Remedy

The difference between what I expected and what I got is too huge. Headhunters is a sort of brutal Nordic pulp, properly cold, chilling, and balanced with a reasonable amount of irony and detachment. The chilling moments don't quite measure up to the best of Fincher, the screenwriting twist where "it all goes pear-shaped" is a worthy match for the Coens, and the proper butchery makes one think of earlier equally proper old-school American pieces. With all the charming melancholy of Scandinavia and a not entirely predictable conclusion, Headhunters can comfortably endeavor for foreign film status for 2011. I would sincerely wish them that, although I "honestly" doubt they’ll even get a nomination. I'd love to be wrong, because the inventiveness in this is truly immense.

The chemistry between Anna Kendrick and J.G. Levitt works great. Seth Rogen is appropriately awkwardly funny (more comic this time around), but his role is extremely rewarding to watch and perfectly demonstrates one of the possible ways Adam deals with everything (or, also, how Kyle (ab)uses it). It was nice, even endearing, how Katherine tried to apply her studied and textbook methods to every possible situation, because she was really incredibly cute when she was embarrassed (you almost felt more sympathy for her than for Adam). In short, I've listed probably the highlights that came out of the production of this film. Three hugely interesting characters, and in all cases superbly acted. And the trio of fantastic performances, topped off with some very darkly funny dialogue (the Patrick Swayze bit nearly killed me), a nice minimalist score, and some nice (perhaps naive to some) emotional moments, deserve some of the more distinguished ratings.

The fights are fantastic as standalones, but everything that happens between the fights has a solid order and purpose. That Tom Hardy is an up-and-coming acting megastar was sort of obvious from his earlier roles, but Joel Edgerton as Brendan also impressed me in no small way. Nick Nolte is excellent as the broken father. It's really wonderful to see the most refined perfect display of professionalism in every aspect, to watch the acting mega-concert and devour a truly powerful story that wouldn't be half as good without all the emotions, clichés, and (un)predictable curveballs. Seeing the utterly heartfelt and focused performances of the actors (and identifying with the characters) leaves you in a state where you feel every scrape, every hit, and every blow delivered to the two leads to your own deepest places (I hope no one took this as an attempt at a dry joke with the most deepest places, because I really don't mean it that way). Warrior is a film that wrings out the emotion (but by no means in a shallow way), a film where we know in advance how it will turn out. It just makes us wonder if that's not actually what we expect from a film, and negative reviews of the ilk of "it's just emotionally manipulative" or "beautifully made, but actually pretty empty, relying only on effect and perfect form" are actually our defense, because we're not willing to admit to ourselves how a movie (just a movie!) has had its way with us. I'm not saying you should watch movies without a brain. I'm just suggesting that if there are any kinks in this film (there would be, because there are always kinks in everything), they can't affect the overall outcome for me, because the emotional power of the entire film is gigantic. And maybe I was watching more with my heart than my brain.

Excellent visuals and a very likeable cast. The wisecracking Perlman is second to none, Cage's leading moral role fits well in this case, and Robert Sheehan shows he can play something other than the total moron in Misfits. I honestly wasn't expecting anything at all and ended up being pleasantly surprised. Dominic Sena is obviously not any miracle as a director, but in this case he’s outdone himself and managed to create some great scenes and evoke a decent period atmosphere. The story is linear and predictable, but by no means boring, and with its appealing running time, it slips by like water. One of the better B-movies of 2011, and a really great diversion on a decent level.

Leaving aside Basic Instinct, which I saw when I was about 13 years old. :), I haven't seen any Verhoeven films in their entirety up to this point – just always in bits and pieces. So, ironically, his last film thus far was the first one I saw. I'm breaking it down like this because I don't know if his other films are similarly dense, intricate, and grandiose in terms of scriptwriting. Black Book is an exquisite WW2 film that gives a rather original insight into the ranks of both Nazis and resistance fighters, while not putting either side in the forefront from a moral standpoint and keeping a clever distance. Verhoeven thus very cleverly and indiscriminately shows that there was plenty of shit on both sides and that there were very few truly unbroken and pure people left. Respectable Hollywood execution – all the costumes, the gorgeous interiors, the excellent music, and the charismatic Carice van Houten, combined with the expressive and distinctive direction, combine to create a breathtaking result that has something to say in terms of both form and content. And if the script for this film isn't Oscar-worthy, I really don't know what is.

A riveting film in the truest sense of the word. Riveting not only in its action (the car chase, the chase on the university campus), but especially in the portrayal itself – the scene where Adam Smith is doubted and revised is absolutely perfect and shows Ron Howard's creative potential at its best (even though I had some doubts about him up to this point). Russell Crowe's performance is a separate chapter of this film. His character perfectly presents a "state of mind" that is pure genius, but at the same time terribly dangerous. As in The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, for example, the viewer watches a large part of the main character's life and experiences his complex transformation onscreen (although in this case, of course, the transformation is very specific). The episodic nature of the whole film is also well handled, each individual "episode" of the main character's life perfectly maps one or another part of his life and together creates a fantastic, emotionally charged work. And yes, jam-packed would be an understatement in this case :))

It was a bit too wild for my taste. The main storyline was very weak – for how urgent and serious the film comes across, it serves up a lot of bland and wannabe shocking action without the script offering anything worth contemplating. And the whole payoff, SPOILER ALERT based on the mental state of the main character END SPOILER, is terribly formulaic and unoriginal. The soundtrack is nice, but totally inappropriate in some passages. The intermezzo at the beginning of the film, when Jim Sturgess is walking through the dirty and evil streets of London, are quite fine as individual moments. But it doesn't improve the final impression.

A dangerously perfect film. That was my immediate reaction during the closing credits. The "danger" I see is that there's really nothing to fault here. Drive blew me away with how it was conceived in just about every way. I guess it's like if you were sitting in a Broadway theatre watching an absolutely perfect play that has no weak points, yet can be classified as academic (done in a completely "clean" and demonstrative artistic style) but at the same time is very easy to connect with emotionally. Then it's not even really "necessary" to spend the hour and a half in the theatre itself as much as it is in a state where you feel a constant adrenaline rush and your attention remains focused on something happening in front of you, while you yourself feel that you are (or would terribly like to be) a part of it. This brings me to another thing that's actually quite paradoxical (given the fact of how emotionally affecting this film can be), and that's Ryan Gosling's acting. His performance of non-verbal communication is truly a marvelous thing. He manages to maintain his poker face in such a vehement and convincing manner that he could easily be the lead in an alternative music video by a certain pop singer. In terms of direction, there are a few things worth noting here. To the uninitiated or shallow-minded (as far as film in general is concerned), Drive may seem like another typical crime film with a lot of established genre tropes (clichés): car chases, excessive violence, the time-honored archetype of hellishly tough bosses. Except that... except that Refn (I haven't seen many films lately that have retained such a distinctive directorial trademark) has managed to create a very distinctive story dominated by a portrait of the main character and impressively atmospheric scenes that could be described as psychedelic rather than as a stream of car chases and shootouts. The whole film then comes across as a sophisticated genre rebel with conventional and time-forged techniques somewhere up its crevices, and while it doesn't leave an impression of exhibitionism or self-absorption, it doesn't shy away from making its form very showy and explicit. The soundtrack here is one of the many engines that drives an immensely impressive, sophisticated, and complex colossus. It should be noted, however, that the music used in this stands on its own perfectly. The melancholy, the psychedelia, and the almost unbelievable intensity of some scenes is largely ensured by the ingenious implementation of music whose inner pathos is breathtaking at moments. One of my most memorable cinematic experiences ever. And I want that jacket!

A beautifully exemplary example of a work that manages to tell the story of teenagers and convey all their defiance, disrespect for almost anything, and youthful rebellion in a way that grabs you by the heart. The child actors are at their best in how natural they are, which makes sense as they have not yet had time to "live" much and thus appear more "animalistic" on screen, sharing something of their private side with the viewer rather than memorized lines. Specifically, I'm referring to Jena Malone and Emile Hirsch, who are really excellent in their roles. The film has an excellent dramatic momentum, with both storylines gradually building up to a climax, with the final emotional power being quite considerable. It didn't completely blow me away, but it did shake me up a bit. :)

I’ve been wondering how to actually approach the naivety (and whether it was naivety at all) and the main character's behavior. The question of whether a 14-year-old girl is capable of discerning "right and wrong" and thinking deeply about the consequences of her actions can be quite tricky. David Schwimmer is a distinctive director who gives a lot of space to Clive Owen, who delivers one of his better acting performances (the ending is really beautifully moving, almost without pathos) and manages to capture Annie's psyche in the wake of that act in a fairly complex way. I don't know what exactly I would have liked to have seen different in this film, but some things felt a little underdeveloped, which ultimately brought the overall impression down to the waters of slightly above average. In any case, David Schwimmer is undoubtedly a talented personage as a director. I will be very happy to watch his next film.