Happy Happy is billed as a comdey in the Film Festival program, but this is stretching the definition of comedy even by Scandinavian standards. There are some blackly comic scenes to smile over as you recover from cringing at other scenes. Elisabeth, Sigve and their adopted son Noa arrive from urban Denmark to rent the house next door to Kaja, Eirik and son Theodor out in the middle of snowy rural Norway. Chirpy, annoyingly talkative, overly outgoing Kaja has an inferiority complex to end all inferiority complexes, and is obviously mismatched to her silent, gruff, hunting fishing husband. The new couple seem urban sophisticated and perfect in her eyes.
But nothing is right in either relationship and Kaja's need to reach out to people cause skeletons to come out of closets in both households. In the background the boys are also forcing by circumstances into an unhealthy unequal relationship. All six characters misbehave, to remind you that no-one is perfect, regardless of how it looks on the surface. It is also arguable that through hurting each other they facilitated resolving issues as far as such issues can be resolved.
This film reminded me of last years Cyrus, both films dealing with serious relationship issues in a darkly funny way.
Ian's rating 3/5
Tuesday, August 02, 2011
Let the Bullets Fly
You know you are not in Kansas now when someone on horseback stops a train by throwing a couple of axes which embed thmeselves into the rails. From the outrageous opening scene Let the Bullets Fly attempts to out do itself in an orgy of stunts and plot twists. Set in anarchic 1920's China when a lack of strong central government left opportunities for local governers to enrich themselves, and when such governerships could be bought and sold. The story follows 3 protagonists on the wrong side of the almost non-existant law as they strive to be top dog of a small town.
Unlike many Chinese and Hong Kong movies I've seen the plot is completely coherent and no expense has been spared on the special effects, sets and the expected over the top fight scenes. You might go to this film for the fight scenes but it is the plot which twists and turns for 132 minutes which will keep you entertained.
One or two of the more sadisticly violent scenes seemed unnecessary to me. But overall Let the Bullets Fly is an amazing entertaining Chinese shaggy dog story.
Ian's rating 4/5
Unlike many Chinese and Hong Kong movies I've seen the plot is completely coherent and no expense has been spared on the special effects, sets and the expected over the top fight scenes. You might go to this film for the fight scenes but it is the plot which twists and turns for 132 minutes which will keep you entertained.
One or two of the more sadisticly violent scenes seemed unnecessary to me. But overall Let the Bullets Fly is an amazing entertaining Chinese shaggy dog story.
Ian's rating 4/5
13 Assassins
Are 13 Assassins, six assassins too many?
The more characters one has in a film the greater the difficulty in giving enough screen time to each character to make them memorable, especially when they are part of a gang and hence not differentiated by role. One way to deal with this problem is to make the various characters look different (a tall one, a short one, a fat one etc). This is one area where 13 Assassins falls down, despite the long build-up the most memorable characters are the 13th assassin and Naritsugu (the bad guy).
But I'm getting ahead of myself. The plot of this Japanese samurai movie is simply summed up as "Naritsugu must die". From the start we are left in no doubt that Matsudaira Naritsugu is a blood thirsty sadistic bastard with no redeeming qualities. The wrinkle is that not only is he the half brother of the Shogun, and hence above the law, but he is about to be appointed senior advisor to his brother. A secret assassination attempt is arranged to give the government plausible deniability of the murder. Twelve samurai, unemployed or bored with peace, set out from Edo (Tokyo) to ambush Naritsugu. An ad hoc bunch of samurai choosing to fight against the odds for little or no reward, does this sound like another more famous Japanese film?
The attention to detail, the classy camera work, the slow build up, the tension, the flashes of humour and finally the climactic battle. The 13 Assassins matches the Seven Samurai and in terms of colour photography betters it. There is also social commentary (the lead assassin shocks his old classmate by claiming to be fighting for the the people rather than his lord) and a really bad baddie. But it lacks novelty and in the end it is just a very well made samurai movie. If you haven't seen the Seven Samurai then see this film but only fanatics need to see both.
Ian's rating 3/5
The more characters one has in a film the greater the difficulty in giving enough screen time to each character to make them memorable, especially when they are part of a gang and hence not differentiated by role. One way to deal with this problem is to make the various characters look different (a tall one, a short one, a fat one etc). This is one area where 13 Assassins falls down, despite the long build-up the most memorable characters are the 13th assassin and Naritsugu (the bad guy).
But I'm getting ahead of myself. The plot of this Japanese samurai movie is simply summed up as "Naritsugu must die". From the start we are left in no doubt that Matsudaira Naritsugu is a blood thirsty sadistic bastard with no redeeming qualities. The wrinkle is that not only is he the half brother of the Shogun, and hence above the law, but he is about to be appointed senior advisor to his brother. A secret assassination attempt is arranged to give the government plausible deniability of the murder. Twelve samurai, unemployed or bored with peace, set out from Edo (Tokyo) to ambush Naritsugu. An ad hoc bunch of samurai choosing to fight against the odds for little or no reward, does this sound like another more famous Japanese film?
The attention to detail, the classy camera work, the slow build up, the tension, the flashes of humour and finally the climactic battle. The 13 Assassins matches the Seven Samurai and in terms of colour photography betters it. There is also social commentary (the lead assassin shocks his old classmate by claiming to be fighting for the the people rather than his lord) and a really bad baddie. But it lacks novelty and in the end it is just a very well made samurai movie. If you haven't seen the Seven Samurai then see this film but only fanatics need to see both.
Ian's rating 3/5
Monday, August 01, 2011
Page One: Inside the New York Times
Page One: Inside the New York Times initially bills itself as the 'daily fight to get on A1' (the front page). But if you were expecting a no holds barred dirty office fight between journalists and editors you'd be disappointed.
The New York Times likes to think of itself as America's premier newspaper. For years it has been aided and abetted by other American newspapers and TV networks taking their daily cue for what is news by what is printed in the New York Times. In the internet age this continues with online news publishers and aggregators (such as Huffington Post, Druge Report and Google News), bloggers and tweeters taking their cues, republishing and feeding off, commenting on and linking to NYT content. But there are two big trends that are killing newspapers around the world. Fewer and fewer advertisers interested in running adverts in newspapers. While simultaneously readers are moving to the internet where they expect to read stuff for free.
Websites like craigslist and Ebay have killed the classified adverts section. Companies large and small now have their own websites and feel less need to put adverts into newspapers. The concept that everything on the internet is free and the difficult in setting up internet pay-per-view websites has reinforced this idea.
Page One: Inside the New York Times is a documentary that gets inside the NYT and sees how it is trying to cope with this new reality. It concentrates on the Media Desk, the department where journalists report on the media itself, and in particular on David Carr, a most unlikely senior reporter.
Some of the older journalists at the Times think that the NYT is different and what has happened to other papers couldn't happen here. But ultimately there are two main views of the future. The optomistic view is that there is a technology driven change here and that traditional paper newspapers are on the way out, and that new internet media will take over the written media space. Then there is the pessimistic view that most (or all) the internet news media is parasitic. It can only exist because it feeds off traditional media. During a TV debate one NYT journalist illustrates this with two pictures of the front page of the news aggregator news site. One unaltered and the other with all the connect that came from traditional media removed. The fear is that if the internet kills the newspaper industry (and the TV news networks too) then they will have killed the golden goose that they depend on.
Ultimately the questions are:
There was a diversion into a red herring argument that what is hurting the NYT is a couple of scandals. First the Jayson Blair plagiarism and fabrication scandal, and secondly Judith Miller's articles that lead to the US invasion of Iraq through a feedback circle. She quoted the US government as saying that Iraq was making or attempting to make WMDs and was in turn quoted by Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld using the NYT as authority. She later wrote that WMDs had been found in Iraq. As damaging as these scandals are they are not the real reason why newspapers are on the way out.
Technically this is a well crafted documentary with articulate talking heads that covers the subject well, leaving the audience in no doubt of the trends for newspapers while resisting the temptation to predict the future.
It is difficult to beat The Onion's headline on the subject.
Ian's rating 3/5
The New York Times likes to think of itself as America's premier newspaper. For years it has been aided and abetted by other American newspapers and TV networks taking their daily cue for what is news by what is printed in the New York Times. In the internet age this continues with online news publishers and aggregators (such as Huffington Post, Druge Report and Google News), bloggers and tweeters taking their cues, republishing and feeding off, commenting on and linking to NYT content. But there are two big trends that are killing newspapers around the world. Fewer and fewer advertisers interested in running adverts in newspapers. While simultaneously readers are moving to the internet where they expect to read stuff for free.
Websites like craigslist and Ebay have killed the classified adverts section. Companies large and small now have their own websites and feel less need to put adverts into newspapers. The concept that everything on the internet is free and the difficult in setting up internet pay-per-view websites has reinforced this idea.
Page One: Inside the New York Times is a documentary that gets inside the NYT and sees how it is trying to cope with this new reality. It concentrates on the Media Desk, the department where journalists report on the media itself, and in particular on David Carr, a most unlikely senior reporter.
Some of the older journalists at the Times think that the NYT is different and what has happened to other papers couldn't happen here. But ultimately there are two main views of the future. The optomistic view is that there is a technology driven change here and that traditional paper newspapers are on the way out, and that new internet media will take over the written media space. Then there is the pessimistic view that most (or all) the internet news media is parasitic. It can only exist because it feeds off traditional media. During a TV debate one NYT journalist illustrates this with two pictures of the front page of the news aggregator news site. One unaltered and the other with all the connect that came from traditional media removed. The fear is that if the internet kills the newspaper industry (and the TV news networks too) then they will have killed the golden goose that they depend on.
Ultimately the questions are:
- Is journalism independent of the technology and hence can it survive in the internet age, if so how will it be funded?
- Is journalism necessary to modern democracy and if so does it need protection of some sort to survive in a post-newspaper world? Will the death of journalism mean the death of democracy? (No one asked the next question: with the death of journalism will anyone notice the death of democracy?)
There was a diversion into a red herring argument that what is hurting the NYT is a couple of scandals. First the Jayson Blair plagiarism and fabrication scandal, and secondly Judith Miller's articles that lead to the US invasion of Iraq through a feedback circle. She quoted the US government as saying that Iraq was making or attempting to make WMDs and was in turn quoted by Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld using the NYT as authority. She later wrote that WMDs had been found in Iraq. As damaging as these scandals are they are not the real reason why newspapers are on the way out.
Technically this is a well crafted documentary with articulate talking heads that covers the subject well, leaving the audience in no doubt of the trends for newspapers while resisting the temptation to predict the future.
It is difficult to beat The Onion's headline on the subject.
Ian's rating 3/5
Sunday, July 31, 2011
Guilty Pleasures
Mills and Boon romance novels are big business and are enduringly popular. Why is that and who reads them? Guilty Pleasures explores those questions by making a film that meets three readers (all women) and an author and a cover photo model (both men) and examines them and their relationships in a gentle and good-humoured way.
Hiroko, the first of our readers, lives in Japan with her husband and two young sons.Her husband seems like a perfectly nice guy who admits to not being that demonstrative or romantic and seems comfortable with his wife reading novels as compensation. Hiroko moves on from reading and takes ballroom dancing lessons to increase the romance and glamour levels in her life.
Shumita lives in Delhi and she separated from her husband five years ago, but seems unable to let go. This is a pity, because he's clearly a self-centred bastard and she should move on.
Shirley lives in Blackpool and her husband is the most romantic of the three, (and a definite improvement on her previous abusive partner) but he's bipolar and so she has to live with his regular periods of gloom. He, too, is unperturbed by his wife reading romance novels.
Stephen the cover model is included (I think) to remind readers and watchers to be careful what they wish for. Beautiful men with perfectly sculpted bodies don't get that way without hard work and this probably means that they're obsessed diet, exercise and themselves which is not really ideal romantic hero.
And then we have Roger the author, who prefers his own company. We learn that most Mills and Boon authors are older people and that writing romance novels is a learned craft and not a reflection of the writer's views or experience.
Now, in case you're thinking this all sounds rather dysfunctional, Hiroko and her husband come to the rescue. Hiroko wants to move onto competitive ballroom dnacing and finds that having her dance teacher as a partner will be very expensive. So she persuades her husband to learn to dance. He is surprisingly enthusiastic and they go on to win a competition. And if that's not a dream come true, I'm not sure what is.
I'm not sure if Guilty Pleasures is really trying to make a point or just give us an interesting overview of the genre. The featured characters are interesting enough for that not to matter particularly.
The last word should go to Hiroko's husband; "I have to be careful not to polish myself too much, otherwise I'll become attractive to other women and my wife will suffer. So I have to aim for just the right level of improvement" Very considerate!
Anne's rating 3/5
Hiroko, the first of our readers, lives in Japan with her husband and two young sons.Her husband seems like a perfectly nice guy who admits to not being that demonstrative or romantic and seems comfortable with his wife reading novels as compensation. Hiroko moves on from reading and takes ballroom dancing lessons to increase the romance and glamour levels in her life.
Shumita lives in Delhi and she separated from her husband five years ago, but seems unable to let go. This is a pity, because he's clearly a self-centred bastard and she should move on.
Shirley lives in Blackpool and her husband is the most romantic of the three, (and a definite improvement on her previous abusive partner) but he's bipolar and so she has to live with his regular periods of gloom. He, too, is unperturbed by his wife reading romance novels.
Stephen the cover model is included (I think) to remind readers and watchers to be careful what they wish for. Beautiful men with perfectly sculpted bodies don't get that way without hard work and this probably means that they're obsessed diet, exercise and themselves which is not really ideal romantic hero.
And then we have Roger the author, who prefers his own company. We learn that most Mills and Boon authors are older people and that writing romance novels is a learned craft and not a reflection of the writer's views or experience.
Now, in case you're thinking this all sounds rather dysfunctional, Hiroko and her husband come to the rescue. Hiroko wants to move onto competitive ballroom dnacing and finds that having her dance teacher as a partner will be very expensive. So she persuades her husband to learn to dance. He is surprisingly enthusiastic and they go on to win a competition. And if that's not a dream come true, I'm not sure what is.
I'm not sure if Guilty Pleasures is really trying to make a point or just give us an interesting overview of the genre. The featured characters are interesting enough for that not to matter particularly.
The last word should go to Hiroko's husband; "I have to be careful not to polish myself too much, otherwise I'll become attractive to other women and my wife will suffer. So I have to aim for just the right level of improvement" Very considerate!
Anne's rating 3/5
Hot Coffee
This talking heads doco looks at the influence of big business on the civil justice system in the US, and the lengths that big business will go to to erode individual rights, and to influence both the nation's politicians and the judiciary.
This is New Zealand, not America, but even here we buy into the concept that Americans sue big companies at the drop of a hat and for the flimsiest of excuses. Once you've watched this documentary, you won't be so sure. Hot Coffee will ensure you never use the phrase "frivolous lawsuit" unthinkingly again. And you'll reflect that if you received a dollar for every time a republican politician used that phrase, you'd be quite rich by now.
Hot Coffee is named after a world-famous-in-America case where an elderly lady in New Mexico named Stella Liebeck sued Macdonalds after being burned by their coffee. Stella has become a poster girl for the ultimate in frivolous lawsuits, but only because spin doctors have made her so. Hot Coffee the movie examines this case and three others and shows how the concept of the frivolous lawsuit has been used to sanitize some outrageous miscarriages of justice. You'll learn about tort reform, big business "buying" the outcomes of judicial state elections, mandatory arbitration clauses in contracts (and what's wrong with that) and about how republican politicians have been lobbied so effectively that they'll parrot the Chamber of Commerce's line on tort reform over and over again. And the best part is, you'll be engrossed, educated and probably outraged so your time in the theatre will fly by.
My new fact for the week is that the American Medical Association is a member the Chamber of Commerce. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised - Medicine is big business after all.
Anne's rating 4/5
This is New Zealand, not America, but even here we buy into the concept that Americans sue big companies at the drop of a hat and for the flimsiest of excuses. Once you've watched this documentary, you won't be so sure. Hot Coffee will ensure you never use the phrase "frivolous lawsuit" unthinkingly again. And you'll reflect that if you received a dollar for every time a republican politician used that phrase, you'd be quite rich by now.
Hot Coffee is named after a world-famous-in-America case where an elderly lady in New Mexico named Stella Liebeck sued Macdonalds after being burned by their coffee. Stella has become a poster girl for the ultimate in frivolous lawsuits, but only because spin doctors have made her so. Hot Coffee the movie examines this case and three others and shows how the concept of the frivolous lawsuit has been used to sanitize some outrageous miscarriages of justice. You'll learn about tort reform, big business "buying" the outcomes of judicial state elections, mandatory arbitration clauses in contracts (and what's wrong with that) and about how republican politicians have been lobbied so effectively that they'll parrot the Chamber of Commerce's line on tort reform over and over again. And the best part is, you'll be engrossed, educated and probably outraged so your time in the theatre will fly by.
My new fact for the week is that the American Medical Association is a member the Chamber of Commerce. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised - Medicine is big business after all.
Anne's rating 4/5
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Taxi Driver
Martin Scorsese's 1976 film Taxi Driver is one of those films I was aware of without knowing anything about it. A film that appears in people's top ten film lists. A film that writers drop into articles without explanation, in expectation that the reader is already familiar with it. It is the first film I saw at this year's International Film Festival.
Taxi Driver stars Robert DeNiro as Travis Bickle an inarticulate, contradictory, angry young Vietnam veteran who takes a job as a night time taxi driver in New York to cope with insomnia. Apparently from a small town, Travis is both repulsed and fascinated by prostitution, pornography and homosexuality. Ranting (mostly in his diary) about the need to clean up the filth, he watches porn during the day. Travis becomes obsessed by two women: romantically by Betsy (Cybill Shepherd) a political campaign worker and Iris a child prostitute (played by then 13 year old Jodie Foster) who he wants to rescue. Neither is keen to fit in with Travis's ideas for them.
Taxi Driver is a slacker film for the most part, with a violent end that is clearly signalled during the long slow build up. We know he wants to kill someone but it is not clear that he knows who or why. Robert DeNiro is in virtually every scene, and there an obvious contrast between the to-the-audience narration by his character which comes across as moderately articulate (albeit somewhat vague and rambling) and his often tongue tied conversations with co-workers, clients and others where he comes across as a throwback from another time and place. The ending was a bit odd, the police were on the scene extremely quickly, but for reasons not explained it seems that they chose not to prosecute Travis.
The film is more about an idea than a character or events. The alienation of people from each other caused both by living in a big city and by serving in a war like Vietnam. You could substitute the Iraq War and both the US and USSR's wars with Afghanistan, but I am not sure that current day New York is quite as exciting and menacing as 1976 New York.
I particularly liked Harvey Kietel's performance as a long haired pimp, while the late Peter Boyle looked almost the same in 1976 as he did in the almost current Everybody loves Raymond.
Ian's rating 3/5
Taxi Driver stars Robert DeNiro as Travis Bickle an inarticulate, contradictory, angry young Vietnam veteran who takes a job as a night time taxi driver in New York to cope with insomnia. Apparently from a small town, Travis is both repulsed and fascinated by prostitution, pornography and homosexuality. Ranting (mostly in his diary) about the need to clean up the filth, he watches porn during the day. Travis becomes obsessed by two women: romantically by Betsy (Cybill Shepherd) a political campaign worker and Iris a child prostitute (played by then 13 year old Jodie Foster) who he wants to rescue. Neither is keen to fit in with Travis's ideas for them.
Taxi Driver is a slacker film for the most part, with a violent end that is clearly signalled during the long slow build up. We know he wants to kill someone but it is not clear that he knows who or why. Robert DeNiro is in virtually every scene, and there an obvious contrast between the to-the-audience narration by his character which comes across as moderately articulate (albeit somewhat vague and rambling) and his often tongue tied conversations with co-workers, clients and others where he comes across as a throwback from another time and place. The ending was a bit odd, the police were on the scene extremely quickly, but for reasons not explained it seems that they chose not to prosecute Travis.
The film is more about an idea than a character or events. The alienation of people from each other caused both by living in a big city and by serving in a war like Vietnam. You could substitute the Iraq War and both the US and USSR's wars with Afghanistan, but I am not sure that current day New York is quite as exciting and menacing as 1976 New York.
I particularly liked Harvey Kietel's performance as a long haired pimp, while the late Peter Boyle looked almost the same in 1976 as he did in the almost current Everybody loves Raymond.
Ian's rating 3/5
Cave of Forgotten Dreams (3D)
The Cave of Forgotten Dreams (Chauvet Cave) is in Southern France. It houses wonderful 32000 year old animal sketches, pristine stalagmites and stalactites, animal bones, cave bear and wolf paw prints, all undisturbed since a rockfall closed the cave some 20000 years ago. Access to the cave is tightly controlled so unless you're a French archaeologist or the German film maker Werner Herzog you'll never get to see the real thing. Viewing the cave on the big screen in 3D seemed like the next best option although I was slightly worried by the fact that the film was written, directed and narrated by Werner Herzog. (I suffered through his Aguirre:Wrath of God at a film society showing a few years back). Foolishly, I thought a documentary about a cave shouldn't go too badly.
Unfortunately, it did go badly. It was too loud (probably not Mr Herzog's fault), the music was discordant, the narration was slow and condescending and there were far too many talking heads. Ricky Gervais or the Monthy Python team could have had a field day with the experts talking in this film, who included an pony-tailed ex-juggler, an aging archaeologist demonstrating throwing a spear to kill a horse without there being a horse, and a younger one clad in reindeer skin playing "The Star Spangled Banner" on a bone flute. Talking heads in 3D seemed a technology overkill. I'm wondering why Werner Herzog got to visit the cave and make a film - why not the French equivalent of the BBC natural history unit?
And what of the cave itself? It was certainly worth seeing. The drawings were lovely and seeing the animal's heads emerging through openings in the rock was charming. However, rather than subject yourself to this very peculiar film I'd recommend getting a book out of the library and admiring the pictures while playing music you actually like.
Anne's rating 2/5,
The First Grader
The First Grader was my first watch of this year's NZIFF and it was a great start. A big landscape, an engrossing story, a minor history lesson, great acting and cute kids - what's not to like? And in case you think that all sounds a bit saccharine, there are some hefty doses of brutality - this is Africa, after all, and you don't have to look far to uncover injustice and bloodshed.
It's the story (based on fact) of an 84 year old Kenyan, Maruge, who takes the Kenyan Government at its word when it promises free education for all. He's illiterate, and he wants to change that, so he fronts up at his local primary school and asks to be admitted. There's resistance to this idea from both the teachers and the parents of the current pupils parents but eventually Jane the headteacher relents and lets him in. It's not all plain sailing once he's in - Jane's boss has a particular objection to him being there and insists he should be at adult education classes in Nairobi and not taking up valuable space in an overcrowded rural school. Jane gets round this problem by appointing Maruge as a teacher aide.
Meanwhile, we get Maruge's (and Kenya's) past in flashback. He was part of the Maumau uprising in the 1950s and his wife and children were murdered. He was imprisoned and tortured by the British. There's particularly poignant scene in the classroom when Maruge has a meltdown at the pencil sharpener as he flashes back to being stabbed in the eardrum with a sharpened pencil by a British Officer.
In addition we get to find out the effect that going out on a limb has on Jane's career, her personal safety and her relationship with her husband.
I particularly enjoyed the pupils rioting when the education board tried to impose a new headteacher on them, having banished Jane to another school 300 kilometres away. I also enjoyed Maruge interacting with the children and him paying his minibus fare to Nairobi with a goat (who came along in the minibus since there was nowhere else to put him). The happy ending completes a very satisfying film.
Anne's rating 4/5
It's the story (based on fact) of an 84 year old Kenyan, Maruge, who takes the Kenyan Government at its word when it promises free education for all. He's illiterate, and he wants to change that, so he fronts up at his local primary school and asks to be admitted. There's resistance to this idea from both the teachers and the parents of the current pupils parents but eventually Jane the headteacher relents and lets him in. It's not all plain sailing once he's in - Jane's boss has a particular objection to him being there and insists he should be at adult education classes in Nairobi and not taking up valuable space in an overcrowded rural school. Jane gets round this problem by appointing Maruge as a teacher aide.
Meanwhile, we get Maruge's (and Kenya's) past in flashback. He was part of the Maumau uprising in the 1950s and his wife and children were murdered. He was imprisoned and tortured by the British. There's particularly poignant scene in the classroom when Maruge has a meltdown at the pencil sharpener as he flashes back to being stabbed in the eardrum with a sharpened pencil by a British Officer.
In addition we get to find out the effect that going out on a limb has on Jane's career, her personal safety and her relationship with her husband.
I particularly enjoyed the pupils rioting when the education board tried to impose a new headteacher on them, having banished Jane to another school 300 kilometres away. I also enjoyed Maruge interacting with the children and him paying his minibus fare to Nairobi with a goat (who came along in the minibus since there was nowhere else to put him). The happy ending completes a very satisfying film.
Anne's rating 4/5
Friday, July 15, 2011
Game Over: Kasparov and the Machine
I saw this 2002 documentary on Monday night about Garry Kasparov's second match with IBM's Deep Blue in 1997. The film follows Kasparov's view of the match and the related conspiracy theories. Unfortunately apart from some interviews with 3 of the Deep Blue team it doesn't seek the views of computer chess experts, so the naive views of computer chess by Kasparov and others are not challenged. The film is punctuated with shots of "The Turk" (actually a replica), which clearly signal where the film maker's sympathies lie. That said it is an interesting film.
Kasparov was convinced that computers were stupid and thought that all computer programs couldn't resist sacrifice offers and accused Deep Blue of not playing like a chess program. The next three games were draws but Garry was unsettled by losing game 2 to a computer that didn't play like a computer, by IBM's refusal to hand over the logs and the general attitude of a public relations conscious corporation. IBM may or may not have deliberately played on his nerves, but ultimately it looks like he was psyched out by game 6, which he lost hence losing the match.
For those of us who can't tell one Russian world chess champion from another the film gives us a background on Garry Kasparov's rise and his challenge to the reigning world chess champion, Anatoly Karpov (with those amazing ^ ^ eyebrows).
Garry Kasparov had beaten Deep Blue in their first match in 1996, winning 4-2 in a 6 game match (Kasparov winning 3 and drawing 2 games). But before the rematch in 1997 Deep Blue's hardware was upgraded to make it twice as fast and it's software had been improved and tuned by a team including 4 grand masters.
The six game 1997 rematch was played at an IBM building in New York. Kasparov won the first game easily and was surprised at how differently Deep Blue played in the second game. He offered a sacrifice and was taken aback when the computer ignored the offer. He went on to resign. He accused IBM of cheating, claiming that a human must have intervened during a 15 minute move. He publicly demanded to see Deep Blue's logs from the match (a demand he repeated before and after every game for the rest of the match). That night another grand master suggested that Garry could have forced a draw if he had continued.
Kasparov was convinced that computers were stupid and thought that all computer programs couldn't resist sacrifice offers and accused Deep Blue of not playing like a chess program. The next three games were draws but Garry was unsettled by losing game 2 to a computer that didn't play like a computer, by IBM's refusal to hand over the logs and the general attitude of a public relations conscious corporation. IBM may or may not have deliberately played on his nerves, but ultimately it looks like he was psyched out by game 6, which he lost hence losing the match.
Unfortunately the film doesn't talk to independent computer chess experts about the match. They might have pointed out that there is nothing implicit in chess programs that mean that they have to take offered sacrifices. It is just that comparing material is about the easiest calculation to put in a chess position evaluation function, and hence the tendency for chess programs to prefer to take pieces.
IBM retired Deep Blue after the match. The other conspiracy theory in the doco was that IBM's share price rose 15% because Deep Blue beat the world chess champion and IBM didn't want to risk someone beating Deep Blue.
Note that the 1984 Karpov Kasparov match lasted 48 games before being called off, they played 4 other matches each lasting 24 games over the next 6 years, so the 6 game match against Deep Blue was unusually short by comparison.
Ian's rating 2/5
Saturday, May 07, 2011
Another Year
Another Year is the latest offering from British writer and director Mike Leigh. I feel like I should have seen a lot of his films, but the only other one I'm sure I've seem is Secrets and Lies - which I have a soft spot for since it's one of the few films out there with an optometrist as one of the main characters. And it's got Timothy Spall in it, for whom I also have a soft spot. Both Secrets and Lies and Another Year are the British antithesis of a Hollywood movie. The stars look like ordinary people, rather than beautiful people chosen for their looks. They're filmed in ordinary homes (although I'd have to says Tom's brother's terraced house was almost extraordinary in its dreariness) and the characters are portrayed warts and all.
The characters and their warts are pretty much the point of the film. The central characters are a married couple called Tom and Gerri who seem remarkably contented with their lives and each other. He's an engineering geologist and she's a counsellor at a medical practice and they live in a very pleasant house in London. Their alotment garden is a big feature in their lives as is their adult son Joe.
Another year watches the rhythm of Tom and Gerri's life- they are the sun and friends and family spin around them like planets, using them for light and warmth. Mary is one of the friends - she's a typist at the medical centre. She's single, fond of a drink and Tom and Gerri's son Joe and short of money and consideration for others. Her life is chaotic and her planet seems liable to spin off course. And then there's Ken, whose life is equally disastrous, and Ronnie (Tom's recently bereaved brother), and the aforementioned Joe and his new girlfriend.
Not all that much happens in Another Year. The rewards of watching it are the amazingly convincing acting (it's almost like a documentary) and the human interest factor. Mary is particularly well-acted and she's splendidly self-centred. Tom and Gerri come across as generous with their time and resources but a bit self-satisfied with it. Definitely not an escapist movie - more an examination of the human condition
Anne's rating 3.5/5 Ian's rating 3/5
The characters and their warts are pretty much the point of the film. The central characters are a married couple called Tom and Gerri who seem remarkably contented with their lives and each other. He's an engineering geologist and she's a counsellor at a medical practice and they live in a very pleasant house in London. Their alotment garden is a big feature in their lives as is their adult son Joe.
Another year watches the rhythm of Tom and Gerri's life- they are the sun and friends and family spin around them like planets, using them for light and warmth. Mary is one of the friends - she's a typist at the medical centre. She's single, fond of a drink and Tom and Gerri's son Joe and short of money and consideration for others. Her life is chaotic and her planet seems liable to spin off course. And then there's Ken, whose life is equally disastrous, and Ronnie (Tom's recently bereaved brother), and the aforementioned Joe and his new girlfriend.
Not all that much happens in Another Year. The rewards of watching it are the amazingly convincing acting (it's almost like a documentary) and the human interest factor. Mary is particularly well-acted and she's splendidly self-centred. Tom and Gerri come across as generous with their time and resources but a bit self-satisfied with it. Definitely not an escapist movie - more an examination of the human condition
Anne's rating 3.5/5 Ian's rating 3/5
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Coup de torchon (Clean Slate)
Coup de torchon (or Clean Slate) is based on the Jim Thompson novel Pop. 1280. Last year I watched The Killer Inside Me also adapted from a Jim Thompson novel. I haven’t read any of Jim Thompson’s novels, but if these two films are anything to go by he favours dark psychological crime stories told from the perpetrator’s point of view.
The novel Pop. 1280 is set in Texas circa 1917, but French director Bertrand Tavernier has moved the setting to French West Africa in 1938, and has made the highly stratified and racist white society the antagonist to protagonist Lucien Cordier. Lucien Cordier is the sole policeman in a small town. He is apparently stupid, lazy and ineffective (he prides himself on never having made an arrest), a man who knows his place in society (looked down on by almost all the white people in town but superior to all the black people) and understanding the injustice of the situation but feeling powerless to openly oppose it. His pathetic attitude is underlined by his wife's apparently open affair with her live-in "brother" and by a Laurel and Hardy like scene where he gets his butt kicked.
Cordier gets his revenge by using his reputation and the "system" against itself. From childish revenge plots to murder of the town's undesirable elements - including his mistress's husband. Cordier sees himself on a self appointed crusade to clean up the trash. Finally he moves from murder to arranging situations where other people kill each other to his satisfaction. This is the ultimate manifestation of God-like powers - the situation has come full circle (as does the film).
Coup de torchon was filmed in Senegal. A climate that affects the white women into wearing very little, and the casual female nudity marks this as very definitely a French film.
Here are a couple of other opinions.
Ian's rating 3/5
The novel Pop. 1280 is set in Texas circa 1917, but French director Bertrand Tavernier has moved the setting to French West Africa in 1938, and has made the highly stratified and racist white society the antagonist to protagonist Lucien Cordier. Lucien Cordier is the sole policeman in a small town. He is apparently stupid, lazy and ineffective (he prides himself on never having made an arrest), a man who knows his place in society (looked down on by almost all the white people in town but superior to all the black people) and understanding the injustice of the situation but feeling powerless to openly oppose it. His pathetic attitude is underlined by his wife's apparently open affair with her live-in "brother" and by a Laurel and Hardy like scene where he gets his butt kicked.
Cordier gets his revenge by using his reputation and the "system" against itself. From childish revenge plots to murder of the town's undesirable elements - including his mistress's husband. Cordier sees himself on a self appointed crusade to clean up the trash. Finally he moves from murder to arranging situations where other people kill each other to his satisfaction. This is the ultimate manifestation of God-like powers - the situation has come full circle (as does the film).
Coup de torchon was filmed in Senegal. A climate that affects the white women into wearing very little, and the casual female nudity marks this as very definitely a French film.
Here are a couple of other opinions.
Ian's rating 3/5
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
My Wedding and other Secrets
My Wedding and Other Secrets is a kiwi love story. Short, Chinese, myopic film student Emily meets tall Caucasian nerd James at Auckland University and they fall in love. Emily lives at home with Mum and Dad and James lives in a flat with two computer science students. Emily keeps the relationship a secret from her parents because they expect her to date Chinese boys. The plot thickens when Emily suggests to James they get married so that she can use the student allowance to make a movie. Her plan is to make a horror movie but she ends up making a documentary about her relationship with James and revealing said relationship to her parents.
The Director and co-writer Roseanne Liang (on whose life the film is based) says its the story of "a selfish but well-intentioned girl" who learns about how both romantic love and familial love are important in life and how to balance and cherish those two kinds of love.
This film is a romantic comedy but it isn't light and fluffy at heart. There are definitely light elements - James' flatmates, Emily and James getting to grips with sex, the chicken head in the restaurant but there are dark moments as well - like neither James nor Emily's parents coming to the documentary screening. You will laugh but you're quite likely to cry as well.
I think I'll always have a soft spot for this film because falling for someone much taller than me while at Auckland University is something I can identify with. And I particularly like that the happy ending isn't manufactured to make a nice film - it really did work out well in the end with a happy couple and happy parents.
Anne's rating 4/5 Ian's rating 3/5
The Director and co-writer Roseanne Liang (on whose life the film is based) says its the story of "a selfish but well-intentioned girl" who learns about how both romantic love and familial love are important in life and how to balance and cherish those two kinds of love.
This film is a romantic comedy but it isn't light and fluffy at heart. There are definitely light elements - James' flatmates, Emily and James getting to grips with sex, the chicken head in the restaurant but there are dark moments as well - like neither James nor Emily's parents coming to the documentary screening. You will laugh but you're quite likely to cry as well.
I think I'll always have a soft spot for this film because falling for someone much taller than me while at Auckland University is something I can identify with. And I particularly like that the happy ending isn't manufactured to make a nice film - it really did work out well in the end with a happy couple and happy parents.
Anne's rating 4/5 Ian's rating 3/5
Friday, February 11, 2011
The King's Speech
The King's Speech is the second nostalgic British historical drama that I have seen in recent weeks. Two such films might be too few to infer a trend, though it could be claimed that the British have been looking nostalgically at their history since Dad's Army arrived on TV.
The King's Speech follows Prince Albert, Duke of York, (second son of George V) as he struggles to overcome his stammer with the help of an unorthodoxy Australian speech therapist, Lionel Logue. The prince is under pressure from his father, George V, to do more public speaking and this becomes more urgent as his father dies and his elder brother is on a collision course with the British establishment, that will see Albert become King George VI in his place.
The way this story was told made it feel like a fairy story.
This sentimental treatment of history is reinforced by the look of the film. London is foggy and quaint. The countryside looks unspoilt. The royals look and act regal. The common people are respectful and keep their distance. In addition there is a cute side story around Lionel Logue's family. Plus some historical titbits to keep the history buffs amused.
There have been some liberties with the truth to assist with the story telling. For instance Winston Churchill is introduced into the film giving advice to the Duke of York at a time when he was an out of favour backbencher.
One thing I didn't understand was that during the first consult Lionel demonstrated that Albert could deliver a speech without stuttering while listening to music through headphones. But for a reason that is never explained, this technique is never used when Albert/George VI is giving later radio speeches.
Anne found the CGI intrusive. It occasionally leaves the impression that the actors have accidentally wandered into a computer game set in 1930s London.
But it is hard to be overly critical of this film as it is well crafted. A story about royalty and leadership is brought down to a human level. Our sympathies are tugged firmly in the direction of the future George IV. The abdication crisis is explained without it coming to dominate the film. The build-up to WWII is signaled
Colin Firth plays Prince Albert in a way that reminded me of his shy and retiring author role in Love Actually with the addition of the stutter. Geoffrey Rush plays Lionel Logue as a more rounded character which is useful as he has to portray most of the friendship between Lionel and the future king.
Much of the tension in the film comes exploiting the natural tension we all feel when listening to a stutterer -- will they manage to get to the end of the sentence or not?
Despite this being a story of how a shy and damaged man became a great king and inspiring leader, there is in counterpoint, a republican theme. This is also a story of two princes, neither of whom wants to be king. Hence the film slyly poses the republican criticism, namely: isn't hereditary monarchy a stupid way of choosing a leader.
Ian's rating 3.5/5 Anne's rating 4/5
The King's Speech follows Prince Albert, Duke of York, (second son of George V) as he struggles to overcome his stammer with the help of an unorthodoxy Australian speech therapist, Lionel Logue. The prince is under pressure from his father, George V, to do more public speaking and this becomes more urgent as his father dies and his elder brother is on a collision course with the British establishment, that will see Albert become King George VI in his place.
The way this story was told made it feel like a fairy story.
The nice but shy prince is cursed by his overbearing father and teased by his brothers. His princess hears about a magician who can cure the curse and sets up a meeting. The treatment is slow, meanwhile his father, the bad king, dies and the new king is feckless and runs off with the evil witch. Leaving the stuttering younger brother to reluctantly become king and make the speech of his life rallying his people in their darkest hour and leading them to victory against the evil empire with his plucky little queen and the magician at his side.
This sentimental treatment of history is reinforced by the look of the film. London is foggy and quaint. The countryside looks unspoilt. The royals look and act regal. The common people are respectful and keep their distance. In addition there is a cute side story around Lionel Logue's family. Plus some historical titbits to keep the history buffs amused.
There have been some liberties with the truth to assist with the story telling. For instance Winston Churchill is introduced into the film giving advice to the Duke of York at a time when he was an out of favour backbencher.
One thing I didn't understand was that during the first consult Lionel demonstrated that Albert could deliver a speech without stuttering while listening to music through headphones. But for a reason that is never explained, this technique is never used when Albert/George VI is giving later radio speeches.
Anne found the CGI intrusive. It occasionally leaves the impression that the actors have accidentally wandered into a computer game set in 1930s London.
But it is hard to be overly critical of this film as it is well crafted. A story about royalty and leadership is brought down to a human level. Our sympathies are tugged firmly in the direction of the future George IV. The abdication crisis is explained without it coming to dominate the film. The build-up to WWII is signaled
Colin Firth plays Prince Albert in a way that reminded me of his shy and retiring author role in Love Actually with the addition of the stutter. Geoffrey Rush plays Lionel Logue as a more rounded character which is useful as he has to portray most of the friendship between Lionel and the future king.
Much of the tension in the film comes exploiting the natural tension we all feel when listening to a stutterer -- will they manage to get to the end of the sentence or not?
Despite this being a story of how a shy and damaged man became a great king and inspiring leader, there is in counterpoint, a republican theme. This is also a story of two princes, neither of whom wants to be king. Hence the film slyly poses the republican criticism, namely: isn't hereditary monarchy a stupid way of choosing a leader.
Ian's rating 3.5/5 Anne's rating 4/5
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Made in Dagenham
We might have the beginnings of a Christmas Eve movie tradition. In 2009 we went to Where the Wild Things Are, and Made in Dagenham was Christmas Eve 2010's effort. The fact that we were in Dunedin and that there were only 2 or 3 others in the tiny Metro cinema added novelty value.
Made in Dagenham is the story of the fight for equal pay for women at Ford's massive car assembly plant at Dagenham in Essex. Women were a tiny proportion of the work force at Ford, and they made car seat covers. They went on strike in 1968 for two reasons - firstly because their work had been re-classified from skilled to semi-skilled and secondly because they were paid less than semi-skilled men. You can't deliver cars without seat covers so production at the entire plant ground to a halt. The dispute was resolved with the involvement of the Secretary of State for employment, Barbara Castle and the way was paved for pay equality with men.
From my 21st century perspective, I wonder why Ford was so stubborn about the issue in the first place since there were only 180 or so women and many thousands of men - it could hardly have made much difference to their bottom line to pay women the same rate as men. I guess they thought there was a principle involved - its good to be able to reflect that few people these days think that paying women less than men is justifiable.
You could call Made in Dagenham docudrama or edutainment but whatever you call it, it's an easy watch with great sixties costumes and sets, unusually good-looking factory workers and a generally good-humoured tone. Apart from documenting a pivotal event in industrial relations in the UK it explores the human impact of the strike - the effects on relationships when one or both breadwinners in the family are on strike, the effect on a town with one major employer when hardly anyone is earning, and what happens when women workers meet a woman politician. Well worth a look.
Anne's rating 3.5/5 Ian's rating 3/5
Made in Dagenham is the story of the fight for equal pay for women at Ford's massive car assembly plant at Dagenham in Essex. Women were a tiny proportion of the work force at Ford, and they made car seat covers. They went on strike in 1968 for two reasons - firstly because their work had been re-classified from skilled to semi-skilled and secondly because they were paid less than semi-skilled men. You can't deliver cars without seat covers so production at the entire plant ground to a halt. The dispute was resolved with the involvement of the Secretary of State for employment, Barbara Castle and the way was paved for pay equality with men.
From my 21st century perspective, I wonder why Ford was so stubborn about the issue in the first place since there were only 180 or so women and many thousands of men - it could hardly have made much difference to their bottom line to pay women the same rate as men. I guess they thought there was a principle involved - its good to be able to reflect that few people these days think that paying women less than men is justifiable.
You could call Made in Dagenham docudrama or edutainment but whatever you call it, it's an easy watch with great sixties costumes and sets, unusually good-looking factory workers and a generally good-humoured tone. Apart from documenting a pivotal event in industrial relations in the UK it explores the human impact of the strike - the effects on relationships when one or both breadwinners in the family are on strike, the effect on a town with one major employer when hardly anyone is earning, and what happens when women workers meet a woman politician. Well worth a look.
Anne's rating 3.5/5 Ian's rating 3/5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
