Los Cronocrímenes (2007)

Many times, the idea of science fiction movies is related almost immediately to big budget films that display amazing special effects and a grandiose art design. However, as in its literary form, science fiction is simply about bringing fantastic visions from the future to the realm of possibility, something that despite what most sci-fi movies attempt, doesn't necessarily need flashy visuals. Science fiction stories are still stories, and no matter how amazing the visuals are, if the story is bad, the movie will be bad. So, in the end all that's needed is a powerful, tight, creative, and most important, captivating story. And it won't matter if it's about that classic sci-fi theme that tends to give headaches to writers: time travel. Ever since British author H. G. Wells wrote "The Time Machine", time travels have been a favorite subject for stories, but in film, its complexities make it a hard subject to tackle. But now, Spanish director Nacho Vigalondo demonstrates in "Los Cronocrímenes" that, having a huge dose of imagination, time traveling is not that expensive.

In "Los Cronocrímenes" ("Timecrimes"), Karra Elejalde plays Héctor, a common man who one day, while resting in his backyard, watches through his binoculars a naked woman (Bárbara Goenaga) in the nearby woods. Héctor decides to investigate and is attacked by mysterious man with the head covered in bandages. Hunted by the strange figure, Héctor runs through the woods until he finds a building in which he hides. Inside he finds a walkie-talkie and calls for help. Hs call is answered by a young man (Nacho Vigalondo) located in another building, who instructs Héctor about how to reach him. Followed by the bandaged man, Héctor makes his way to the other building and meets the young man, whom is a scientist. The scientist helps Héctor to hide inside a strange-looking machine, machine that accidentally gets activated sending Héctor exactly one hour in the past. Now, there are two Héctors existing at the same time, so Héctor #1 now must do whatever is necessary to make Héctor #2 follow his steps to keep existing, but the job won't be easy, and crime, is just a matter of time.

Written and directed by Nacho Vigalondo, "Los Cronocrímenes" has as its greatest strength a carefully developed screenplay at its core, in which Vigalondo plays with the time travel concept to build up a clever, complex story that's not only highly entertaining, but also thought-provoking and simply fascinating. By focusing more on the consequences of the travel than on the technology to do it, Vigalondo makes a very believable portrayal of time travel without having to resort to heavy visual effects, as everything is done and explained by the way the story unfolds. Such is the power of a carefully planned storyline, as the plot is so captivating that its verisimilitude is always out of question. Built as a convoluted puzzle that the main character, Héctor, must solve to return to normality, "Los Cronocrímenes" keeps its mystery well guarded until the last frame, handling masterfully suspense and most important, never losing any consistency (something most stories about time travel lack) and always having a surprising twist to add to the plot.

As written above, director Vigalondo forgets about all the flashy visuals that tends to surround sci-fi movies and remains entirely focused on the story. Done with an extremely low budget, the movie is more about the results of the trip than about the trip itself, with the time machine being nothing more than an odd looking industrial artifact. Nothing iconic, nothing surprising, and yet, the power of the story is that strong that despite having one of the less remarkable machines in science fiction, the time traveling in "Los Cronocrímenes" is completely believable. Forced to relay entirely on the story, Vigalondo brings to life his story in a remarkable way by taking great care of every tiny detail on the screen. Playing with touches of noir and horror, Vigalondo creates a thrilling atmosphere of mystery out of the common neighborhood where Héctor lives; and thanks to the great eye of cinematographer Flavio Martínez Labiano (frequent collaborator of filmmaker Álex De la Iglesia), he manages to take the everyday world to the realm of fantasy without losing any credibility.

Given the importance the story has in the film, the performances of the cast are instrumental for the success of the film, and director Vigalondo truly gets the best out of them. As the main character, Héctor, actor Karra Elejalde is truly superb, carrying the weight of the film on his shoulders with great talent and skill. As a typical man caught in a series of highly atypical events, Karra's performance is excellent and very natural, making this unlikely hero (better said, antihero) a very sympathetic character. Director Nacho Vigalondo himself plays the scientist, a young man whose hurry to test the device will put Héctor in several complications. Vigalondo is very good in his role, portraying the unexperienced, nervous young man with ease. However, I must say that he is easily overshadowed by Karra's terrific work. Candela Fernández plays Héctor's wife Clara and Bárbara Goenaga is the mysterious girl in the woods, characters whom will get involved into the time crimes as Héctor goes back in time. Both are not only beautiful, but very effective in their roles.

Watching "Los Cronocrímenes", it's really amazing to see what Vigalondo and his crew have achieved with so little, as it's safe to say that with this brutal display of imagination, Vigalondo has taken science fiction back to its roots, where what mattered the most were the effects fantastic science had on people, not the fantastic science itself. It is also a film that shows the great importance of having a good script to work with, as it is the simple, yet intensely captivating storyline what drives the movie. Of course, this is not to say that the script is the only worthy element, as definitely every element adds its magic to the whole picture, I'm just saying that having such a terrific basis meant a lot for the development of the film. I must also add that Flavio Martínez Labiano's remarkable work of cinematography does add a lot of atmosphere to the movie because, while apparently simple (everything in the movie is minimalist), his eye perfectly captures the entrance of Héctor into the maddening world of time travel.

Four years after his breakthrough short film, "7:35 De la Mañana" (nominated for an Academy Award, among other awards), director Nacho Vigalondo proves in his feature length debut that his fresh vision and great talent will probably result in greater things in the future. For a career that's just starting, "Los Cronocrímenes" is a good omen of what's about to come from this filmmaker. A deeply entertaining, thought-provoking film, "Los Conocrímenes" will definitely become a cult classic of the genre, as it remind us about what truly matters about science fiction (and well, about movies in general): a good story told well. Like every good puzzle, "Los Cronocrímenes" leaves you asking for more, and even after one knows all the answers, it's still a thrilling story to watch. A must see indeed.

8/10
-------------------------------

Gojira (1954)

Without a doubt, one of the most recognizable figures in the history of modern horror and science-fiction cinema is the nuclear-powered lizard known as Gojira, or Godzilla, the King of the Monsters. One of the ultimate icons of Japanese horror, the giant beast has taken the roles of villain and hero interchangeably through its many incarnations; however, one theme remains a constant in its existence: the destruction of mankind's habitat by a twisted, uncontrolled and devastating force of nature, which Godzilla, symbol of the fears of the nuclear era, perfectly represents. It was in 1954 when the powerful monster first reared its head when, inspired by a tragic naval incident (as well as motivated by the success of 1953's film "Beast from 20,000 Fathoms" and other films about nuclear-powered monsters), writer Shigeru Kayama and director Ishirô Honda decided to give their own view, a very Japanese view, on the horrors of the nuclear era, very real horrors that their country had experienced first hand. And so, the most formidable of the giant monsters was born: Gojira.

The story begins with the Japanese fishing boat Eiko-Maru, which is attacked by a mysterious flash of light from the water near Odo Island, and is shipwrecked. Two other ships meet the same fate. In the mean time, the fishing community of Odo Island is unable to find any fish, which together with the news of the attacks prompts the locals to remember the legend of Gojira (or Godzilla), an ancient monster god that lives in the sea. Reporters arrive to Odo Island to investigate about the attacks, and that night, the giant monster (Haruo Nakajima) attacks the village, leaving only death and destruction. In the aftermath of the attack, paleontologist Dr. Kyohei Yamane (Takashi Shimura) discovers that Godzilla is a giant dinosaur mutated by atomic tests. Meanwhile, Dr. Yamane's daughter Emiko (Momoko Kôchi) visits her fiancée, Dr. Daisuke Serizawa (Akihiko Hirata) in order to break off their engagement, as she is in love with Lieutenant Hideto Ogata (Akira Takarada). But with in her visit she'll also discover that Serizawa has a secret that might be the only chance to stop Godzilla.

As written above, to conceive the story writer Shigeru Kayama found inspiration in the case of the Lucky Dragon, a ship which after straying too closely to a nuclear test site, had its crew severely injured by radiation. Having this as inspiration, it's not surprising that horrors of the nuclear era became one of "Gojira"'s main themes, and the screenplay, by Takeo Murata and director Ishirô Honda himself, follows this concept expanding the idea by adding their own experiences and memories about the nuclear attacks at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This becomes obvious as not only it's the atomic test what create the monster but the monster's own wave of destruction is akin to the one left by the atomic bomb. The story is essentially simple, and highly influenced by American monster movies, but instead of jingoistic action and adventure, writers gave "Gojira" a huge dose of suspense, and a terrifying verisimilitude, resulting in a darker, almost pessimist tone, in which heroism does exist in people, but not without great sacrifices.

Deeply shocked by the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, director Ishirô Honda brings to life Kayama's giant monster by echoing the devastation that impressed him nine years before. While budgetary constrains forced Honda to shot "Gojira" in black and white, cinematographer Masao Tamai plays this to the film's advantage and creates an ominous atmosphere perfectly in tone with the somber mood the story has. Handling suspense in a masterful way, Honda keeps his monster in the shadows, hidden during most part of the film in order to enhance the effect of its arrival to Tokyo and the following destruction of the city. This climatic scene is effectively built up as a nightmarish vision of chaos, with Godzilla as an implacable force of nature unleashed to finish what the atomic bombs started. Raw and crude, yet full of style and suspense, Honda's "Gojira" succeeds in transforming a man in a monster suit into an apocalyptic vision of nuclear horror.

Framed by the big event that is Godzilla's rampage is the story of a love triangle between the main characters; and while definitely the giant monster's brutal attack overshadows such plot with its great impact and overwhelming power, the cast does and overall good job with their roles. Experienced actor Takashi Shimura plays Dr. Kyohei Yamane, a man more interested in studying Godzilla than on destroying it. As the good paleontologist, Shimura adds a certain sense of dignity to the cast, and is remarkable in his portrait of the troubled scientist, torn between his wish to understand the monster and his responsibilities. Nevertheless, even more interesting is Akihiko Hirata's work as Dr. Daisuke Serizawa, a complex character whose life will get a dramatic change with Godzilla's apparition. Hirata has a very commanding presence that helps him to steal every scene he's in. As Dr. Yamane's daughter, Emiko, Momoko Kôchi is effective in her role as Hirata's counterpart, while Akira Takarada, who plays the man she loves, is the cast's weakest link, being easily overshadowed by Hirata's great performance.

However, as time has proved, no matter how good the cast is (and the cast of "Gojira" is one of the best in any Godzilla movie), it is ultimately the giant monster, Godzilla, whom is the real star of the film. Because even when the Godzilla of "Gojira" is a brutal representation of nuclear horror, it's also a victim of it, and so its fury is mankind's punishment for going too far. Eiji Tsuburaya's special effects, while certainly a tad crude and rudimentary to an extent, manage to perfectly compel the terror of Godzilla with the only help of a rubber suit and carefully designed models. Tsuburaya's work may not had been the state-of-art effects director Honda expected, but together with the work by stuntman Haruo Nakajima, it truly created a mythical figure of epic proportions. While far from a perfect film, "Gojira" succeeds in making the unbelievable a reality, as despite lacking great special effects, the whole tone set by the story and the visual style transform the fantastic story of a giant monster into a very vivid nightmare with echoes from World War II.

Nowadays, more than 50 years after the first time Godzilla smashed a city, the big old monster is more a pop culture icon than the terrifying creature it originally was. Years of facing colorful enemies, kitsch alien invaders and cheesy sidekicks have made us forget that Godzilla is a monster, and that monsters were meant to be scary. Watching Ishirô Honda's original vision of "Gojira" is a great reminder that the big G is more than a giant monster: it's an enormous nuclear nightmare. Even when contrasted to the 1956 American re-edited version, "Godzilla, King of the Monsters", this film is really a completely different take on the monster. This is definitely Godzilla: the monster, the destroyer, the legend.

9/10
-------------------------------

The Vampire Bat (1933)

In many ways, it could be said that the horror genre in film was finally born the day Tod Browning's "Dracula" was released back in 1931. And that's because even when it was already a familiar theme in cinematography (being a genre explored by the German Expressionist movement of the 20s), the arrival of sound to film completed the shape of the classic horror movie. Browning's "Dracula" and Whale's "Frankenstein", the two monsters Universal Studios unleashed in 1931 would define the genre and start a "Golden Age" of American horror, a period deeply rooted in Gothic literature, murder mysteries and pulp fiction. Following Universal Studios' great success, many companies began to produce horror films. Majestic Pictures, a studio dedicated to the production of B-Movies, was one of those companies, and released several horror films of an originality and quality a tad superior to the norm. Frank R. Strayer's "The Vampire Bat" was one of those, a movie benefited by the presence of three horror legends: Lionel Atwill, Fay Wray, and none other than Dwight Frye.

In the German village of Kleinschloss, a series of mysterious deaths begin to take place, all having in common that the victims die of blood loss. Dr. Otto Von Niemann (Lionel Atwill), a famous scientist who lives in Kleinschloss, becomes very interested in the case, taking care of the victims while police inspector Karl Brettschneider (Melvyn Douglas) attempts to solve the case. Due to the strange way the people die, rumors of vampirism begin to run rampant through the town, as the police seem to be clueless about what exactly is causing the deaths. While Inspector Karl, his girlfriend Ruth (Fay Wray) and Dr. Von Niemann try to find a rational explanation for the deaths, the town is filled with paranoia, and the villagers begin to murder bats and suspect of everyone. Soon suspicion falls on Herman Gleib (Dwight Frye), a simple-minded man with a fascination for bats and who likes to make fun of the people's fears. As the deaths continue and neither Von Neumann nor the police can do anything, Herman will find himself in the middle of the turmoil caused by the vampire bat.

Combining elements of crime film and Gothic horror, writer Edward T. Lowe Jr constructs a surprisingly original tale of mystery in which the secret behind the deaths is the source of a plot filled with twists and turns in which paranoia and suspicion become the central themes. A skilled author of convoluted mystery plots, Lowe plays with the genre conventions and crafts a nice mix of different elements (from sci-fi to traces of proto-noir) that make "The Vampire Bat" to be more than the style of Gothic horror that was the norm amongst low budget productions of the time. While sticking to the popular archetypes of the genre, Lowe fleshes out his characters with interesting details that make them to stand out above the norm. Particularly interesting is Inspector Karl's struggle to keep the townspeople's superstitions at bay when himself is unable to find a rational explanation for the mystery. This battle between the rational and the supernatural becomes a major theme in the film, as it begins to hurt the friendship between Insp. Karl and Dr. Von Niemann.

Seasoned craftsman Frank R. Strayer is the man at the helm of "The Vampire Bat", and once again, he gets the job done with his simple yet effective style, although "The Vampire Bat" features some of his most imaginative work. More a hired-gun than a stylish director, Strayer has never been known as a stylish artist, but in "The Vampire Bat" there are a couple of memorable moments where Strayer, along cinematographer Ira H. Morgan, truly capture the story's style, mix of Gothic horror and pulp fiction. It helped a lot that to his fortune, Strayer was able to work in some of the sets of Universal's 1931 classic, "Frankenstein"; because he really makes the most of that chance by recreating the expressionist look and some of the ominous atmosphere that James Whale's movie had. It's clear that Strayer was asked to mimic the Universal films, but given the originality of the screenplay and the quality of his cast, "The Vampire Bat" resulted in something more than a mere copycat, as it's dark plot allows Strayer to make scenes a tad more terrifying than what was seen in those classics.

The work of the actors in "The Vampire Bat" is quite better than the average found in most low budget horrors from the same era, with the main reason for this being the fact that it has a great cast that even A-productions would envy. Leading the cast is a young Melvyn Douglas, whom truly commands the film with a charming personality and good natured humor that suit well his role as the film's "hero". While the screenplay may not have the best dialogs ever written, Douglas makes an adequate, and very professional job with it. Horror icon Lionel Atwill appears as Dr. Von Niemann, and once again Atwill delivers his trademark work as eccentric scientist. However, Atwill (and to be fair, everyone else as well) is overshadowed by Dwight Frye's remarkable turn as Herman. While at first glance it may look like a retreat of his work as madmen in "Dracula" and "Frankenstein", Frye's work here has far more depth, being able to steal the spotlight now. Fay Wray is good as Karl's girlfriend Ruth, but her character is not exactly the most challenging of all.

With such an impressive cast and a great original idea at its core, "The Vampire Bat" has many elements that make it quite an interesting view. Unfortunately, it also has several things that make it fail from reaching its enormous potential. For starters, while writer Edward T. Lowe Jr has built a very interesting plot, his work with dialog is at times kind of poor (unlike for example, his stylish crime film "The World Gone Mad" of the same year), resulting in a loss of credibility that terribly hurts the mood of the story. Also, the attempts at comic relief feel forced, awkward, and even copied from James Whale's "Frankenstein". But still, I think the biggest disappointment is how director Frank R. Strayer fails at transforming an interesting screenplay into an interesting movie, as even when he does create a couple of thrilling moments full of atmosphere, most of the time the movie just flows without any real style. To summarize, "The Vampire Bat" is a bit unmemorable in the sense that it lacks that special something that makes a film rise above the norm.

But even when it's definitely not the great movie it could had been, "The Vampire Bat" is still an interesting curiosity that certainly is worth a watch. Done in order to follow Universal's success, "The Vampire Bat" became experimental ground for Lowe's style of pulp fiction and resulted in a very different kind of beast. It's a shame that a mediocre work of directing damage a interesting concept (and one with a great cast), but fortunately, it's not as bad as it could had been, just definitely not as great as it should had been. Quirky, odd, and different, "The Vampire Bat" is a horror film about vampires that take the concept to a whole different direction. Now this is the kind of movie that should be remade.

7/10
-------------------------------
Watch "The Vampire Bat" (1933)

Changeling (2008)

In 1926, James E. Davis became Chief of Police of the City of Los Angeles, California; where he formed his infamous "gun squad": a 50-man team destined to blast crime without mercy. Unfortunately, the form of extra-judicial punishment delivered by the gun squad only brought even more violence to the streets, which along with the corruption inside the department and the incompetence of the police to solve crimes resulted in a huge amount of bad reputation for the LAPD. It was under this circumstances that the strange case of Christine and Walter Collins took place, the case of a missing child that the LAPD wanted to use to boost its reputation but that ended up uncovering the terrible and corrupt methods used by the department to silence its enemies. More than 70 years later, scriptwriter and journalist J. Michael Straczynski learned about the case and, fascinated by it, decided to take it to the big screen, writing a screenplay and sent it to his agent. Interested in the case and the period setting, director Clint Eastwood decided to take the project.

Titled "Changeling", the film tells the story of single mother Christine Collins (Angelina Jolie), whom one day in 1928, returns home to discover that her son, Walter (Gattlin Griffith), is missing. The LAPD opens an investigation about it, and several months later, the department informs Christine that her son Walter has been found alive in another state. Incredibly happy about the news, Christine awaits eagerly for her son, whose return is announced by the LAPD as a great triumph. However, when Christine meets the boy the police claims is Walter (Devon Conti), she claims the boy is not her son. Captain J. J. Jones (Jeffrey Donovan), head of the department's Juvenile Division, insists the boy is Walter and pressures Christine into taking him home to avoid a media scandal. Despite this, Christine begins a crusade to find her real son and gathers consistent proof that the boy is not her son. Knowing that Christine's actions may become dangerous to the police, Captain Jones decides to send her to an psychiatric hospital. But Christine won't let them to silence her.

Completed after a lengthy work of research, J. Michael Straczynski's screenplay for "Changeling" is a heavily detailed account of the Collins case, including its connection to the Wineville Chicken Coop Murders. But even when Straczynski offers a complete overview of the case (straight from historical records), "Changeling"'s focus is entirely on Christine Collins and her crusade to prove that the boy the LAPD claimed to be her son was an impostor, and that her real son was still missing. On this aspect, "Changeling" is more a drama about the disempowerment of women than about the mystery itself, as it follows the attempts done by the LAPD to silence her, reflecting the ways women were treated in the past when they became trouble for the male-dominated police department. Under this focus, Straczynski also makes the point that the brutal methods employed by the corrupt police department to cover its mistakes and protect itself were as terrible as the Wineville Chicken Coop Murders, as they were done by those supposed to protect and serve the society.

With themes such as rampant police corruption, authority abuse, and the loss of innocence of a rising city; director Clint Eastwood evokes in "Changeling" the tone and mood of film noir to tell the story of Christine Collins' fight against the system. To achieve this atmosphere, Eastwood puts to great use the remarkable job done by cinematographer Tom Stern, who gives the film an antique visual look that suits nicely the period setting. Taking a subtle, restrained approach to the film's subject, Eastwood avoids to fall in overemotional melodrama or in the cheap sensationalism, and remains as objective as possible, keeping true to Straczynski's compromise with the historical account of the case. While it's one of the biggest productions in his career, Eastwood's film flows in a very intimate way, focusing on the characters' humanity and their interactions. Also, it's worth to point out the great work done by the visual effects team, who manage to recreate Los Angeles' old landscape and prove that digital effects are not an exclusivity of the more fantastic genres.

Leading the cast is Angelina Jolie as Christine Collins, the single mother who must face not only the tragedy of losing a child, but also the oppression of having the police working against her. In what's probably an atypical role for her, Angelina Jolie brings back that talent that seemed to be hidden behind the whole celebrity image of her recent years. As Collins, Jolie is subtle, restrained, and surpassing all the expectations, manages to portray Collins' mix of fragility and strength with a very natural and believable charm. As Captain J. J. Jones, Jeffrey Donovan is excellent, representing remarkably not only the historical Captain Jones, but also the whole image of 1920's corrupt LAPD. Playing Rev. Gustav A. Briegleb, the man who helps Collins to keep fighting, is John Malkovich, who once again delivers a great performance, even if he's role is toned down in favor of Jolie's. Finally, two actors make excellent jobs even if their roles are also considerably smaller: Michael Kelly as Det. Lester Ybarra, and Jason Butler Harner, who plays Gordon Stewart Northcott.

Impeccably crafted and filled with a powerful message, in "Changeling" director Clint Eastwood delivers again an excellent movie that manages to deal with one of Lost Angeles' most lurid events with taste, class, and surprisingly, objectivity. Granted, it could be said that the movie does have a strong dose of social message about police corruption and women's rights; but the whole thing is executed with such a restrained pace and is so faithful to the historical facts, that it never feels tiresome or boring in the way it handles its message. If anything, the film may feel a tad typical in its presentation, although certainly the scope it has goes beyond the constrains of any genre. While not exactly a film noir, it's easy to make a connection, and not only because of the setting, as "Changleing" does offer the whole oppressive atmosphere and mystery that filled those classic films. The key difference being that, due to the focus on Christine Collins and her crusade, "Changeling" deals a bit more with emotions, as it's through her that we experience the cold fist of the 1920's LAPD.

A visual joy that brings back memories from the classic era, "Changeling" may not rank amongst Clint Eastwood's best films as a director, but in the end, given the talent the legendary actor has developed in his years as a director, it's still far superior than most filmmaker's work. While a bit slow at times, "Changeling" is quite a mesmerizing experience thanks to its recreation of the period and wonderful visual look. It's good to see that Angelina Jolie has more in her than the celebrity image the media has built around her, and thanks to Clint Eastwood, "Changeling" is a great reminder of her talent. Personally, I find in "Changeling" yet another proof that if there's a true heir of Hollywod's style for making classic, that's Clint Eastwood.

8/10
-------------------------------

Watchmen (2009)

Between the years of 1986 and 1987, DC Comics published a twelve-issue comic book limited series that would change the history of the medium for ever: "Watchmen". Written by Alan Moore and illustrated by Dave Gibbons, "Watchmen" was revolutionary in the way it deconstructed the superhero concept, in an elegy of sorts in which the superhero was seen not as the epitome of perfection, but as humans with their own problems and traumas. Based on the idea of how the existence of superheroes would affect the real world; themes such as vigilantism, power politics and nuclear war are touched in a dense, complex story that proved that comic books could be an art form too. As expected, a respected and influential work like "Watchmen" would attract filmmakers almost since it was published, but the difficulties of the adaptation had the project in development hell, despite having directors like Terry Gilliam, Darren Aronofsky and Peter Greengrass attached to it at times. 22 years after its publishing, director Zack Snyder decided to film the project many considered "unfilmable".

The story in "Watchmen" is set in 1985, in a world where masked vigilantes have been around since the 40s. The existence of costumed adventurers changed history, proving decisive for everything from politics to pop culture, specially since the appearance of Dr. Manhattan (Billy Crudup), the world's first real superhuman. However, by the 80s, superheroes (except Dr. Manhattan) are outlawed and the Cold War's tension is on the rise. One night, government agent Edward Blake (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) is murdered, and the only masked vigilante who remained active outside the law, Rorschach (Jackie Earle Haley), discovers that Blake was actually another vigilante, The Comedian. Assuming that someone is killing former "costumed adventurers", Rorschach decides to warn his former partners: Dr. Manhattan, Silk Spectre (Malin Akerman), Nite Owl (Patrick Wilson), and Ozymandias (Matthew Goode). Nobody takes him seriously, but as Blake's past gets uncovered and nuclear war becomes closer, the most important question is "who watches the watchmen?"

Writer Alex Tse was the man signed for the monumental challenge of transforming Moore's heavily detailed and complex graphic novel into a realizable screenplay; and considering the difficulty of the task, it can be said that Tse did a more than satisfying job. As faithful to the comic book as possible, Tse keeps the 80s setting and remains true to the characters' identities and the story's themes. While certain aspects were done in a more realistic way, the plot's essence remains intact, with the mystery about the Comedian's death and the ominous threat of nuclear war being the core of the plot. The way the characters are fleshed out in the movie is excellent, as Tse allows them to grow the way they do in the comic, with their origins and motivations explored with great care and detail (to the point of having dialog copied verbatim). "Watchmen" was always more a drama about superheroes than a typical superhero tale, and Tse keeps true to that line by making an intelligent, powerful story that captures that revisionism of the superhero theme.

The most noticeable thing about director Zack Snyder's work in "Watchmen" is definitely his passion about the project, as the meticulous care in reproducing the look and atmosphere of the celebrated comic book is certainly worthy of respect. Just like he did in his adaptation of Frank Miller's "300", Snyder takes the pages of "Watchmen" and brings them to life as faithfully as possible, covering as much detail from Gibbons' art as possible. With a gritty visual look by cinematographer Larry Fong, Snyder creates an appropriate atmosphere of impending doom and urban decadence that suits the story perfectly, and surprisingly, his "realistic" take on the visual look of the characters is for the most part appropriate. Unfortunately, in his passionate focus on translating faithfully the novel to film, Snyder seems to have sacrificed a bit the storytelling of the movie, as while it's clearly what Moore and Gibbons left on paper, sometimes it just doesn't work that good, perhaps proving right when author Alan Moore said that "Watchmen" was just not cinematic.

As the outlaw vigilante Rorschach, Jackie Earle Haley delivers a truly amazing performance bringing to life the borderline psychotic personality of a man obsessed with an extreme form of moral absolutism. Haley's work is truly worthy of praise. Equally remarkable is Billy Crudup's turn as the superhuman Dr. Manhattan, a man with godlike powers but who feels more and more detached from humanity as time goes by. Patrick Wilson plays Dan Dreiberg, alias the second Nite Owl, a technological wizard who followed the steps of his childhood hero, but who feels hard live a life without the aid of his costume. Wilson is very good in his role, but he's certainly overshadowed by Haley and Crudup. The same applies to Malin Åkerman, who plays the second Silk Spectre. While her work is not bad, she's nowhere near the quality of some of her cast mates. Finally, Matthew Goode is Adrian Veidt, Ozymandias, the world's smartest man and an extremely wealthy industrialist. His work in the role is good, but he is certainly the weakest link in an overall good cast.

As written above, Alex Tse's screenplay for "Watchmen" is certainly a masterpiece of scriptwriting, and definitely a lot better than what everyone was expecting. While there were some changes done, as an adaptation, everything of importance is there, and probably more. Unfortunately, while Tse's screenplay is miraculously a tremendous work of art, Snyder's directing fails to truly deliver the full power the story has. Don't get me wrong, against all odds, director Zack Snyder has pulled off a fantastic movie that dares to go where few blockbusters would (An R-rating for starters); but still, his desire to translate every panel in the comic result in an uneven pace that makes the film suffer a bit. While some bits flow nicely, others move with a vertiginous speed, with lines of dialog being said without caring about timing or rhythm, as if Snyder had felt the need to rush the work to get as much of the novel on screen as possible. Still, it's not a problem as big as it may sound, as it's only really noticeable in a couple of scenes (although those are a couple of important scenes).

I guess nobody was really expecting "Watchmen" to finally hit the big screen, but at last it did. And while Zack Snyder's adaptation of Moore and Gibbons' novel may not be perfect, it's probably as close as we'll get to have a proper version of "Watchmen" on film. Fortunately, the core of what made "Watchmen" so revolutionary in print is still there: the dramatic deconstruction of the superhero myth, stripping it from all its values to find the human inside every superhero. A brutal and unmerciful deconstruction that surprisingly, in the end it's also a celebration of everything that superheroes mean. The position of hero, of a society's watchmen, is always a difficult one, full of morality issues and complex dilemmas. Like the novel did, this movie invites us to ask one more time: "who watches the watchmen?".

8/10
 -------------------------------

Låt Den Rätte Komma In (2008)

Ever since the publishing of John Polidori's "The Vampyre" in 1819, the folkloric figure of the vampire, that mythical undead being who survives by drinking blood, entered the world of modern fiction. 78 years later, Bram Stoker's highly influential novel, "Dracula", would finish to integrate the vampire to modern culture. After that, the vampire has been a constant theme that lurks in horror fiction, mainly because the attractive and interesting traits of the vampire figure make it very useful to deal with a wide variety of topics. From dashing hero to atrocious monster, the vampire has taken many roles and symbols through its existence on modern fiction, and another proof of the fascination it has on us is 2004's Swedish novel, "Låt Den Rätte Komma in" (literally, "Let the Right One In"), by writer John Ajvide Lindqvis. A supernatural tale of horror and romance that deals with issues like bullying, murder and pedophilia, "Låt Den Rätte Komma in" became a bestseller in its native country, and fortunately, it also became a new chance for the vampire to get into the big screen again.

In the Stockholm suburb of Blackeberg, Oskar (Kåre Hedebrant) is a lonely 12-year-old boy who is regularly bullied at school. Living with his mother in an apartment building, Oskar spends his time meditating alone and dreaming about getting revenge from the classmates who bully him. One night he meets Eli (Lina Leandersson), a strange pale girl who seems to be of his same age. Eli has recently moved to the building and comes out only at night. Despite Eli's reluctance, a bond is formed between the two kids, and soon they become close friends, meeting at the building's courtyard or communicating between the apartments via Morse code messages. Eli begins to encourage Oskar to fight back those who bully him, and gives him the strength he needs to stand up. But Elis is not without problems herself, as she is a vampire and needs blood to survive. Her "father", Håkan (Per Ragnar), has been killing local residents in order to provide blood for Eli, but one night he gets caught, so he disfigures himself to avoid being identified. Eli finds herself alone, but Oskar's willing to let her in.

Adapted to the screen by the bestseller's author, John Ajvide Lindqvist himself, "Låt Den Rätte Komma In" is a powerful, melancholic tale of horror that despite the toning down (or complete removing) of several themes of the novel, it still is explores the dark side of humanity in the tragic tale of the love between a lonely kid and his vampire friend. The story's greatest strength is certainly the way the characters are developed, with the relationship between Oskar and Eli taking the central focus of it. But even with a tender love at the center of it, the world of John Ajvide Lindqvist's "Låt Den Rätte Komma In" is a harsh, realistic one, so harsh that the existence of vampires isn't really that terrifying when compared to the bleak world where Oskar has to grow up. The realism extents to the vampire theme too, as "Låt Den Rätte Komma In" doesn't attempt to glamorize (or modernize) the vampire condition, but instead chooses to represent the classic myth with all its "rules" without any concession: the life of a vampire isn't a romantic one, not even an easy one.

Director Tomas Alfredson makes a great job in bringing to life the cold, lonely world of "Låt Den Rätte Komma In", as he conceived an atmosphere that perfectly represents the feeling of alienation that's present in both kids' lives. With a superb work by cinematographer Hoyte Van Hoytema, Alfredson creates a beautiful, poetic film that's emotional and tender without being schmaltzy or childish. The innocence and purity of the bond formed between the kid and the vampire speaks louder than the clichéd teenage angst of other vampire-related love stories. At the core, it's still a horror film, but the horror is subtler, based more on the disturbing images it evokes than on the graphic violence it shows. It's restrained, sober style taking back the focus of the horror to the darkness, to the unseen, leaving the work to the imagination instead of spiting out every move. Alfredson's use of silence is masterful, and coupled with Van Hoytema's beautiful cinematography, result in the haunting atmosphere of a film in which images speak more than words.

Acting in the film is really amazing, with young actors Kåre Hedebrant and Lina Leandersson (both 11 years old at the time of filming) delivering remarkable performances in the lead roles. As the fragile Oskar, Kåre Hedebrant is excellent, very natural and believable as the bullied little kid whose life is lonely and miserable until that strange girl appears. With a face full of melancholy and wonder, Kåre is a wonderful Oskar, but if he is wonderful, Lina Leandersson takes it to the next level as Eli, the mysterious vampire girl. Looking wise beyond her years, Lina portrays perfectly a vampire trapped in the body of a 12-year-old kid, with the maturity that gives age and the fragility that gives the discovery of love. Both actors have great chemistry as a couple, which instrumental for the film as in the end it's their character's emotions what drive the film. The rest of the cast is for the most part effective, although the film revolves completely around the two young lead actors. Still, Per Ragnar is good as Håkan, and young Patrik Rydmark is excellent as Oskar's bully, Conny.

A fascinating tale of romance and horror, "Låt Den Rätte Komma In" once again resurrects the myth of the vampire, but by taking away the glamor and taking it back to its roots as a tragic, monstrous curse, it surprisingly humanizes it. Facing a bleak world filled with murderers, drunkards, bullies and broken homes, both kids are not that different in the end, as the fragile 12-year-old boy and the older vampire trapped in a kid's body appear as equals, both being misfits in such environment. And they need each other: Oskar needs the confidence and strength Eli gives him, while she needs the innocence and purity his love offers. As written above, some of the themes the novel handled were eliminated, but still, the essence of John Ajvide Lindqvist's book remains: the dark side of humanity is far more terrible than any monster. Sober and low key, Alfredson's "Låt Den Rätte Komma In" moves in silence and flows at a much slower pace than most modern films of the same type, as it opts for suggestion instead of explanation. This approach takes horror back to where it's scarier: in the imagination.

Filled with a chilling atmosphere and beautiful visual poetry, Tomas Alfredson's "Låt Den Rätte Komma In" is a breath of fresh air for the horror genre that shows that there's more about it than graphic violence and jump scares, as it can also evoke powerful emotions and still be a disturbing thriller. Granted, it may be too slow for some, but personally, I think that its restrained, subtle approach was the best way to properly tell the story without falling in the schmaltzy clichés of similar romance stories. It's respect for realism and extreme care for detail certainly help in this aspect too. "Låt Den Rätte Komma In", or "Let the Right One In", is definitely an original and inventive story that seems to remind us that way before being cool and hip, vampire stories used to be disturbing too.

9/10
-------------------------------

The Midnight Meat Train (2008) @ Cult Reviews!

This time in Cult Reviews, my contribution is a review for Ryûhei Kitamura's 2008 debut in American cinema, which was an adaptation of the classic Clive Barker's short story, "The Midnight Meat Train". Starring Bradley Cooper and Vinnie Jones, "The Midnight Meat Train" is a very interesting horror film that features mystery, chilling suspense and a good dose of gruesome violence, all framed by Kitamura's stylish vision. Unfortunately, not everything is perfect on the film, and in fact it suffers from a serious problem that hurts what could had been one of the best movies of the decade. The details about it on my review featured on Cult Reviews.

This month Cult Reviews also features an interesting overview of Brett Leonard's comic book inspired horror film "Man-Thing", all in the trademark style of Cult Reviews' very own Perfesser Deviant. The Perfesser also writes about "Postal", film that some consider to be Uwe Boll's best movie (althought in all honesty, that doesn't say much) and a trip to the time of funky afros and disco music in "Blacula". In tone with the month's marketing device (and with the month's major mainstream release), reviewer Anna McKibben's takes the dust away from the original "My Bloody Valentine" (1981), reviewing the recently released uncut dvd. Finally, Vomitron reviews Jack Hill's 60s oddity: "Spider Baby" (1968), which is also the featured full length movie of the month (remember that Cult Reviews has public domain movies available to watch).

So, keep supporting Cult Reviews!



-------------------------------

And the Oscar goes to...

Well, it's that time of the year again when the American Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences selects the winners of its major award, the famous golden statuette known as "Oscar". There are many important film awards across the globe, from recognitions given at Festivals to the awards given by professional film critics or by guilds, not to mention the awards by other National Academies (the Mexican Ariel and the BAFTA awards for example); however, despite being a group of awards based almost entirely on the American film industry, the Oscars still have that strange power to fascinate audiences, and even when it's been proved that their rules by no means proved an objective selection of the best, some still consider them the big prize of the year. Perhaps it's the show, perhaps is just Hollywood magic, but the Oscars still continue to fascinate us whether we admit it or not (and sometimes those who most adamantly scream that they don't care about them, wouldn't mind to have one over their chimney).

Anyways, on Febryary 22, 2009, we'll get to know the results of this year's Awards, and well, considering that at the end of last year I had only seen 16 films released on 2008, I decided to give a rest to my focus on the classics for a while and spend the first two months of 2009 getting updated on 2008 cinema. All with the purpose of having an opinion made for the awards season. As I expected, I agree with very few of the nominees of this year's Oscars, and I dare to say that compared with the awards of the previous two years, this time the selection is pretty uninteresting. Don't get me wrong, the 5 films that are competing for the Best Film award are good, but in my opinion, not really the best that the last year offered. So here at W-Cinema, we have now the obligatory post about the Oscar, with thoughts and ideas about some of the nominees, as well as the films I think should really be considered the best of 2008's American cinema.

Best Picture:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.
Frost/Nixon.
Milk.
The Reader.
Slumdog Millionaire.

As written above, I find the selection to be pretty typical safe choices, in the sense that while the 5 are good films, I doubt that they will stand the test of time as important, influential pieces of cinema. If anything, Danny Boyle's "Slumdog Millionaire" and Gus Van Sant's "Milk" are in my opinion the two best films, and the only worthy contenders for the award. Of the two I would vote for "Slumdog Millionaire", because despite offering a reworking of Hollywood's classic romantic melodrama, it's done with such a fresh and distinctive style that in my opinion, makes it a tad more enjoyable than Van Sant's chronicle about Harvey Milk's life. Of the rest, I found Stephen Daldry's "The Reader" to be pretty interesting, but shallow, and David Fincher's "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" to lack soul. Ron Howard's "Frost/Nixon" is certainly his best film, and would be my choice if it wasn't for Van Sant and Boyle's movies. Probably because of my belief in the auteur theory, I find kind of interesting to compare the best movie of a slightly-above-average director (Howard) with a slightly-above-average film by a talented one (Fincher). Forced to pick one amongst the 5, W-Cinema picks Boyle's "Slumdog Millinaire" for Best Picture.

Best Director:
Danny Boyle – Slumdog Millionaire.
Stephen Daldry – The Reader.
David Fincher – The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.
Ron Howard – Frost/Nixon.
Gus Van Sant – Milk.

Then we have of course the Best Directing category, which has the same 5 nominees of the Best Picture award lined up again. As written above, I consider Howard's "Frost/Nixon" to be quite a remarkable achievement for his career, as not only he proves he is a competent craftsman (nothing new, I must admit he has always had good a technique), he finally makes a film where the story shines free of compromises, and for that alone I think he should get an award. On the basis that he is the only one that made something beyond his usual. Or well, I would say that if it wasn't for Boyle's directing of "Slumdog Millionaire", in which he mixed a terrific work of editing and cinematography to make a superb oddity of magic realism. Other than Boyle and Howard, I don't see anyone worthy enough of such award. Van Sant's directing is pretty much straight forward, although his work with the cast is superb (though the real star is the film's remarkable script). The opposite side is Fincher's work, which is a visual joy, but at times kind of emotionless and shallow (courtesy of its screenplay). Daldry in "The Reader" is good and effective, but nothing out of this world. So, as in Best Picture, "Slumdog Millionaire" is my pick again, and the prize goes to Danny Boyle.

Best Actor
Richard Jenkins – The Visitor.
Frank Langella – Frost/Nixon.
Sean Penn – Milk.
Brad Pitt – The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.
Mickey Rourke – The Wrestler.

In the Best Leading Actor we find one of the movies I think was tragically snubbed for the Best Picture category: "The Wrestler". In my opinion, Mickey Rourke's brutal performance as aged wrestler Randy the Ram is easily the best work amongst the 5 nominees. Well, perhaps "easily" is not the most appropriate word, as Frank Langella's work as President Richard Nixon in "Frost/Nixon" is equally as deserving as Rourke's. But still, if only for the fact that "The Wrestler" was not recognized in the Best Picture, I pick Mckey Rourke for the Best Actor award. About the rest, I must admit not having seen "The Visitor" yet, so I can't have an opinion about it, but I do have things to say about Penn and Pitt. Sean Penn's performance as Harvey Milk is excellent, but I don't see it on the same level as Rourke's Wrestler or Langella's Nixon. I have no idea about why is Pitt on the list of nominees, as he has delivered better performances than his work as Benjamin Button.

Best Actress:
Anne Hathaway – Rachel Getting Married.
Angelina Jolie – Changeling.
Melissa Leo – Frozen River.
Meryl Streep – Doubt.
Kate Winslet – The Reader.

Since at the time I write this I have not seen neither "Rachel Getting Married" nor "Frozen River", to have an established opinion in this category, specially since word of mouth says Anne Hathway is excellent in "Rachel Getting Married". However, the battle seems to be focused between Meryl Streep and Kate Winslet. While it's true that Streep is definitely the best American actress of the modern times, I find difficult to name her as the winner because personally, I found her performance to be a bit over the top. Granted, her character is an extreme personality, but still, something wasn't that convincing. Named the favorite, Kate Winslet certainly has had a terrific year, but of her two main works of the year, I would have preferred to see her nominated for "Revolutionary Road" than for "The Reader". In fact, I probably would had given her the award without too much hesitation. Finally, I must admit that Angelina Jolie's work in "Changeling" was a pleasant surprise, and probably her best work since "Girl, Interrupted". In conclusion, I won't name a favorite as neither Streep nor Winslet fully convince me and while Jolie is great (really great), she's not definitively superior to them.

Best Supporting Actor:
Josh Brolin – Milk.
Robert Downey, Jr. – Tropic Thunder.
Philip Seymour Hoffman – Doubt.
Heath Ledger – The Dark Knight.
Michael Shannon – Revolutionary Road.

Let me say it clearly: no, I don't find Heath Ledger's performance as The Joker as the year's best. In fact, a part of me wonders why was he nominated and not Aaron Eckhart. I mean, his work is remarkable, yes, but as a whole, "The Dark Knight" owes its power to its screenplay. Now that it was said, let's continue with Robert Downey Jr. whom I consider a genius, but despite that, I seriously wonder why was he nominated for "Tropic Thunder". Honestly. Personally, I would have nominated Brendan Gleeson for "In Bruges" (another tragically snubbed film), where he delivers what is simply one of his best performances ever. Anyways, between Philip Seymour Hoffman, Josh Brolin and Michael Shannon, I would pick Michael Shannon's work in "Revolutionary Road" (a film I'm beginning to see as the result of a faulty script saved by a competent director and two masterful performances: Shannon and Winslet). Brolin is the favorite of the crowds (or well, the favorite of those not invaded by nostalgia about Ledger), but Shannon's work is haunting, just haunting.

Best Supporting Actress:
Amy Adams – Doubt.
Penélope Cruz – Vicky Cristina Barcelona.
Viola Davis – Doubt.
Taraji P. Henson – The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.
Marisa Tomei – The Wrestler.

I think that Amy Adams has an incredibly bright future ahead, and her work in "Doubt" is just another proof of how talented she is. But still, I'm inclined to say that neither she nor her "Doubt" costar, Viola Davis, will get the award. At least I wouldn't give it to them, despite the fact that both deliver great performances in a film filled with super acting work. Taraji P. Henson, while being the best actress in all "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" is another that wouldn't be my pick amongst the five. No, the choice for me is just between Penélope Cruz's psychotic Maria Elena and Marisa Tomei's strong (yet strangely sweet) Cassidy. While I described the two characters with only a couple of adjective, they are incredibly complex and the actresses who play them truly make a terrific job in their roles. Cruz has never been a favorite of mine, but she surprised me completely in Woody Allen's "Vicky Cristina Barcelona". On the other hand, Marisa Tomei's subtle, natural performance in "The Wrestler" left me breathless. I can't choose, I will be happy with any of them winning. OK, I may give Cruz a slight preference at the moment.

Best Original Screenplay:
WALL·E - Andrew Stanton, Jim Reardon and Pete Docter.
Happy-Go-Lucky - Mike Leigh.
Frozen River - Courtney Hunt.
In Bruges - Martin McDonagh.
Milk - Dustin Lance Black.

Being unable to have an opinion regarding "Frozen River" and "Happy-Go-Lucky", I'll focus on the other three, which certainly are three of the best original screenplays of the past year. "WALL·E"'s simple, yet timeless story is probably the favorite, but personally, I think it loses a lot of steam by the end, where the film's message gets too obvious and the love story takes the backseat. A shame, cause the first two acts are pure perfection. I guess I'll be pretty disappointed if it actually wins (and probably it will). On the other hand, "Milk" and "In Bruges" are two masterpieces of writing, one being an extremely detailed portrait of a man's crusade and the other the best comedy of the year. Dustin Lance Black's "Milk" is quite an achievement not only in the level of detail it includes, but also on how intimate its representation of Milk's life is. It's certainly a winning screenplay, but as written above, "In Bruges" is in my opinion amongst the real best 5 films in English of the year, and a lot of that comes from the movie's brilliantly funny script. Seriously, if it doesn't win, it'll be an injustice.

Best Adapted Screenplay:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button - Eric Roth and Robin Swicord.
Frost/Nixon - Peter Morgan.
The Reader - David Hare.
Slumdog Millionaire - Simon Beaufoy.
Doubt - John Patrick Shanley.

I'm not entirely happy with Roth and Swicord's adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald's "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button", I mean, it's a terrific story, but I just couldn't help but feeling that Roth was trying to make a deep point by using the most clichéd resources. Something similar happened to me with David Hare's adaptation of "The Reader", which left me the impression of having seen an important theme being treated on a shallow way by giving more importance to an illicit love story. Simon Beaufoy's "Slumdog Millionaire" is a great piece of work, but I think that the two best adaptations of a previously written material came from stage plays this year: "Doubt" and "Frost/Nixon". And of the two, I pick "Frost/Nixon" as the serious contender for the award. "Doubt" is remarkable, but what Morgan does with "Frost/Nixon" is to make more than just a filmed play (something that "Doubt" can't help but do a couple of times), but a wonderfully constructed story that seems to be done for film instead of a play. Outstanding work.

Best Animated Feature:
Bolt – Chris Williams and Byron Howard.
Kung Fu Panda – Mark Osborne and John Stevenson.
WALL·E – Andrew Stanton.

No contest. "WALL·E" will simply roll over both the dog and the panda. Easy as that.

Well, those are W-Cinema's thoughts and rants about this year's Academy Awards. Anyways, If I was the one in charge, now that I have been able to give the year a better review than what I did last December, I would nominate the following films for Best Picture:

Låt den rätte komma in (2008, Tomas Alfredson)
WALL·E (2008, Andrew Stanton)
The Wrestler (2008, Darren Aronofsky)
The Dark Knight (2008, Christopher Nolan)
In Bruges (2008, Martin McDonagh)

The prize of course, would go to that Swedish miracle that is "Låt den rätte komma in" ("Let the Right One In"), but OK, let's play by Academy Awards rules and pretend that it wins the Best Foreign Film category and that "WALL·E" is placed on the Best Animated feature. With that in mind, my nominees would be...

The Wrestler (2008, Darren Aronofsky)
The Dark Knight (2008, Christopher Nolan)
In Bruges (2008, Martin McDonagh)
Gran Torino (2008, Clint Eastwood)
Slumdog Millionaire (2008, Danny Boyle & Loveleen Tandan)

To me, those are the top five. But hey, nobody cares about Oscars, right?

Slumdog Millionaire (2008)

From "Cinderella" to Charles Dickens, rags-to-riches stories have always had a constant presence in mankind's storytelling, from oral tradition and legends, to literature and film. Whether they are taken from real life or entirely fictional, with a realistic premise or a complete fantastic one, this kind of stories tend to capture the imagination mainly because one can easily feel identified with the struggles the characters find, and because some of this stories can actually be inspiring. Of course, the other side of the coin is that this kind of stories also tend to be overtly melodramatic and sentimentalist to the extreme, exaggerating beyond the acceptable as many schmaltzy films from classic Hollywood can testify. Danny Boyle's film "Slumdog Millionaire" walks the fine line between the two extremes, in the story of a young man from the slums of Mumbai who manages to get to the final question in the Indian version of the popular game show, "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?". And surprisingly, it's actually a fresh take on the classic formula.

In "Slumdog Millionaire", Dev Patel plays Jamal Malik, an uneducated young man whom after growing up in the slums of Mumbai now works as a "chai-wallah", (a boy or young man who serves tea) at a call center. Against all odds, Jamal enters the popular game show "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?" and makes it to the final question, meaning that if Jamal answers correctly, he'll win 20 million rupees. However, being a former street child with no education at all makes Jamal an unlikely candidate to know the answers of the show, so before the taping of the last show, he is taken into police custody under, accused of being cheating. Interrogated by Sergeant Srinivas (Saurabh Shukla), Jamal denies the accusation and begins to explain how is it that he was able to answer correctly every question in the show thanks to the experiences of his short life. Telling his life story, Jamal recollects memories from his childhood with his brother Salim (Madhur Mittal), and the orphan girl Latika (Freida Pinto), whom is perhaps the most important person in his life.

Written by British scriptwriter Simon Beaufoy taking as basis the Boeke Prize-winning novel "Q and A" by Indian author Vikas Swarup, "Slumdog Millionaire"'s plot unfolds in a series of flashbacks where the life story of Jamal is told since his childhood days along his brother Salim and his friend Latika, recounting his difficult life in the slums, facing gangsters and other problems in their attempt to make a living. But even when the harsh life of Jamal does take a central part of the film, the real theme of the story is love, as it is the unbreakable love that Jamal has for Latika what drives him and gives him the strength to survive. Simon Beaufoy takes the classic premise of star-crossed lovers and gives it a fresh spin to wave a modern romantic melodrama rich in well developed characters that make the story quite a captivating experience. Because while "Slumdog Millionaire" offers an interesting view on the Indian slums, it is actually a timeless story that could take place in any slum in the world, so it's very easy to feel identified with Jamal and his quest.

With a vibrant, high-octane pace that never gives a minute to rest, director Danny Boyle brings to life Beaufoy's screenplay in a colorful, visually exciting way. With a remarkable work of editing by Chris Dickens and the stylish cinematography by Anthony Dod Mantle, Boyle crafts a fascinating movie that perfectly mixes the fantastical with the realistic in a sort of magical realism where the idealistic romance story is framed by the harsh reality of India's slums. Boyle gives an interesting (albeit definitely superficial) view on the lives of Mumbai's street children, showing a bit of the tragedies they face everyday and the few joys they must find to cope with them. While "Slumdog Millionaire" is not exactly a tribute to Bollywood, Boyle does capture, if not exactly the style, at least the highly energetic spirit of joy found in the so-called Masala films (mixes of genres, usually musicals). Also, it's interesting how with the aid of cast director Loveleen Tandan, Boyle decides to have a third of the film in Hindi language, which gives it a realistic touch.

The young cast of mostly newcomers is remarkably effective, with lead actor Dev Patel being the film's greatest surprise. Playing Jamal, Patel offers a very natural performance, albeit in all honesty, at first it's a bit difficult to see him as a former street child. But as the movie progresses the talent of the young actor gets fully appreciated. As his love interest, Latika, Indian model Freida Pinto is also a nice surprise, as she is not only beautiful, but also delivers a good performance as her troubled character. Madhur Mittal plays Jamal's brother Salim, and while good, I must say that his work is overshadowed by the boy who plays his character at a younger age, real street child Azharuddin Ismail, whom is by far the most talented of the younger cast. Ayush Khedekar and Rubiana Ali are the other kids, playing Jamal and Latika respectively, and both are also great in their performances, particularly Ayush, although is Ismail who steals every scene he is in. Anil Kapoor appears as the game show host, and his energetic, charming performance adds a lot of realism to his character.

Overall "Slumdog Millionaire" is a wonder of film that updates those classic feel-good themes of romantic melodrama (almost in that "Capraesque" style of film-making) without getting too schmaltzy about it, and keeping a special focus on the development of the film's "three musketeers". Personally, I found Boyle's decision of giving a realistic outlook to a fantastic story like this one a very interesting, albeit daring one; and while it may seem like an odd mix at first, it actually works. Granted, the whole realism of "Slumdog Millionaire" is still far from being an exact representation of Mumbai's life, after all, it's still an outsider's view on the subject. Also, it certainly can't help but being a bit patronizing about the whole thing, but I think that the approach taken while not entirely realistic, it's a very insightful one despite its flaws. It's safe to say that slums like those depicted in "Slumdog Milionaire" exist in every country, and that street children like Jamal and Latika live in them too. Unfortunately, not every slumdog can become a millionaire.

Fresh, energetic and most of all highly entertaining, "Slumdog Millionaire" seems like a return to Danny Boyle's roots on independent cinema, only on a much greater scale. As written above, "Slumdog Millionaire" is more a modern fable than a realistic view on the life of street children, but despite this, it would be good to believe that movies like this one may give the street children of the world a bit more of attention. It may had been a shallow view on poverty, but it's certainly reaching a great audience. Anyways, while it has been hailed as a masterpiece, "Slumdog Millionaire" may not be the great work of art that claim may lead one to believe, bu it's definitely a terrific film and easily amongst the best movies done in 2008.

8/10
-------------------------------

The Reader (2008)

The Holocaust, the genocide of approximately six million Jews (and other groups) during World War II by Nazi Germany, was definitely one of the most horrible acts of the armed conflict, as the systematic extermination of civil population under the justification of racial superiority is the best example of the brutality of the actions of World War II. The magnitude and complexity of this crime against humanity can be proved just by looking at how has affected the posterior generations. Certainly, the Holocaust is an event that marked its survivors and their descendants, but also one that marked the descendants of those who inflicted it. When talking about the Holocaust, it's often easy to simplify it by stating that those in command weren't really sane, but one must not forget that not everyone there were psychos, and that's the complex thing about it: normal people were also part of it. Bernhard Schlink's novel "Der Vorleser" (known in English as "The Reader") explores this subject, and is the basis for a film of the same name by director Stephen Daldry.

In post-WWII Germany, Michael Berg (David Kross) is a teenager whom one rainy day feels sick as he heads home. Vomiting and unable to continue under the rain, Michael rests in the entryway of an apartment building, where he is helped home by Hanna (Kate Winslet), a single woman much older than him. Diagnosied with scarlet fever, Michael spends days at home, but when he recovers he decides to seeks out Hanna to thank her. Fascinated by Hanna, Michael begins a secretive affair with her, making constant visits to her apartment to make love and read her. Hanna loves being read to, and so in his visits Michael reads her literary classics such as "The Odyssey", and their bond grows stronger each day, with Michael falling irrevocably in love with Hanna, despite her mood is often abusive with him. However, by reasons unknown to Michael, Hanna mysteriously disappears one day, leaving the young Michael confused and heartbroken. Eight years later Michael is a law student observing the Nazi war crime trials, and he is shocked when he finds that Hanna is a defendant in the courtroom. Her past will be a great revelation to him.

Adapted to screen by David Hare (whom also penned Daldry's previous film "The Hours"), the story chronicles the relationship between Michael and Hanna from Michael's point of view, in a non-linear structure that moves back and forth between young Michael's experiences and the effects they had on him thirty years later (where Michael is played by Ralph Fiennes). As in Bernhard Schlink's book, their relationship represents that of younger Germany with its Nazi past, and the challenge of comprehending what was going on with their society back then when it participated in one of the greatest crimes against humanity. Naturally, the themes of guilt, shame and morality play a key role in the story, as Hanna's secret is proved to be instrumental in understanding her actions. Working both as a coming-of-age story of romance and as an intense courtroom drama, "The Reader" attempts to translate the interesting questions Schlink poses regarding our understanding of the Holocaust and its perpetrators, but David Hare's screenplay at times fail to tackle its subject in a deeper sense.

Taking advantage of the script's two different yet irrevocably connected structures, director Stephen Daldry constructs his movie as Michael's slow and tragic discovery of Hanna's real character. Focusing on Michael's innocence and sensibility, Daldry makes the first part of the film to focus on the romance angle, with the development of Michael and Hanna's complex relationship and then slowly, as time advances and their relationships gets troubled, the movie switches to its real theme: the courtroom drama surrounding not only the guilt of a group of Nazi guards, but also the guilt of a generation and the way the following one judges it and lives under the previous one's shadow. To achieve this, Stephen Daldry keeps the film flowing at a nice pace, always keeping the subtlety and elegance he develops thanks to the superb work of cinematography by Roger Deakins and Chris Menges, whom give the film a terrific atmosphere, specially when it contrasts the rejuvenated Germany of the new generation with the stark, grim reality of those responsible for the Holocaust.

The acting in "The Reader" is certainly one of the highlights of the film, specially the work done by the couple of David Kross and Kate Winslet. Winslet has received much acclaim for her work in the film, and not without a reason, as her performance as the apparently simple, yet extraordinarily complex Hanna Schmitz is easily one of her best (if not the best) jobs to date. Portraying a very realistic character that's at the same vulnerable and strong, Winslet makes unforgettable what could had been a stereotypical role. However, the real surprise is David Kross' work as the young Michael Berg, as he is simply perfect as the naive, innocent teenager whom is about to discover love by the hands of Hanna, but also pain. Dependant and innocent, but also egotistical and mean, the character of Michael Berg is made real with impressive talent by the young Kross. As Michael's older self, grown colder and somewhat bitter due to his experiences, Ralph Fiennes is effective, but in all honesty, nothing really amazing, as the film rests entirely on Winslet and Kross' shoulders.

Like the novel where it originated, "The Reader" is a film that poses very interesting and challenging questions, as it deals with the subject of guilt regarding the Holocaust in a very direct and straight forward manner. Questioning about how can one judge the previous generation's sins is a difficult matter, specially when the sin in question is something as incomprehensible as the Holocaust, and the entire society of the time (perhaps not only the German one) has its fair share of guilt on the subject (wheter they admit it or not). Schlink's novel makes for an interesting meditation on this, but personally I find that Stephen Daldry's film fails at doing the same. As written above, the problem I see is that David Hare's screenplay is a bit too shallow on its take on the subject, and the subsequent revelations of Hanna's past seem to take the backseat in front of her risky relationship with young Michael. This makes for a terribly weak final act as filmmaker Daldry seems to prefer the premise of the boy traumatized by his ill-fated romance with an older woman.

Perhaps this may sound a bit harsher than intended, but that's because in my opinion, the film feels like a romance drama that attempts to go beyond the norm by posing challenging questions about a very interesting subject, only to end up preferring to remain a tragic romance drama after all. However, by no means take that statement as an equivalent to saying that "The Reader" is a bad film, because it's definitely not. Daldry's movie is a well crafted story of multiple layers crowned by two remarkable performances and an excellent work of cinematography. It's just disappointing that it's take on the subject wasn't as deep as it could had been. But perhaps that just me nitpicking.

7/10
 -------------------------------