Have you ever suffered reprimand for being over-competent?
Have you been transferred to a remote country-side village as a reward for your over-competence?
Did your girlfriend dump you because you are more in love with your work? And is she right
Is your new work-place too good to be true?
Have you ever felt that you are the only one who thinks something fishy is going on there, and no one believes you?
If yes, then you will identify with the protagonist of this movie, Nicholas Angel, played by Simon Pegg - a very competent and workaholic police officer (a.k.a. "Fuzz" in local slang). Too competent for his own good... Ditto for being a workaholic... The department rewards him for his good work by transferring him to a remote village in the "country". Its a nice little village, where crime is virtually unknown. For an ambitious and workaholic Fuzz from the City, this is a nightmare. The attitude of the Police department is laid-back and lax. The most challenging task he is entrusted is to track down a missing swan. Nothing is going well it seems. Until one day there is an accident that kills two people. But was it really an accident? Officer Angel believes not. But in a village where the "M" word has not been heard of for decades, no one will believe him... And the truth, as it turns out, is even more sinister than officer Angel had thought...
The movie hooked me right from the start. The logic of Angel's supervisors for transferring him is flawless. The reasons for his Girlfriend to leave him are not at all irrational. His introduction to the village and its folk, and his interactions with them is anything but cordial.
There is another reason for the movie's quick pick-up. All these sequences are portrayed without "mincing the words" so to speak. Its a unique style employed by the movie-makers - they show quick short snippets of things happening, one after the other in quick succession, to convey an idea. For instance, Angel's journey from London to Sanford village is portrayed using little 2-3 second consecutive shots of him traveling in a taxi, then in a train, and then again in a cab... Due to this quick snappy portrayal of certain events that need not be prolonged unnecessarily, the movie runs along at a steady clip.
The mystery behind the deaths will reel you in. You will never guess who the suspects are. And their motives behind these crimes are so unbelievable that they sound utterly realistic and logical.
The only thing that robs points from this movie is the climax. This is where it mutates from a nice little comic but intricate murder mystery to an action parody. It was an utter let down for me. Even though the rest of the movie was pretty nice.
Hot Fuzz is the second part of the Flavours Cornetto Trilogy.
But don't let this little fact stop you from watching it, just because you have not watched the first part. The three parts are not related. In fact, apart from the facts that:
- they are all directed and co-authored by Edgar Wright
- they feature actors Simon Pegg and Nick Frost
- each of the movies afford the audience pure fun at the expense of a specific genre, and
- each one features in it a specific flavour of Cornetto
there is nothing else common between the three movies that form this Trilogy. So believe me, you are not missing out on anything if you watch this one without having watched its "prequel" (Shaun of the Dead). Nor does it leave any untied ends to be tied up in its "sequel" (The World's End). It is a "stand-alone" movie, thank you.
My Ratings: 2.5
For me it started with 28 Days Later. There was something about the idea of the world and the life as we know it, being shot to hell, that sucked me in... Empty streets, abandoned houses, crashed lonely vehicles, not a being in sight... And add to that, the danger of your fellow humans gone wild, crazy and, technically dead... Zombies out to get you on the mean streets of a deserted city, chasing you down dark corridors of apartment buildings... It was your worst nightmare come true...
I lapped them all up. Right from Rec and Rec 2 to I am Legend and Frank Darabont's Walking Dead TV Series. Some of them were groundbreaking and stunning. Many others were just copy-paste jobs with hardly any inspired or original contributions to the genre.
World War Z does expand the horizons of the Zombie genre by portraying the zombie apocalypse on a global scale. Its does for zombie movies what 2012 did for natural disaster movies.
It is the story of a former United Nations investigator who is out with his family when the streets around him abruptly erupt into chaos. He manages to flee with his wife and two daughters as they try to survive the sudden outbreak of a rabies like disease (what a cliché) that turns a human bitten by an infected one into a frenzied biting zombie within seconds. He gets help and shelter from his former boss, a high-ranking official in the UN. His family is safe for now, but on one condition. He is reluctantly entrusted the task of accompanying a virologist and a team of soldiers, as the venture out into the midst of danger and chaos, in search for the origins of the disease, hoping to find a cure. Thus starts his perilous journey which will take him round the globe, in search for a possible cure to this apocalyptic disease.
Seriously speaking, story and concept-wise, there is hardly anything original about this one. Some of the ideas are almost preposterous. The plot and the story are too over-dramatic and unrealistic. And yet there are two things that make this movie worth watching at least once. Awesome visuals and breathtaking action sequences.
It portrays the zombie outbreak pretty nicely. Throngs upon throngs of frenzied infected zombies fill up the screen like hundreds of ants. The action is intense. The story roars ahead at breakneck speed, hardly allowing the viewer a moment to mull upon the ridiculousness of some of the ideas. Arial views of fallen cities and zombie-infested landscapes are visually stunning. An international cast of actors that ensure good acting that went waste thanks to an over-dramatic script.
If you don't mind switching off your brain and watching the movie for pure entertainment's sake, then you are in for a pretty intense joy ride. For me, the movie earns no points for realism and originality. But it succeeds to entertain pretty well.
My Rating: 2.0
This is an anthology of six unrelated horror short films, each one directed by a different director. Each story is depicted in found-footage format using the shaky camera-work technique.
The movie starts off with "Tape 56" directed by Adam Wingard. This one is used as a frame narrative, where the other 5 stories are shown within this as the central story. It shows the exploits of a group of criminals who record their exploits and post the videos on the net. Someone has hired them to break into a house and retrieve a VHS tape. The house belongs to some old guy. When they break in, they find him dead in a room with multiple TVs and VCRs. While the others search the house for any more VHS tapes, one guy has to sit in the room with the old mans dead body and go through the tapes available there. As the guy plays each tape, we are taken into the narrative of each of the other 5 stories. Needless to say, this story ends with a nice but predictable twist ending. Except for the short sequence in the basement, the story lacked much of a punch and on the whole, turned out to be just a simple filler between the other stories.
The first video the criminal guy from the frame narrative watches is "Amateur Night" directed by David Bruckner. A trio of young guys have recently bought a spectacles with a camera in it (Google Glass???). They ask the most nerdy guy among them to wear it. Then they go have some fun in the bar. There they pick up a couple of girls and return to their apartment to spend a night of obvious debauchery. But they are in for a nasty surprise. This story had potential. But they ruined it for me by putting in way too much gore. Not to mention it was sexually explicit. And the camerawork was at times too shaky. But I give points for the interesting twist at the end.
The next story is called "Second Honeymoon" directed by Ti West. I have watched his famous movies The Innkeepers and The House of the Devil, and I enjoyed them both. So I had great expectations from this one. But I was quite disappointed. Apart from a bit of suspense and a very unexpected and original ending, the short lacked entertainment for me.
"Tuesday the 17th" (sounds like Friday the 13th? You bet it does) directed by Glenn McQuaid is about a bunch of two guys and two gals who visit a lake deep in the woods. This one is a pure no-brainer that lacks originality, but certainly adds the thrills (if you prefer slasher movies, albeit with a possible supernatural twist)
"The Sick Thing That Happened to Emily When She Was Younger" directed by Joe Swanberg has a pretty original but utterly preposterous story. It does have some good thrills. But overall, I would rate it as average.
The last one is "10/31/98" by a group of directors who call themselves Radio Silence. It is about a bunch of guys who visit a friend's house for the Halloween party. But it seems that there is no one in the house... Or is there? Personally, I think this is the best one among them all. Its your good old-fashioned horror tale. Where it lacks in originality, it makes up for in suspense, thrills, scares and the supernatural.
The beauty of any short film is that it does not beat round the bush. It delivers the goods quickly without the overhead of character or story building. And that is its drawback too. It is too short for explanations. One is left to assume certain things, concentrating more on delivering the gist of the story and the action involved. The same is true for these short films. They deliver the punch pretty effectively. But please don't go around looking for explanations or background stories.
These short films do aim to push the boundaries of the found footage horror genre. And to some extent they do succeed. For there is a certain uniqueness in each of the story, that deserves appreciation. But somewhere, I think, it failed to deliver the stories to their full potential. May be the direction could have been a bit better. Same can be said for some of the scripts. Overall, it is a case of hit-and-miss, where some stories are good, while others are disappointing.
Some of the stories have sexually explicit scenes, which is a bit of a turn off. Also some of them show way too much blood and gore. Call me a prude if you will, but according to me, a good horror story need not take help of unnecessary sexual scenes or excessive blood and gore in order to entertain.
On the whole, this one is worth watching once, but not more than that.
My Ratings: 2
Some Sci-Fi movies are about ideas and the science of the future. Some, or rather most of them are about high-tech action based in the future. This movie is about the the pursuit of discovery, and how far can a team of humans go, in order to make that discovery...
I am a sucker for Sci-Fi movies. The ideas and the science in them appeal to me. While trawling through the net for prospective Sci-Fi movies of this year, the name "Europa Report" caught my attention. The title itself sounded so appealing. I have always been fascinated by Europa. With its shiny white surface covered with red patches and what looks like scratch marks, I find it most intriguing among the four famous "Galilean Moons" of Jupiter (so named because they were first discovered by Galileo). So I dived in without even looking up its trailer...
When the movie started, I was a bit disappointed to know that it used the Found Footage format, making use of footage from various stationary and hand-held cameras to tell the story. I have seen one found footage Sci-Fi movie before - Apollo 18, and I was a bit disappointed by it. No doubt it had its share of thrills and suspense, which are a hallmark of any good Found Footage movie. But the basic premise, the idea behind the story did not appeal to me at all. Plus, Sci-Fi movies are a lot about eye-candy - VFX, beautiful outer-space locales, a spanning panorama of stars, fancy space-ships, the works... And one can't expect good VFX in the found footage format because of the stationary camera and its comparatively mediocre ability to capture good visuals.
But by the time the movie ended, it left me feeling mildly enthralled. The movie's story had managed to invoke in me the awe and wonder I had felt as a youngster, every time I would let my imagination soar at the prospect of travelling through space, wondered what we would find out there...
The movie does not weigh itself down with an over-ambitious scientific idea. Its premise is quite simple. A team of six astronauts embark on a voyage through interplanetary space to Europa - one of the moons of Jupiter. Their mission: to search for signs of life under Europa's crust of ice.
The mission is being sponsored and executed by Europa Ventures, a private firm. For a welcome change, NASA is nowhere involved - its a privately funded mission. The footage from the various cameras on board the spaceship are being broadcast back to earth.
The first half depicts their journey through the vast chasm of space that lies between the planets. The movie captures well the enthusiasm of the crew. And its infectious. After all, they are going farther than any Man has ever gone before. But like any ground-breaking voyages, this one is full of perils. The first disaster strikes, when halfway through, they loose all communications. While trying to repair the comm modules, one of the crew members is lost. All the exhilaration of the unique voyage suddenly dies out. The harsh reality of the perilous nature of the voyage suddenly dawns upon them all. But this will not be the last disaster they face... The stakes are high, for, if successful, they believe that their discovery could prove to be a most profound one in Human history. So they press on. How the crew members face one difficulty after another, and how they press on against all odds, and the sacrifices they make in pursuit of their discovery, is what fuels the rest of the story.
The found footage format does put a damper on what could have been a very good movie experience. But there are moments in the movie which not only justify the found footage format, but actually take advantage of it to give an entertaining movie experience. For example, this is one of the very few rare Sci-Fi movies which explains and portrays the use of centrifugal force to generate artificial gravity in zero-G. Its a nice little scene where a guy is shooting a personal tour of the ship for his kid. The guy hands the camera to his colleague, and then climbs the stairs from the ground (which is the inner surface of the rotating ship) towards its center of the ship, and as he ascends, he begins to float. And while he floats, we can see beyond (or above?) him, another astronaut descending (going upwards in reverse) at the opposite end of the ship.
There are moments when the found footage format does get on the nerves though. And it doesn't help that during the first half, the story keeps toggling to and fro between flash-back and flash-forward, giving us a sneak-peek of impending disaster. It gets a bit confusing at times. One has to concentrate on the timeline displayed in months : days : hours format every time the story switches back or forward in time.
If you have seen the movie Mission to Mars, then you will recognize the similarity of the plots. To be frank, Mission to Mars scores over Europa Report, because it was shot in normal format. So it was able to render some really awesome sequences (the space walk rescue attempt is one of my most favourite sequences in that movie). But it loses to Europa Report in one aspect. Its climax was too over-done for my taste. But Europa Report has managed to maintain rationality in its somewhat action-wise subdued but utterly realistic and believable climax. And in the end, it does manage to answer a question raised within the movie itself: "Compared to the breadth of knowledge yet to be known, what does your life actually matter?"
On the whole a really nice Sci-Fi flick. Worth watching at least once...
My Rating: 3.5
They say that one should not bite the hand that feeds. Very True. But what happens if the hand that feeds, itself becomes the hand that kills?
Parallelly released in Marathi language under the title Lalbaug Parel, it is directed by Mahesh Manjrekar. If you have seen Vaastav and Astitva, need I say anything more? But I feel I do need to say more... For this is a unique movie, about the city I was born and brought up in. The city I love, like so many others. And hate, like so many others too. And I feel it needs to be told...
Truly speaking, this is the story of a standard lower middle class mill-worker's family, one of the many millions of similar families that formed the cogs in the machinery of this City till the 80's... Till the mills were shut down, to make way for Shopping Malls and sky-scrapers. A family of six living in a 10 x 10 feet room in one of the many chawls that formed the landscape of Mumbai during that time.
The father, who used to work in one of the textile mills, has taken retirement. He is waiting for the gratuity amount promised him post-retirement - but the mills are yet to settle the dues of all the retired workers. One son is a struggling writer whose plays don't ever get sold. Another one, Mohan, works in a bank. The third son roams around being a "bhai" - a local goon. And the only daughter works in a beauty parlour. Somehow they are all trying to make ends meet.
The Mills are shutting down one department after another, claiming loss in business. The workers go on strike. While this drama unfolds, the family faces one problem after another. And they are not the only ones. The mill workers have not been paid for months. How are they to feed their families, pay the school fees, the rents?
And in the backdrop of their tribulations, unfolds the untold story of Mumbai, currently one of the costliest cities in India, maybe in the world too. How this City of the working class turned into a City of Gold. I think each city is like a person. It has a unique personality, a unique past, present and future. If I have to describe the personality of the city of Mumbai, I would describe it as that of a worker. For it is the city of the working class. A city born out of economic necessity, build and developed out of economic progress. Everything in Mumbai is economy driven.
One of the major trades in Mumbai post-independence, was the Textile Mills. Millions of mill workers worked in these mills, which worked 24 hours a day, 7 days a week in three daily shifts. All these workers mostly stayed in chawls near the mills itself, in the area around Parel, which came to be known in the local slang as the "Giran Gaon" - the village/town of the mills. Hence the name of the Marathi version Lalbaug, Parel. At the end of every shift, the iconic Siren would go off, indicating the end of one shift, and beaconing the workers who would toil and shed their sweat and blood in the next one. They would work one or two shifts a day and make ends meet.
But all this changed when the mill owners began to shut down parts of the mill, claiming losses. The mills might not be profitable, but the abundant land on which they stood, could gain the owners a lot of money. This was what they secretly desired. The untapped development potential of the land on which the mills stood. The land, so the movie claims was not owned by the owners themselves, but was given to them on lease for 99 years by the Government. And so, they began to make things difficult for the workers. The movie depicts this very nicely.
It depicts the hunger and desperation of the common mill worker and his family. Some commit suicide. The kids of some turn to crime and violence, driven by the most basic need to feed the fire within their hungry stomachs. It is sad and horrible indeed.
The movie also depicts the machinations that go on behind the closed doors of the mill owners' offices. The corruption and the under-handed deals would make anyone's blood boil.
All the major characters are quite well-sketched. All the actors, most of them from Marathi film industry, have played their part extremely well.
The directorial talent of Mahesh Manjrekar is evident in the brilliant portrayal of the harsh life of the mill workers, before "they became extinct, like dinosaurs" (to borrow a dialog from the movie itself). The story does not flinch to depict illicit love affairs or violence, in the same way it unflinchingly depicts the desperation and the sad state of the mill-workers' families after the mills shut down. The life in the chawl is portrayed very realistically - life in small 10x10 rooms, where there is no space for personal privacy, but lots of space for humanity, and neighbourly love and care.
As far as I know, the Marathi version - Lalbaug Parel - became more famous than the original Hindi one. One of the reasons probably was that the Marathi speaking localites could identify with its content. And second reason being that, the Hindi audience, who were looking out for mere entertainment, probably found nothing new in this movie. For Mahesh Manjrekar has already explored similar concepts (like common man turning into a criminal) in his previous movies like Vaastav. If that is the case, then I think they missed the point entirely...
Because this is an important movie for anyone who wishes to understand the events that triggered the transformation of this city of mills and chawls, into a city of skyscrapers, huge corporate offices and shopping malls. A city where people who own a piece of it's land, need not really work for a living. And ironically, a city where a hard working common man can no longer afford to buy a home of his own. A City of Gold...
My Rating: 3.5
After watching Children of Men directed by Alfonso Cuarón, I was eager to watch his newest release Gravity. And the wait was worth it!
For a movie named 'Gravity', most of it takes place in an absence of it. Sandra Bullock and George Clooney are a part of a team of astronauts on a mission to do some repair-work on the famous Hubble Space telescope, when disaster strikes. Sandra Bullock and George Clooney are the only survivors. And in the cold, dark and empty loneliness of Space, with communications and vital instruments down, they have to battle against seemingly insurmountable odds to survive and get back to Earth.
If I were to describe the movie in minimum amount of words, I would call it "visually stunning". I am glad I watched it in 3D. People associate 3D with action scenes where fast moving things hurtling towards the camera appear as if they are actually coming straight at you. I was under the same misconception until I saw the movie Sanctum in 3D. Much of that movie is shot within caves and under water, where most of the scenes have a dark background. This makes the feebly illuminated portions stand out. And it looks even better in 3D, where the contours appear so well-defined. The lights playing over the huge caverns, or on the surface of the water way above (when the camera is under water), or on the bubbles floating around, look almost magical in their clarity, thanks to the 3D effects. Same is the case with Gravity.
In Space, everything is either dark, or very brightly illuminated by the naked sun rays. This contrasting interplay of light and darkness makes things stand out very nicely in 3D. Most of the movie takes place in orbit around the Earth. The slow graceful movements of the astronauts in space is captured very nicely. So are the various objects, large and small, floating around in empty space. It all adds up to a very stunning visual experience.
The views of the Earth as the backdrop, from far above in orbit are stunning. So is the depiction of the space shuttle and the ISS. The movie depicts the rare beauty of the Earth and the nature from space, even as the tense story-line moves from one catastrophe to the other.
In spite of being a Sci-Fi movie, it does not have your distant planets, fancy star-ships, aliens or super-advanced technology. The director has tried to keep it as near to the present-day science as possible. Though I am not sure how much of the science portrayed in the movie is realistic or actually plausible, it does not seem improbable to the layman. The harsh and dangerous environment of space is the villain and the indomitable human spirit to survive against all odds is the true hero of the movie.
For most of its part, the story hurtles along at break-neck speed. It does slow down a bit in the second half, which many of you might find a bit boring. But its worth the wait as the story once again picks up speed as it approaches the climax.
The characters of both the protagonists are neither too shallow, nor overly well-defined. But at least they are sketched realistically. Both Sandra Bullock and George Clooney do justice to the characters with their great acting skills. Sandra Bullock's acting is especially nice.
The story is not as complex as some other Space disaster-survival movies like Apollo 13. But the visual effects are ground-breaking and worth the money.
My Ratings: 3.5
Our life, the world we build for us, our entire system works on our hope for the future. All our plans, expectations, speculations are based from future's point of view. But what if there was no future to look forward to? With no hope for the coming tomorrow, our system would slowly but surely decay and collapse. This is the premise on which Children of Men is based.
The movie starts with the protagonist viewing a news report in a bar. Its the news of a famous celebrity who passed away. Its a kid. He was famous because he was the last kid to be born. In the future, mankind has inexplicably lost the ability to give birth. Everyone has, for some reason become sterile. And this has lead to a slow but certain Global Meltdown. As the protagonist comes out of the bar and walks away, there is a blast in the bar. It is one of the regularly carried out arsonous acts carried out by the Foogies (for Refugees) against a totalitarian government regime.
This is how the movie starts. The lead protagonist's ex-wife asks him a favour. He has to arrange for a pass to get someone out of the country. He manages to get the pass, but it turns out, he will have to personally escort that someone. Somewhere on the way, things take a turn for the worse. And while trying to cope with the sudden turn of events, he realizes that his mission is much more important and critical than it appears.
The story is based in a hypothetical future. So it certainly is a Sci-Fi movie, but without the aliens and the hi-tech stuff. And the story never really explores the why and the how of the apparently sudden sterility of the entire human race. It has some very breath-taking action. But its not your usual action flick. The direction ensures that the main theme of the movie never gets lost in the action scenes and the depiction of a future gone bad.
The movie starts with a bang but soon looses momentum for a while, as the stage is set, and the character-building happens. This initial character and story-building is nice if you don't mind the slow pace. And then suddenly the movie picks up speed. And then it hardly ever slows down...
The protagonist has to get involved in lots of action and intrigue. But he is never depicted as an action hero. He is a normal empathetic human who is doing what has to be done, like a normal human. neither are the antagonist portrayed as totally evil. The characters in this movie are more realistic shades of grey, instead of the usually shallow black and white ones that most simplified movie plots depict.
The director Alfonso Cuarón (director of the famous recent movie Gravity), pretty nicely depicts a world where hope is lost and all is shot to hell. And yet, we are shown the human side of things, where common people try to survive against all hopelessness and unnecessary violence. Even the violence is depicted with empathy, where we feel the unnecessariness of it, and the shock of its sad aftermath. And in spite of its dark dreary background, the movie gives us a message: that however dark and hopeless the future may appear, there is always hope...
On the whole its a pretty decent flick. Much better than your run of the mill Sci-fi action movies that attract so much audience. This is certainly not for everyone. But if you like sensitive movies, that add a pack of pretty slick action, pace and suspense, then you will certainly enjoy this movie the way I did.
My Ratings: 4
