In the Loop

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
7/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
8/10

Year released: 2009
Runtime: 106 minutes
IMDB page: here

If you are easily offended by lots of swearing, don't watch this. But then you'll be missing a great deal of fun. Not to mention the political satire and the creative cussin'.

Plot: Simon Foster, a bumbling British Cabinet Minister (Tom Hollander, the Mr. Collins from Pride and Prejudice, the Lord Beckette from Pirates of the Caribbean), accidentally put in a word of dissent on radio when it comes to the war the Americans might be thinking of starting in the Middle East. Malcolm Tucker, the Prime Minister's Director of Communications, immediately starts a foul-mouthed, very un-PC rant as he goes about trying to fix things with the Americans, who are divided into war proponents led by US Assist. Secretary Linton Barwick and opponents led by Assist. Secretary Karen Clark and General George Miller of the Pentagon (oh don't worry, all the names and titles are actually part of the fun that is politics). Leaks, war committees, bathroom sessions, intern sex, fax machine stomping and lots more hilarity ensue.

Cast: Oh God. So perfect. Anyone who can utter those long strings of sensible obscenities at a supercharged machine-gun rate can only be comedy incarnated in human flesh. Every look, every stutter, every awkward silence... bravo.

Script: Er... Things happen at a blazing speed, mostly because people talk really fast. This definitely requires multiple viewings to squeeze out all the flavour, all that British dry humour. It's such piercing satire on the massive machine of politics, how at the end of the day people in suits are much sillier than us the commoners. Except they wield the power on how to start wars with real guns.

Production: Some of the shots have a frantic frenziness to them, as if the whole thing is seen through the eyes of one giddy, overwhelmed intern. I can't wait for the DVD to come out and we can hear about the backstage stories on how this movie was made.

Awesome way to invest your hour and 46 minutes. But you've gotta be super alert to catch all the nastiness that transpires.

We Own the Night

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
5/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
4/10

Year released: 2007
Runtime: 117 minutes
IMDB page: here

A typical The Departed police drama wannabe. All the more tragic for the fact that it gets kind of close, only to fail epically.

Plot: Bobby (Joaquin Phoenix) is managing a hot shady nightclub in NYC for a Russian family. There's a bit of drugs involved, and Bobby is a user, but nothing too major, or so Bobby thought. He is a pretty decent person and has a long-term Puerto Rican girlfriend (Eva Mendes) whom he's genuinely in love with. But Bobby has a bit of dark family history: unknown to his circle of club friends, his father (Robert Duvall) is the police chief and his brother (Mark Wahlberg) is the police captain leading the narcotics team targeting the nightclub for some heavy drug trafficking. Caught between the two, where would Bobby's alliance come down?

Cast: Very respectable group of actors. Which makes this flop of a film even more puzzling. The acting is fine, really not the aspect causing all the problems for the film.

Script: I guess that's where the problem lies. The story is a bit ridiculous. The son of the police chief can end up managing a club for the Russian mafia? Why? You'd think the mafia is a tad bit better informed than that. The script really doesn't dive into the characters the way The Departed does. None of the characters are explored too deeply, and a lot of them are very vague and flat, like the girlfriend with the emphasized Puerto Rican background, a piece of information that just sticks out like a sore thumb because you really don't find out anything else about her. There's basically no history for any of the characters, and therefore you have a hard time caring for them.

Production: um, nothing remarkable. And also, I didn't get to see the special features to get to know the film better. Sorry.

The title is really vague overall. I still don't get what exactly it means, beyond the obvious. Maybe I didn't give the movie enough of a chance, because the whole time I was thinking "ugh, when does this end, cuz I really don't care how it all goes down..." The more terrible kind of gangster movie: boring and bland.

Whisper of the Heart (aka Mimi a Sumaseba)

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
7/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
7.5/10

Year released: 1995
Runtime: 111 minutes
IMDB page: here


Well, animated films will usually get really high ratings from me. I love the genre, the way things are presented. The animators are in TOTAL control of what appears on screen, which is both a good and bad thing. Good for obvious reasons, but also bad because they have to pay attention to every little detail, because there is no surprise, no spontaneity, nothing can possibly appear on the screen without meticulous planning, which makes it all the harder when a good animated film does appear organic and spontaneous and realistic. Japan traditionally does very well in this category, and Studio Ghibli, led by the famed animation master Miyazaki Hayao, can only be said to be the best of the bunch. Almost all films from of Ghibli come with high recommendations.

Plot: The heroine, Tsukishima Shizuku, is a 14-year-old junior high schooler who reads a lot and has a knack for writing. In many of the books she checks out of the library, she finds the name "Amasawa Seiji" (you have to put your name in the books you check out), who is apparently a very fast reader and has similar tastes in novels. Shizuku becomes curious as to who this mysterious Seiji is. One day, she follows a smart stray cat to a scenic neighbourhood on the top of a steep hill, where she discovers a neat little shop showcasing a doll, a cat dressed as a human baron. The shop is run by a friendly old man, and Seiji is apparently his grandson...?

Script: based on the comic series Mimi a Sumaseba by Hiiragi Aoi. It is just so sweet and innocent. The characters are struggling with the feelings that arise with adolescence, crushes for a special someone, uncertainty about what they want to achieve in life, all the good stuff. And these feelings are demonstrated with such details and sensitivity, with slight tastes of nostalgia and melancholy.

Production: You are constantly amazed by Ghibli's attention to details, the beautiful palette that they use to portray the ordinary as something you can relate to, even though it's 2D. If you have seen one Ghibli film, you know exactly what I'm talking about. Though, granted, a bit of the flavour is lost because a lot of the circumstances are strongly cultural so if you are not Japanese and have not lived in Japan, you might not get exactly how closely matched to real life these films are.

Watching Ghibli films is kind of like drinking tea. It's to be savoured, so it takes some patience. If you really just want to quench your thirst with some Mountain Dew (I know, soda just makes you more thirsty), then you are probably not a Ghibli person.

Revolutionary Road

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
8/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
6.5/10

Year released: 2008
Runtime: 119 minutes
IMDB page: here

Well, if you have heard anything about the movie, you know it's depressing, so you should be mentally ready before you start watching. If you are already having thoughts of suicide, perhaps you should wait till a happier day.

Plot: 1950's, suburbia in Connecticut. Married couple Frank and April used to love each other, but upon hitting 30, things begin to rot as they grow restless of their dead lives, as Frank is stuck at a boring desk job and April is stuck as a failed actress trapped with the duties of a housewife with 2 children. They want to live, to be meaningful, to dream. April makes the crazy suggestion that they sell everything and move to Paris, where they can finally start living. Frank hesitates but then agrees. Things perk up as they make the preparations, but a few unforeseen incidents and inevitable reality get in the way, and...

Cast: The first reunion of Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet after the famed Titanic. Things are tragic in a very different nature. Love cannot conquer all, after all. Both have matured a great deal in acting. They are both really fine actors, but they just don't hit me personally, DiCaprio with his usual violent desperation and Winslet with her usual inner righteousness. Especially with Dicaprio... it's just so difficult to see him as anyone but Leonardo DiCaprio, be it in Gangs of New York or The Aviator or Catch Me If You Can (a remarkable exception is The Departed, where you can actually forget who he is). Point of note goes to Michael Shannon, who is brilliant and biting in his Oscar-nominated role as an emotionally honest mathematician sent to the madhouse by his parents.

Script: Based on Richard Yates' novel. Some of the lines are so poignant. The story is also quite universal, basically about the early onset of midlife crisis. Except the couple is only 30 years old, so they actually have real hopes of changing life to the way they want, which makes the crash to reality all the more harsh.

Production: Directed by Sam Mendes (American Beauty), who is also Winslet's husband. It's a period piece, so the set design and the costumes all have the 50's feel, quite authentic. Shooting on location instead of at a soundstage at a studio also makes it more realistic, though there is a cramped feel sometimes (a good thing, since it adds to the claustrophobic nature of the situation).

Like I said, it's a depressing subject matter. I recognize that it's really great material because it really makes you think, makes you feel for the characters and for yourself. To be able to generate that kind of powerful emotion in the audience is no easy feat. But I personally may not welcome that kind of emotion. To someone who has little faith in marriage to start with, this just confirms my worst fears about marriage and life in general. It's pretty much all downhill after the moment you are born. The characters are realistic, their dilemmas and the ways they choose to cope are realistic, and therefore their inevitable failures are realistic and all too uncomfortably close to our lives.

New Category!

Yes, I am introducing a new category to the mix. Life -- it's kind of overdue, since obviously I should infuse more of myself into this place instead of just commenting on other characters' lives. But fear not, I will not be saying anything intensely boring that only concerns myself. Hopefully.

It would kind of be a category of my plans, my musings (not too much of that, with any luck), and anything I deem worth sharing (hmm... sounds dubious). It will include no whining if I can help it, nothing too bogged down with the reality of living an ordinary life. Instead, it'll be the more interesting part of the extraordinary life that I lead (or wish to lead, in any case).

Okay, moving on to my master plan for the world... review recently viewed movies such as:

• Night Watch / Day Watch, the famous Russian fantasy trilogy that is currently missing the final installment
• Nixon/Frost, also recently seen and ... liked, to my surprise
• Painted Skin, an Asian action flick / period piece that is quite abysmal, in the negative sense of the word
  

My summer reading plan is failing abysmally, but I finally got my hands on Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, the now (in)famous adaptation by Seth Grahame-Smith of the Jane Austen classic. So far, it's weirdly delightful, though not exceeding expectations like I expected it to (hmm, that sentence really ought to make more sense).

Still plowing on with Terry Pratchett's Discworld series. "Plowing" is really doing the series a great injustice, since it's not boring at all. But there are so many books in the series and I just discovered that I'm not the avid reader that I used to be.

Also, my comic reading schedule has been thrown way off too... for no apparent reason other than me not wanting to read. Which is just bizarre, but I can always wait until summer is over and I no longer have time for reading... that should pique up my reading interest adequately.

Labor Pains

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
4.5/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
6/10

Year released: 2009
Runtime: 89 minutes
IMDB page: here

Okay, I confess: I watched this movie for Lindsay Logan. And the positive review. The two seemed to be an oxymoron, so I had to check it out. It did not disappoint. Hilarious at points, with a lot of cheeziness and a bit of cliche. Just relax and have a pretty fun time.

Plot: Thea is a poor girl taking care of her younger sister after their parents' death and working her butt off as a lowly assistant to one annoying, clueless know-it-all publisher. When he decides to fire her, she lies on the spot and says she's pregnant to keep the job. Funniness ensues as she struggles to keep up the pretense and realizes that things really work out for a pregnant woman who does not really have a baby growing inside her...

Cast: Lindsay Logan is back to her Freaky Friday / Mean Girls /girl-next-door kind of character, which is what she does best. Overly earnest or exasperated at times, she is nonetheless much more comfortable and realistic here. The rest of the cast is kind of just there, in a majorly supportive role.

Script: Majorly cheezy, a few laughs, a few improbable points that can be overlooked given that this is a Lindsay Logan comedy. There, I've mentioned her name 3 times already.

Production: .... It's a Lindsay Logan comedy. How deep do you have to look into it? There are no explosions, no artsy angle shots here, sorry.

Don't get me wrong, this is still a nice little piece of comedy. Nothing too rowdy, but not terrible. I just typically don't have that much to say about the genre.

Harper's Island - Conclusion

The season has ended. The entire series has ended. It was rather ill-fated.

I still remember when the series just started, I had such high hopes (and wrote so here). But it was soon moved from Thursday nights to Saturday nights due to low ratings, and a bit later it was announced that CBS will not be picking up a second season. Which is alright by me, because to me the series was supposed to be a one-season wonder anyway. Everyone was supposed to be killed off, so any continuation after that would only ruin things.

Except it wasn't a wonder at all. The ending revealed a very surprising killer, granted, but just shock value is not gonna get you all the way there. The plot became too transparent, too thin, too uninteresting, too unrealistic. The twists are not fast-paced enough, and the bland acting doesn't help.

But I stood by it anyway, stuck with it until the end. And I totally called one of the survivors right at the beginning. I'm glad it's over, because it was really starting to feel obligatory rather than exciting. Nice to have some closure at the end.

The Horsemen

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
3.5/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
4/10

Year released: 2009
Runtime: 90 minutes
IMDB page: here

Things looked so promising, but ultimately it's so disappointing. Yeah, take that, you serious-artsy-intriguing-horror-movie wannabe!

Plot: A widower cop with 2 sons, Aidan (Dennis Quaid)'s family life isn't doing so hot. He's always overworked and doesn't have the time to take care of his kids, who have grown quite distant from him after his wife's death, especially the older, teenaged Alex (Lou Taylor Pucci). Aidan gets a particularly nasty case of ritualistic killing, where the victim, a mother of 3, was hung up by hooks and killed by lung punctures and her unborn baby was taken out of her. The words "COME AND SEE" were spraypainted on 4 walls in the room. A few days later, a victim is found dead in a similar way, hanging by hooks dug into the body. Evidence shows there are multiple people present at the scene...

Cast: Dennis Quaid is quite bland. But Ziyi Zhang does play a psycho Asian adopted daughter of the 1st victim. She has always had that mean look in her eyes suitable for playing a villain, so this fits her pretty nicely. Her accent is a bit painful at times, but she manages to do the whole thing in English. Lou Pucci's tortured Alex is remarkably poignant to watch.

Script: Has a very intriguing idea on hand, but mostly ruins it. The gist is that the serial ritual killers are imitating the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (Pestilence, War, Famine, and Death), colour themes symbols (sword, weighing scale, etc) included. But the dialogue and the ending is pretty lame... the identity of the final killer was kind of predictable.

Production: Lots of fake blood, lots of agony in death... but most of those scenes have little weight or passion in them. As horror movies go, this one doesn't incite any fear in you... just a slight disgust that you are actually wasting your time watching it.

So, yeah, not awesome in my book. I started watching with no idea what it would be about, then got pretty excited that it's gonna be a very interesting serial killer mystery with lots of symbolism... then got real disappointed that nothing really comes together. Definitely skippable.

Watchmen

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
7.5/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
9/10

Year released: 2009
Runtime: 162 minutes
IMDB page: here

Stylish, dark, fast, desolate, violent, sophisticated, philosophical. Too many adjectives, some seemingly contradictory? I agree! But the movie is just that good!

Plot: In an alternative universe, Nixon is elected 3 times, the US is victorious on the Vietnamese front, and the world is on the brink of nuclear holocaust due to the escalating arms race between the US and Russia. All this? Due to some costume-wearing heroes. Not superheroes; none of them have superpowers, except for Dr. Manhattan, who can control all matter and manipulate time due to his accident as a physicist stuck in the testing room for a nuclear experiment. All the other masked vigilantes are just good fighters who bring down the criminals, though some are criminals themselves. The public develops a problem with this, and now most of them are forced into retirement. A few are killed. All of them have personal flaws, some of them are quite emotionally damaged and are borderline sociopaths... rather like the Greek gods and goddesses.

The Comedian, one such mask who caused equal damage and good (if not more damage) in his days but is now aged and retired, is murdered. This causes ripples in the heroes community, as Rorschach, a particularly stubborn vigilante, tries to uncover the conspiracy behind the death.

Cast: There is not really any big star in the movie, since the attention never focuses on one character for too long... all of them are so colourful and different. But the acting overall is very convincing, or as convincing as possible, given the strange yet plausible setting. I especially liked Rorschach, and not just for his ever-changing face.

Script: Based on the (in)famous comic of the same name. Which I have never read, so I can't comment on the authenticity. But I thought the adaptation was pretty successful if it can drag a non-fanboy like me into it. A mystery wedged in-between all these allegories about humanity and the nature of society, revealed bits by pieces through flashbacks. And the un-PC-ness can be shocking at times (the things the Comedian did to women... and it's not even sex, which is done offscreen) The ending is a bit lame, but there's nothing that the rest of the movie doesn't make up for.

Filmmaking: Directed by Zack Snyder, who directed "300." Stylish editing, rhythmic. Some sci-fi elements that are futuristic, but it's set in the 70's so it has that old glamour to it, in the costumes and in the buildings, even in the sordid flashbacks; there's something close to nostalgia in it all. The bone crunching, the squirting of blood all hit home nice and proper. My favourite scene's gotta be the bathroom swinging door one (watch it; you'll know it when you see it).

I just love this movie, love every aspect of it. It's a (not-super)hero action flick, it's a social commentary, it's a sci-fi thriller, it's a detective story, it's a cautionary tale. All of the above? Absolutely.

Surveillance

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
6/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
7/10

Year released: 2008
Runtime: 97 minutes
IMDB page: here

Grueling, explosive at the end. A typical serial killer movie, but there is nothing typical about it. It's very different, hard to describe. Largely to do with the strange pacing of the movie.

Plot: Two FBI agents come to a small-town police station to investigate a series of bloody highway murders. The police station is very disorganized, manned by several unprofessional (and a few corrupt, mean-spirited) officers. The agents try to piece together the story from different perspectives of the people involved, including a little girl, a female drug addict in her 20s, and a police officer whose partner was killed in the incident.

Script: Okay, a tiny bit impossible, because that little police station is just too perfect a place for the things in the movie to happen. But that might be the only flaw. The pace is ... strange. It can be described as slow at places, but even those places are filled with violent/bloody flashbacks. (Violent and bloody are quite different and should not be used interchangeably.) When those flashbacks build into a stunningly abrupt conclusion and the answer is suddenly revealed in your face, you are quite shocked and can't be sure of yourself for a few moments.

Cast: I was personally unfamiliar with either of the two leads (Julia Ormond and Bill Pullman) who play the FBI agents. They demonstrate a shocking transformation and multiple facets as the movie goes on. The string of incompetent police officers also has the right touch that irritates you without completely alienating you. They are just doofuses and jerks who happen to be police officers, nothing personal. The little girl played by Ryan Simpkins (who IS a girl, ignore the name) is vulnerable but observant, smart without losing her credibility as a little girl.

Production: Directed by Jennifer Lynch, David Lynch's daughter. Has a very raw feel to it. Set design seems rather primitive (like they just found a place and made do with it), since the movie mostly revolves around the police station and the open high way. With that said, what they did with what they had is very respectable.

I personally liked it more than I expected. I really thought I would have a hard time getting into it, but after the first few minutes, I'm in. Not recommended for anyone who hates: blood, suspense, sudden mind twisters.

Japan Sinks (aka Nihon Chinbotsu)

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
7/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
7/10

Year released: 2006
Runtime: 135 minutes
IMDB page: here

See, this movie was long too, but I didn't really feel it. It was a bit slow at times, but you don't think "when's this movie gonna end?!" every 5 minutes. But then, if a disaster movie ends too fast, it couldn't have gone well for the characters...

Plot: Japan sinks. Pretty self-explanatory. End of movie. No, just kidding. Due to the movements of tectonic plates, Japan will sink (the plate with Japan on it is getting dragged under). America predicts 50 years, but a Japanese geologist predicts less than a year based on new evidence he gathered. The government doesn't want to cause a panic, so they say it's gonna be 5 years and start to evacuate people to neighbouring countries. Meanwhile, earthquakes and seaquakes and volcanic eruptions and other natural disasters plague the nation. The story centers on Toshio, an experienced operator of deep-sea probes, and Reiko, a firewoman/rescue worker.

Cast: I'll try not to get bogged down with Japanese names, but... Kusanagi Tsuyoshi (Toshio) is a member of the famous Japanese boyband SMAP (who, despite being a group of 30-something-year-olds now, is still extremely popular). Shibasaki Kou is also a singer/actress who appears as the evil Mitsuko in Battle Royale (one of my favourite survivor horror movies). But really, very few people watch this kind of movie for the acting.

Script: Well, the plate tectonics theory was used pretty convincingly, at least to a non-professional like me. This started out as a novel of the same name, which was made into a movie in the 70s, and now is remade. Things make sense, some themes are explored lightly (like social inequality, international relationships, to stay and help or to flee), and there's some human interest in there.

Production: That's where the money is. Very spectacular visual effects for all the natural disasters. Rumoured to be the most costly film in Japanese cinematic history, this movie delivers realistic explosions, floods, eruptions, collapses, and a lot of other phenomena that are very expensive to make, either physically or by CG.

Again, watch for the spectacles, not the people. It can be a bit heart-breaking near the end. And also, this Japanese mentality of disaster is very curious; it must have something to do with the fact the country is, in real life, often troubled by natural disasters.

Knowing

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
5/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
5/10

Year released: 2009
Runtime: 121 minutes
IMDB page: here

It was a jumble of a lot of used ideas. You just keep thinking what pieces of other movies they are gonna try to stuff into this one movie. It wasn't that bad, but... eh. I've always been a bit attracted to the whole prophecy/apocalypse idea, so I probably liked the movie a lot more than I should.

Plot: John is a widower with a little son, Caleb. John is also a professor of physics at MIT. Caleb's elementary school buried a time capsule 50 years ago and dug it up now for the 50th anniversary. Other children got cartoon drawings of rockets and robots, what the students 50 years ago predicted the future would be like. Caleb got a piece of paper covered with numbers. John didn't think much about it, before he discovers some of the numbers correspond with dates of large-scale disasters like 9/11 and the number of people who died in each disaster. There are still 3 dates on the paper that haven't happened yet, but the last date, instead of giving the number of the casualties, is followed by the letters "EE."

Cast: Nicolas Cage as John is his usual self, the mixture of tenderness toward his son and obsession as a physics professor. Rose Byrne, as the single mother that John meets and the daughter of the little girl who wrote all those numbers 50 years ago, is QUITE different from the Alex she played in Wicker Park. In this movie she's a lot thinner and a lot more annoying. Perhaps it's just her character's fault. She's basically feeble-minded and a bit unthinking.

Script: Like I said, a lot of jumbled bits of past movies that worked. There's some X-Files elements thrown in there, some of The Forgotten, some of all the previous prophecy/Armageddon movies combined. Nice elements, but all together in one movie? Result: dubious.

Production: Some very nice visual effects, with a plane crash and a subway crash and... well, just crashes.

I almost fell asleep near the end (but not AT the end), and this movie deserves better. But not much better. It was exciting at times, but definitely not a masterpiece.

Midnight Secretary

Japanese: ミッドナイト·セクレタリ
Artist: Ohmi Tomu 大海 とむ
Status: Complete
Span: 2006-2009
Volume #: 7
Wiki page: here
Series can be read: here


Unlike movies, I will probably not review comics that I don't like because that would simply take up too much time. This series is considered josei (adult female), with a lot of romantic and sexy vibes. Quite different from other things I read, but somehow I got interested. And no, just because I like some vampire-themed manga doesn't mean I like Twilight.

Plot: Kaya is trying her best to be professional. She has to hide behind glasses and a tight hairbun to conceal her baby face. She works at the secretary department of a large corporation. (Secretaries in Japan take on much bigger roles... kind of like personal assistants). One day, she's dispatched to worked for Director Touma, notorious for his pickiness and his numerous affairs with various women. He sends Kaya away upon their first meeting because she's not "sexy" enough. Kaya's not intimidated and still does her best to be the perfect secretary, especially after she discovers Director Touma is... a vampire. He dates the women so he can suck their blood when they are immersed in pleasure.

Of course Kaya and Touma develop a rocky love story. There's a whole set of rules that goes with the vampire lore in this story, like vampires can only reproduce with a human, and the baby is either fully vampire or fully human, not half-and-half. Or that vampires are fine with garlic and religious symbols, provided the symbols don't hold real faith (aka used for secular purposes).

Riding on the wave of vampire fanfare, the series is much like Twilight or True Blood, with modern, semi-normal vampires who are a part of human society and are the mature, reliable men girls are looking for.

Art: Typical art style for girls/women, with tall, handsome, muscular men with slanted eyes and petit, slender, long-legged women with huge child-like eyes and perfect figures. The artist, Ohmi, is apparently known for the elaborate laces she draws on the bras and other undergarments for the female characters.

Storytelling: Hmm... your typical swooning maiden story with the (vampire) prince sweeping her off her feet. With the extra moody Asian-ness thrown in there. Don't analyze too deep into it. It's basically soft porn for girls. Not unlike Twilight.

I do like Kaya as a character, but sometimes the men in the story are meant to be handsome but just... turn out a bit weird looking. That's only on occasions though. For a light read, this is pretty great.

Seven Pounds

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
5/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
3.5/10

Year released: 2008
Runtime: 123 minutes
IMDB page: here

High-concept, long. Still haven't figured out what exactly the seven pounds are. But then I wasn't exactly paying close attention, seeing this is the second long film in as many days.

Plot: Well, it's one big story and the beginning, the ultimate cause, is only revealed at the end. Will Smith plays Ben, a IRS tax collector who seems to be barely in control of himself, as he screams mean-spirited insults to a blind customers service man (played by Woody Harrelson). He tracks down seven people with severe problems in life (abusive boyfriend, congenital heart disease, etc) and inserts himself into their lives.

Cast: Mostly driven by Will Smith, who gives a pretty powerful performance. But then it's what we've come to expect from him. Rosario Dawson, as Emily with the heart disease, is also quite forceful. The rest of the people are pretty 2-dimensional and vague. Why were they there again?

Script: I can't say exactly what's wrong with it. It's just boring. I don't know why. It should be an engaging story, intriguing and full of human interest. But it just isn't. Perhaps I was a bit influenced by bad reviews that I read before watching the movie, but it just didn't grab me. And I've been grabbed by plenty of bad movies before; movies that I like aren't all Oscar material.

Perhaps my shortest review yet... but the movie was just that unremarkable to me.

K-20: Legend of the Mask (aka Kaijin niju menso den)

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
5/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
3/10

Year made: 2008
Runtime: 137 minutes
IMDB page: here

First Japanese action movie I've seen. Long, bland, nice set design but overall, please. Someone should have told me not to watch it. I should stick with the Japanese horror genre.

Plot: It's set in an alternative universe where Japan avoided WWII and enters into a caste system with great social unequality. Heikichi is a circus performer who loves his circus, though it's barely making ends meet. A suspicious old dude hires him to take some tabloid pictures of the engagement ceremony between Miss Yoko, the duke's daughter, and Count Akechi, a famous private detective. At the ceremony, Heikichi's arrested as the infamous thief K-20. When he escapes, he finds the circus burnt down and himself a wanted man. To get his old life back, he vows to hunt down the real K-20, who seems to have a plan to destroy the world...?!

Okay, stop, some brief explanation. K-20 and Detective Akechi are characters created by famous mystery writer Edogawa Rampo. Akechi is kind of like Sherlock Holmes, and K-20 is like Arsene Lupin, the master thief who excels at disguises and steals artworks for thrills rather than money. Akechi's not a count in Rampo's stories, and K-20 is not a true villain with a real agenda. Which brings us to the...

Script: based on Kitamura Sou's novel very loosely based on Rampo's characters. Never read the novel, but I have read some Rampo and this movie is so DISAPPOINTING. It's nothing like Rampo, which is what I expected due to the film's title. And the turns and twists are quite ridiculous. And predictable. And boring. And doesn't make sense, even though you see it coming. Don't ask me how that works.

Cast: Kaneshiro Takeshi, the Japanese-Taiwanese actor/singer/all-around heartthrob, plays Heikichi with an earnest passion that is just... irritating. He's not cool, he's not charming, he just talks his mystique to death. I used to like him. Now ... not so much. Nakamura Toru, who plays Akechi, is properly stiff and not like Rampo's Akechi at all. Matsu Takako, who plays Lady Yoko, also blabbers too much like an excited little girl, except she's not little so it's not adorable.

Production: The set design is perhaps the only good aspect of the movie. The alternative universe feel is similar to that of The Golden Compass, zeppelins included. The clothes, the buildings, the skyline all have a brown, earthy tone, old and glamourous at the same time.

ARRRRR.... remind me not to watch Japanese action movies in the future. It was over 2 hours long! There's way too much flat humour involved, that kind that's supposed to be cute but just turns out to be too slow and taking up too much time.

Death Race

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
5.5/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
6.5/10

Year made: 2008
Runtime: 111 minutes
IMDB page: here

Oh it's exciting, it's bloody, sparks flying everywhere. It's fatally pumped with testosterone, it makes Fast the Furious looks like a wimp. That's right, it's Death Race.

Plot: Man, does the plot even matter? It's an okay plot, but no one watches this kind of movie for the plot. Jensen is a blue-collar worker struggling to make ends meet. He gets framed for his beloved wife's murder and gets sent to jail, where the ultimate reality show takes place: Death Race. The inmates race really fast and dangerously armed and armoured cars. The one who wins 5 races gets to walk free. Of course, there's the slight hindering aspect that you might get your head shot off and crushed flat in the race, and the mortality rate per race is 64%. The femme-fatale warden pushes Jensen under the mask of Frankenstein, a legendary racer who died after winning his 4th race but is an audience magnet. Oh, did I mention the whole thing is aired over the internet to paying subscribers, and that's motivation for the warden to keep things interesting.

Cast: Whoa. I'm getting a mixed message here. Jason Stathem as Jensen, very fitting role. I really love Stathem; the guy's got a kind of rough charm, like in The Transporter or The Italian Job. Sinewy, lean, with a steely light gleaming in his eyes. He's built for this kind of movie. But then there's Ian McShane as Coach, the old-dude sage fixing cars and giving out advice. And then there's Joan Allen as the anything-goes warden who gets down and plays dirty for subscriber ratings. Oscar nominations and Golden Globes under those two heavyweights' belt... what's the movie trying to get at? That it's got character acting? Er... no. The "making-of" feature says it's not a B movie, that it's clearly an A movie because of the cast. I say it's trying to be an average A movie when it can be a superb B movie. I vote for the latter.

Production: crazy, crazy car stunts, with lots of horsepower and firepower. Some grisly deaths. There's not enough character development for you to actually care about any of these poor dudes with tattoos who get their guts shot open, but everything's realistic enough that you might cringe a bit. The cars and the guns are very sweet; chances are you'll love it if you are a guy, and you'll leave the movie theater (or the TV) early if you are a girl (why you were watching such a movie in the first place is questionable).

Truly a thrilling ride, a very solid B movie with some A-movie wannabe tendencies.

Coraline

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
7/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
8.5/10

Year made: 2009
Runtime: 100 minutes
IMDB page: here

Rich, dark, delicious. It's a twisted fairy tale. It's a full-length stop motion animation film. These are the essentials before you go into the film.

I liked the film very much. It's a fantasy turned into a nightmare. You know, I had my doubts before watching this. I don't want to waste my hour and a half with some kiddie stuff that has no rewatch value. Or first-time watch value, period. But this is definitely a very enjoyable film with its creepy edge.

Plot: Coraline just moved into an apartment with her workaholic parents who have no time for her. She's an adventurous but lonely little girl. When exploring the ancient apartment, she finds a little door in the wall that's bricked off. But in her dreams, the door leads to a fantasy land where her parents go to a great length to please her. Her mom cooks her favourite meals, her dad arranges the whole garden to look like her face, and even the neighbours are quirky and fun. One tiny weird detail: everyone's eyes are buttons sewed on.

Things sour when her Other Mother wants to sew buttons over her eyes as well. She finds that not everything in fantasy is what it seems to be, and she's having quite some trouble returning to the "boring" reality she used to hate...

Acting: the voice acting by Dakota Fanning as Coraline and Teri Hatcher as Mother and the Other Mother is ... adequate. Expressive, ... not a whole lot to say about them. But they do make you forget that it's their voice, and you stop associating their face with the character, and I highly respect that.

Script: Based Neil Gaiman's novella, which I haven't read, but I have read Good Omens (coauthored by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett). It's a dark but light kind of humour, quite creepy at times but very enjoyably so. The story teaches you a lesson not-so-subtly, but it's one you are quite willing to swallow. And your heart really goes out for the little girl. It's a bit like Pan's Labyrinth, where the lonely little girl creates a fantasy that she might not be able to handle in the end.

Production: Adapted and directed by Henry Selick, who also directed The Nightmare Before Christmas. The main characters in this one are smoother than Nightmare. Some of the fantasyland scenes are just wondrous (like in the Other Father's garden, or the Opera House, or the Circus, or even the Other Mother's kitchen where the chandelier also serves as a multi-flavored milkshake dispenser). I personally wouldn't be able to stay away from such a fantasy land, which makes the nightmare hit home more vividly. And some of the creepy imageries really stick with you, like the sewn-on button eyes, or the stuffed old dead dogs dressed as angels, or the old abandoned lifeless dolls bleeding sand, or the Other Father hunting down Coraline on a mechanic praying mantis...

Soundtrack: dreamy in a slightly sinister way. Lilting vocals like wind chimes. Properly dark.

All in all, a very pleasant surprise.

13 Beloved (aka 13 game sayawng)

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
5/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
5/10

Year made: 2006
Runtime: 114 minutes
IMDB page: here

This is the 1st Thai movie that I have watched all the way through. I can't really comment on the Thai movie industry based on this one film, but, eh, I'll go ahead with the review anyway.

The title doesn't make any sense to me either, beside the 13 part. Beloved? Beloved what?! But then, that's the English version, and I dare say the Thai title is a bit less elusive.

Premise: Pusit (beside having a terrible name, at least in English) is a very unlucky bastard, perhaps the unluckiest. He just lost his job as a salesman for Yamaha in Thailand. His car got towed due to his late payment. His girlfriend has dumped him for an abusive punk who had promised her an advancement in her singer-wannabe career. He barely has enough money left to buy a pack of cigarettes, and his mother just asked him for some money to pay off his younger sisters' school tuition. Yeah, bad day a'ight.

Then he gets this mysterious phone call that says he can get $500 immediately (or some other medium-sized amount of money... I'm not too good with the currency exchange) if he kills the fly buzzing around him with the roll of newspaper on the floor. He's a bit freaked that the caller can obviously see him, but follows the instructions on a whim. And sure enough, he gets the money forwarded to his bank account. The caller then tells him that if he chooses to play this game and complete 13 tasks, he will get some money after each task, and the amount will increase with each task. After finishing all 13, he will get $100 million. If he fails or chooses to quit at any point, he loses all that he has earned. So begins this twisted version of "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" as the tasks get increasingly bizarre, disgusting, dangerous, and mean-spirited.

Acting: The lead actor is pretty tough despite his appearance as a geek. Everything's realistic and you have to sympathize with this poor office drone even though he's a wimp. This game has finally given him a chance to be a man. Perhaps at the cost of his humanity.

Script: this is clearly a piece of thriller trash, in a good way. Some of the tasks are ... mean-spirited and tasteless, but they egg you on. You really want to see what crazy stuff the game will come up with next, and how Pusit is gonna handle it. You get hooked, which doesn't happen in every movie. The ending is surprisingly lame and tame, nothing too twisty, but enjoy the ride anyway.

PS. I enjoyed the little design that comes with the task number. It's on the movie poster.

Haunting in Connecticut, the

Objective Rating (How much merit I think it deserves):
4/10
Subjective Rating (How much I personally like it):
4.5/10

Year made: 2009
Runtime: 92 minutes
IMDB page: here

The story made some sense... mostly. The acting was.... close enough. I suppose you can't ask for too much in a horror movie. Especially an American one.

Premise: Matt is a teenager with cancer. To be closer to the hospital where he's receiving chemoradiation treatment, his not-so-wealthy family (parents, a younger sister and brother, a live-in babysitting cousin) moves to this wonderful but cheap house in Connecticut. Slight catch: the house has a history. As a funeral home.

Matt has one foot in Death's door already, so he can see some of the remnants of the house's dark past. The house's old owner tried his hands in necromancy and seances, with the unwilling help of a young assistant/medium.

Acting: Matt's actor Kyle Gallner caught my eye. That's about it. Virginia Madsen's loving mother is only so-so and not so believable. But Gallner's sincere desperation and loss of control to both his physical disease and the dark powers embedded in the house is quite something to watch. His quiet, pale, sweat-drenched face in pain is about the only thing remarkable about the film.
The film relies on mostly loud noises and sudden seemingly "scary" images to scare audiences, and these days you just have to do better than that. The bodies covered in bloody carved writing are a nice touch, the ectoplasm (described on wiki as "weightless defecation floating out of a medium's mouth") takes on an interesting shape. But eh, I've seen better.

Overall, blerg.

And I shall be more diligent and write more about the interesting movies I have seen in the past few days.