anything less than 100% stylish and entertaining movie?

Starting with a pulse racing title music, the entire movie puts an iron grip around you for two and half hours time. I had watched this movie when I was a kid, some time during my school years. And I was totally clueless about why this movie was so famous. I had hardly understood some of the dialogues and those that i understood didn't make sense at that time. After talking to Priyanka a couple of days ago, I decided to give it another try, after all I am a huge fan of John Travolta! And I am glad I watched it again!

The movie is full of 'four letter words', crude humor, intermittent action scenes, closely knit storyline and a display of class acting. The underlying plot is about three men's lives (Travolta, Willis and Jackson) who work for a gangster (Rhames). The characters of these men are portrayed in a wonderful fashion and detail. They act differently in different situations and yet they have a common belief of loyalty and conviction.

[Spoiler Warning: Following contains details about suspense. So if you plan to watch the movie (which you should if you are a movie buff), don't read it till you watch the movie.]


Things I loved about the movie

-The scene in which Bruce Willis bursts into outrage over his lost watch which was a gift from his father.

- Bruce Willis going back to the cellar where Wallace was being tortured. Even though he himself wanted to kill Wallace, his conscience forced him to go back and save Wallace.

- Samuel Jackson reciting a verse from Bible every time before he was going to kill someone.

- Travolta and Thurman's dance on their date.

- Travolta's hair style and his on screen persona

- Samuel Jackson handling the robbery situation in the restaurant.


Things I hated about the movie

- Why on earth Travolta had to die?
Except for that one scene in which Bruce Willis kills Travolta, I enjoyed every moment of the movie!


Some of the memorable dialogues

Vincent (Travolta): Jules, did you ever hear the philosophy that once a man admits that he's wrong that he is immediately forgiven for all wrongdoings? Have you ever heard that?

Butch(Willis): [beating up Wallace (Rhames)] You feel that sting, big boy, huh? That's pride F***' with you! You gotta fight through that s***!

Wallace (Rhames): Yeah, we cool. Two things. Don't tell nobody about this. This s*** is between me, you, and Mr. Soon-To-Be-Living-The-Rest-of-His-Short-***-Life-In-Agonizing-Pain Rapist here. It ain't nobody else's business.

Wallace (Rhames): You leave town tonight, right now. And when you're gone, you stay gone, or you be gone. You lost all your L.A. privileges. Deal? [This one is a classic :D]

The Wolf(Keitel): Jimmie, lead the way. Boys, get to work.
Vincent(Travolta): A please would be nice.
The Wolf(Keitel): Come again?
Vincent(Travolta): I said a please would be nice.
The Wolf(Keitel): Get it straight buster - I'm not here to say please, I'm here to tell you what to do and if self-preservation is an instinct you possess you'd better f***ing do it and do it quick! I'm here to help - if my help's not appreciated then lotsa luck, gentlemen.


[Image Sources: http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/PYR/NECA0003~Pulp-Fiction-Posters.jpg
http://img2.timeinc.net/ew/dynamic/imgs/061006/17191__pulp_fiction_l.jpg
http://youretime.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/pulp-fiction.jpg]

Movie Review - Michael Clayton

Ever since A Civil Action and Erin Brockovich, if you have been waiting for a good legal drama, your wait is over. Michael Clayton is undoubtedly one of the finest dramas of this year. Written and directed by Tony Gilroy (The screenplay writer of The Bourne movies), MC is gripping, thought provoking and a perfect crime drama.

George Clooney plays a lawyer/deal-maker in a large law-firm in NY city. A case that his firm is handling, involving a corporation, goes awry and he is called in to clean up. Things get nasty as he learns the truth behind the corporation and their tactics. Three fourth of the movie runs in flashback and then in the final piece of drama, the story springs back into present. The climax is one of the best in class and leaves the viewers smiling, amazed.

George Clooney once again proves why he is the boss in hollywood. Calm yet passionate, unpredictable and intense. Clooney literally lives his character. The intensity with which he acts puts him class apart from other actors. The camera work, lighting, motion and sound all remind me of The Bourne series. The only difference is that it is not as fast moving as Bourne yet equally enjoyable, even more so to some extent.

There have been a lot of movies about the 'the evil corporations'. This movie is also similar. But it views the story from a more humane perspective. The 'blind zones' created by the scriptwriter make the movie much more thrilling to watch. Total lack of predictability makes it a perfect thriller.


If it is running in any theater near you, go and watch it. I regret not watching this movie in theater. I am sure it would have been worth every minute and dollar spent on it

Equilibrium (2002) - Movie Review

There are some movies which pass both the tests. Giving entertainment as well as driving across a message. Equilibrium is one such movie. I did not have any great expectations from the movie and I started watching it with a skeptical note. What turned out to be was 100 minutes of absolutely thrilling and adrenalin pumping entertainment.

Equilibrium is a Sci-Fi/Thriller movie in which the story begins after the imaginary Third World War has destroyed the earth and a handful of people have survived. These people are ruled by an organization which claims to have eradicated woes and agony from the world by eliminating the core reason for it all. And that reason, they say is feelings. So they have developed a drug which eliminates feelings and emotions from a human. And feeling is considered a crime punishable to incineration. They call it sense-crime.

Christian Bale is one such commander (Cleric in the movie's lingo) who realizes the true importance of feelings. He realizes that without feelings, there is no meaning to life. And then he rebels against the empire.

The movie very delicately shows feelings creeping up on Bale. Little things like a puppy's love for him make him realize that without feeling the life is not lived but just existed. Some dialogues too grab attention of a true movie lover. Like when Marie says to him "Without love, breath is just a clock .. ticking away.. " Some of the Matrix-like action scenes deserve loud applause. Bale has done a good job in acting.

IMDB review at http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0238380/

[Image Source: http://www.wallpaperbase.com/wallpapers/movie/
equilibrium/equilibrium_1.jpg]

Movie Review - To Kill A Mockingbird (1962)

Some movies are hyped up unnecessarily without any apparent reasons. An old classic 'To Kill A Mocking Bird' is one such example. I am sure the classic movie lovers would loathe that statement of mine. But I can not help but be honest in expressing my feelings about the movie.

Based on a critically acclaimed novel by Harper Lee with the same title, this movie features in the Top 50 movie list of all times from IMDB (http://www.imdb.com/chart/top) at number 46. It is a Black-&-White movie produced in 1962 with the talented star of his time Gregory Pack inn lead role.

The story revolves around a Lawyer who defends an African-American man for the crime that he did not commit. It depicts the severely racist and disgusting attitude of American people at that time. It depicts an African American's plight and humiliation that he had to face because of such racist community. Along with this main theme, it also shows innocent gambol of two little children of this Lawyer and few incidents surrounding them.

Now about the criticism of this movie. First, the director has taken a real long time to build up the plot. The weaving of the tale is far too lengthy and lackluster. I agree that it is difficult to appreciate a classic movie because of lack of technical magnificence of lighting and sound effects. But this movie lacks the grip in the plot too.

The movie is supposed to be a Court Room Drama. And even the book for that matter. But the courtroom scene in the movie is hardly 15 minutes long in the whole movie, which is of the length of about 130 minutes. The dialogues are banal. Acting of all the actors except the two kids and the legend Pack himself are superfluous to say the least.

Though the intelligentsia would demean my opinion by calling it pedestrian because I am unable to appreciate the so called 'Classics', I would stand up and boldly say that I would rather rate movies like 'Gladiator' or 'Cindrella Man' of today's time better than these old movies which have grabbed the place in history as classics just because they appeared earlier in time.