Which non-Indian film did you watch recently

[kid-glove]

Ebert

Metacritic

Officially retired, aana innum passion kuraiyala. Once again, he turns out to be the voice of reason, “There are limits to artistic self-indulgence,” begins Todd McCarthy’s review in Variety. I disagree. And there are no limits to the pleasures that can be afforded from this kind of freedom.

It’s no less pertinent that a Spanish boy on the street previously asks Isaach De Bankolé — who’s channeling Lee Marvin in Point Blank, and is called “Lone Man” in the cast list — if he’s an American gangster and De Bankolé replies, “No.” It seems like an act of prophecy that an American gangster like Chaney should meet his symbolic comeuppance in the same country that might now arrest him for war crimes if he should ever make an actual appearance there. It also seems relevant that the boy and his street pals are reluctant to believe what the Lone Man says. After all, American gangsterism is a style that seems designed for export. In Point Blank, directed by an Englishman, the terrain is supposedly Los Angeles, but Lee Marvin might as well be trekking across Mars; and in Le samourai, directed by a Frenchman — another obvious source for The Limits of Control — the terrain is supposedly Paris, but Alain Delon might as well be holing up somewhere in Tokyo.

Although he didn't touch on Tati's "Play time", it is implied and self-contained by that final point. All three films came out 67, and yet, none so particularly authentic on its time, name and space, manufactured its own universe. We still remember the hats and cars in "Le Samourai" or the multi-floored apartments and colored toilet lotions in "Point blank". The magic of films is that such universes transgress the purported rules of authenticity and become a unique fixation/redefinition of that time & era. Mostly they are utopian like every major city and too distant & mechanical in its character, that is only fair the lead character (in all these films) fail to "connect", even at faintest level.

This couldn't be made explicit and any more clearer by an obscure (the film is full of 'em) character 'Blonde' (played by Tilda Swinton), in an almost monologuized exchange with 'Man with no name'

Blonde: Are you interested in films, by any chance? I like really old films. You can really see what the world looked like......thirty, fifty, a hundred years ago. You know the clothes, the telephones, the trains......the way people smoked cigarettes**......the little details of life. The best films are like dreams you're never sure you've really had.

**- Cut to a Spanish waiter smoking the cigar - slow mo. and the full terrain plus a swift montage of terrain.

Then the ultimate tease of being in a film.
Blonde:Sometimes I like it in films when people just sit there, not saying anything.
*long pause*

And if you play this game like Jarmusch had, you'd better do it to T. It's faultless as I see it. In its ruthless defacement of 'everything' to its bare fundamentals, with a ridiculously post-modernist plot, a successful and memorable film. Timeless.

[groucho070]

Jarmusch? Saw only one film, Broken Flowers. I was amongst three or four folks who saw this in the theater

[groucho070]

Completed re-watching The Godfather trilogies last night with wife. What an emotional roller coaster ride!! Plus the third film works better this time.

[kid-glove]

Jarmusch? Saw only one film, Broken Flowers. I was amongst three or four folks who saw this in the theater

That, I believe, is his most successful film to-date. :P

[kid-glove]

Few other things for those who are interested:

a) The film is shot in Doyle's style. I don't know if it's Jarmusch's conscious choice before hiring Doye or something that happened later on sets.

b) Like all Jarmusch films, the characters do not fit into the seemingly 'empty' milieu. But the milieu render the minimalism at plot level and character development (hahaha).

c) The lead character comparison to "Ghost dog". The lead actor played a different role in "Ghost dog"!!

d) Multiple homages/reference to Godard (there is a mirror of "Contempt" but even of "Alphaville" in thematic content) and Hitchcock. A massive exploitation of macguffin, taking it to all new levels.

[groucho070]

Sherlock Holmes (2009)

Thoroughly enjoyable. Review's in my signature.

[ajithfederer]

Nice to know that rakesh.

[P_R]

One False Move

Oru cliche vidaama box-ai tick paNNirukkainga, idhukkku KamalagAsar rekamandEsan vERa

Every 'thirilling' sequence was underwhelming. The main tuwist was guessable. The long drawn out climax was boring.

Billy Bob Thornton-ukkaaga oru sila scenes paakkalaam. That's about it.

Flop-aamE. MagEsan theerpu :thumbusp:

[groucho070]

Kamal sonnarunaa etho vishayam irukku pola. IMDB users comment check pannuvom.

[kid-glove]

One False Move

Oru cliche vidaama box-ai tick paNNirukkainga, idhukkku KamalagAsar rekamandEsan vERa

Every 'thirilling' sequence was underwhelming. The main tuwist was guessable. The long drawn out climax was boring.

What are the cliches? How many films revolve around small town cops and a criminal on loose? And the criminal is on road from one side to other of a big country. Especially the split of a "thugs on road" and a "police procedural". General cliche is small town cop with sins to be 'redeemed' and domestic issues to be 'resolved' by the end. But this film, the repercussion of sin hits back and further 'doomed' it by the end. And it especially hits back as the cop sees this case as his big leap in police force, the force which essentially gave him licence to exploit her. And when the long overdrawn climax ends, he will be seen as a hero and get promoted. But the film ends with largely negative tone and conclusion to Lila's fate is nailed-on pessimism. That's something that you can't say for many criminal-on-run films.

Then there is patronization within small town and city police force, the racism aspect of small town, etc. Un-urbanized and rudiments they are. There is an aspect of black community still being oppressed by direct/indirect ways. (Of course, The less subtle aspect is to "scream" through the plot outline - white guy with some authority maligning and ultimately away a black victim's life. Carlin's, "This country was founded by slave owners who killed people, and wanted to make it free country", is one fat cliche alright)

Anyway, the film is not necessarily liked for twists/thrills, I didn't bother about it naturally, unless the twist is not out-of-place, but useful and makes sense, rounding off the plot so to speak. Whether it's guessable is immaterial unless I anticipate some thrills/twists to churn my insides, that sort of thing.