Maybe it’s because it’s the five-year anniversary of Roger Ebert’s death, but I thought a lot about my old film reviews today. It’s what I used to do for fun, for a job and just for the hell of it. When I go back and read them (some dating back well over a decade ago), there are some I am proud of and some that made me question my existence. Did I really give Hancock 3 stars? Why did I hate Munich so much when I first saw it? These questions I felt needed answering, so I will attempt to pull from the archives my old reviews, read them, rewatch the movie and see if I still feel the same way. Roger Ebert would approve of this. When asked one time in a mailbag Q&A from one of his reader’s if he ever changed his mind about a movie, he answered with the following: I am no longer absolutely certain that "Thoroughly Modern Millie" deserved four stars. So, in the meantime before I start this journey, I’ll share with you, tidbits of two old reviews (one positive and one negative) that make me shake my head to this day….in agreement.
-----
Inglourious Basterds (Written: August 21, 2009)
Quentin Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds is a brilliantly unconventional piece of cinema that is absolutely one of the best films of the year. It dares to take huge risks only Tarantino is capable of taking. Whether you're looking for an antidote from this summer's ridiculously loud and noisy movies, or want to experience two-and-a-half hours of untamed, breathtaking cinema, this is it. In the midst of what is usually a quiet throwaway month for movies, this August has two of the best films of the year (this and District 9). It's the refreshing cleanse of fine filmmaking we desperate moviegoers ever so needed.
Inglourious Basterds may need a quick explanation for those who think this story is about Brad Pitt and a group of eight soldiers killing Nazis. Trust me, nothing could be farther from the truth. This is a much richer, more complex story than what's being advertised. Think Pulp Fiction set in World War II, a movie which follows several different characters in a specific genre who all unexpectedly cross paths, in which will decide the fates of every character involved.
The story begins in 1941, where a young Jewish refugee named Shosanna Dreyfus (Mealine Laurent) witnesses the brutal murder of her entire family carried out by Colonel Hans Landa (played by Christopher Waltz, in an extraordinary performance). The scene is set on a farm in Nazi-occupied France, and it evolves into one of the most intense introductions to a film you will see all year. Tarantino, a master at building tension, gives one of the strongest written scenes of his career, where you meet the evil and ridiculousness of Christopher Waltz's startling portrayal of a Nazi colonel.
Using his trademark by telling the story through chapters, the second chapter introduces us to the "Inglourious Basterds," a group of Nazi-killers headed by Lt. Aldo Raine (Brad Pitt). Their jobs? Killin' Nazis. And according to Raine, "business is-a-boomin." We learn about the Basterds through their violent punishments, their off-beat pasts, and Aldo Raine's mysterious ways of serving justice. When he crosses paths with Shosanna Dreyfus, who has become the owner of a cinema, we know exactly what to expect when they discover that many of Germany's high command will be attending a Nazi propaganda film at her theater. What do we expect? That they will be sneaking into the premiere. Not to see the movie, but to blow up the theater, and all those occupying it.
There is no doubt that Tarantino is probably one of the biggest lovers of film ever, but what makes him one of the greatest film directors ever is how he embraces that very love. For example, by using film stock for a weapon, a film critic as a character, and a movie theater as a location for the film’s climax, this is an unequivocal sign of a master at his craft using the very tools needed to create the filmmaker's passion. This is one of the only times you will ever see the climax of a film set in a movie theater, and not for a second does it ever feel like you are watching one.
Combining themes from numerous genres, Tarantino has made a masterful film, one that isn't at all about the history of World War II (in fact, it's probably one of the most historically inaccurate films of all time) but rather a celebration of moviemaking. That's what Tarantino does. Anyone who criticizes him for taking lines and ideas from other films is missing the whole point. He's not stealing from them, he's honoring them. I don't want to give anything away, but I will say this. There is a line in Inglourious Basterds involving someone who does something, and they think it may be their masterpiece. You may decide for yourself what I mean by that, and what Tarantino meant too, once you see it.
Rating then: 4/4 Stars
Rating now: 4/4 stars (this movie holds up incredibly well and will go down as one of Tarantino’s greatest achievements.)
------
Twilight Saga: New Moon (Written: November 20, 2009)
Twilight Saga: New Moon is not a vampire movie. It's a soap opera with vampires in it. It is also not a love story. It is not even worth being called a story. What we have here is 130 minutes of pre-teen porn, a truly disgusting spectacle of falsifying true relationships for a woman's inner sustenance that should scare men of all ages. The fact that women are referring to Edward Cullen as the perfect guy is one of the scariest things I've ever heard.
I know I'm being a bit dramatic here, but so are the fans of these movies. For anyone whose girlfriend or crush wants them to be more like Edward, or Jacob, don't do it. You're just feeding their fire. The problem here is that the characters of Edward and Bella have no real reason to be in love except for the fact that author Stephanie Meyers tells you they are, when in actuality, these two people have absolutely nothing in common, to the point where they can't even talk about the weather without having a problem. And as for Jacob? Well, yes he may be good looking and muscular, but the actor playing him, Taylor Lautner, is only 17, and for me, grown women who look at this character as a sex symbol should watch To Catch a Predator to see where they could end up.
I stand by my point of view with this saga. I read and saw the first film before it became a phenomenon and I'll admit that I appreciated that there was this new wave of love stories being told for a younger generation. Young people reading again? This is a great thing. But now, the reading is gone, and it's replaced with movies that are as bad for the brain as a blade is to the heart.
Rating then: 1/4 Stars
Rating now: 0/4 stars (this movie is still not good in case you were wondering)
Comentários