Lawrence Jamieson is a proud prince
of some small far away kingdom. His royal Highness operates out
of Beaumont-sur-Mer, a beautiful little place located in what they call
as the French Riviera. His major occupation is to get help in the form
of hefty donations from the rich ladies who visit the place, in order to
help the cause of his enslaved people. All is going well, until one day
he stumbles upon one Freddy Benson, an American, who is in the same
line of work as himself. Except for the fact that Freddy is trying to
get help for his very sick Grandmother.
There is just one problem. Actually a
set of problems. Namely, Freddy is fishing in the same waters as
Lawrence. He is younger. Less experienced. Not to mention, an utter
moron, according to His Highness.If nothing else, he would scare away
the fish on which Lawrence relies on for his living. So Lawrence tries
to convince, persuade, or scare Freddy in order to leave voluntarily.
But to no avail. The young cocky grandson of a very sick grandmother
becomes the thorn in the backside of his highness - a thorn which will
not dislodge itself so easily.
Something
needs to be done. So they both decide to settle matters once and for
all, by placing a bet. The first one to get 50000 bucks from a lady
wins. The lady in question is ... A Soap Queen of America. The race is
on. Who will finally win?
Lawrence Jamieson, played by Michael Caine has been brilliantly portrayed. Michael Caine's
acting skills are extraordinary, as is evident in this movie. His
straight faced comedy is as refreshingly hilarious as the serious
performances he had to give during one or two scenes in the movie. The
klutzy but persistent role of Freddy has been played quite nicely by Steve Martin.
I felt his acting was a bit awkward and contrived. But it suited well for the character of Freddy. In fact he fit the role so well, he
almost defined it. After watching the movie, I can't imagine anyone else
playing the same role. Glenne Headly, who played the role of the Soap Queen of America, has also performed well.
The movie captures the beauty of some
idyllic European towns along the Mediterranean coastline, during that
golden age before such beautiful places became expensive,
commercialized, crowded and polluted...
What I liked most about this movie is
that it gave me quite a few good laughs. Its pure unadulterated humorous
good old-fashioned entertainment. A rare gem of a movie that will not
fade with age. Something you can watch and enjoy with your family
without having to worry about adult content. I had a really good time
watching it. But most importantly, it was so good, that I am sure I will
be watching it many more times in the years to come. And I am sure it
will still make me laugh and give me a good time every time I watch it!
My rating: 3.5
8 candidates prepare for the final round of an extremely lucrative job opportunity. The recruitment is supposed to be for a very high post in a very big company. An opportunity worth dying for. An opportunity worth killing for.
The exam hall is a single closed room, with no windows, a single door, a guard besides it, 8 desks and chairs and 8 question papers, one for each candidate. The invigilator sets forth a set of rules: they cannot communicate with the guard or the invigilator at any time. They cannot leave the room for any reason. And they should not spoil their own question paper. There is one question. And one answer is required. The invigilator starts a timer. They have 80 minutes to give the correct answer. Then the invigilator leaves the room. Each candidate opens the question paper. Each of the paper is blank...
So starts the quest for the question. And the correct answer. At first its a very intriguing puzzle. But as the time begins to run out, the pressure increases. Which candidates will snap under pressure? Which ones will manage to find the right answer? What is the right answer? But before that, what is the question? This is what forms the heart of the movie. This is what fuels it, grabs the audience by the collar and hardly ever lets go...
What I liked about this movie was its entirely original premise. The idea is unique. Who would have thought of making a movie based on a recruitment process for a big job opportunity? It thankfully refrains from using the age old spices of love, action, romance, murder, etc. Which makes it a refreshing watch. There is mystery and suspense. Its a puzzler, which reminds me of movies like Cube and Fermat's Room. Just like the Cube, it not only entertains by making the audience use their grey cells as they get absorbed in the puzzle, but also explores the human psyche.
Somewhere in between the movie seems to veer off from the path that one might have expects. For, it starts off as an intriguing and intricate puzzle and then turns into a psychological thriller where it explores the impact of pressure on human psyche. How a situation of stress and pressure can bring out the best or the worst in people. And how some people would go to any lengths when the stakes are high enough for them.
And the climax comes with a twist that you would never have anticipated. Some of the ideas in the movie, like how each of the candidates came to know about the job opening, may sound a bit half-baked. And some of them, for example the explanations at the end, may sound a bit far fetched and fantastic. And yet it manages to keep it all as realistic as possible, refraining from taking unnecessary leaps of fantasy.
The movie is a single room drama, where the entire story takes place within a single room. Which shows the talent of the co-writer and director Stuart Hazeldine, to be able to make the entire story work within such a limited location / set.
The camera work is pretty impressive too. Many aspects of the story are narrated very well by intuitive visuals. It exemplifies the rule that visuals can express better and are more powerful than words.
The acting ranges from very good to mediocre. I especially liked the acting of the candidates who are referred to as "white", and "dark" in the movie.
The characters are neither too shallow, nor too intricately sketched. But each character's personality is portrayed with enough details to fit the requirements of the story.
The movie will not afford you easy entertainment. It will demand your brain power. It will make you think. If you don't mind that, then its certainly worth watching at least once.
My Ratings: 3.5
Shaun is your regular working class type, staying with his annoying and dim-witted friend Ed, and trying to keep things from falling apart with his girlfriend, his job and his mom and step-dad. And failing miserably. His only solace, the regular trips to the local pub Winchester with Ed.
Shaun's buddy, Ed does not wish to grow up. His girlfriend wants Shaun to grow up. His Mom expects him to remember her every now and then. His step-father expects him to do what his mom expects. Being a nobody at the job isn't helping. His world falls apart when his girlfriend splits up with him. But it is not his world alone that's going down the drain... People all around, who had been busy doing their daily chores in a zombie-like fashion, have suddenly started turning into actual ... need I mention the famous Z-word?
To say that Shaun of the Dead is a parody about Zombie movies, would be as accurate as stating a theorem. For it does sum up the movie, but fails to elaborate on its intricate and interesting content. In a funny yet realistic way, the movie, as it starts, portrays the pains of being a nobody in his late twenties. It parodies the daily life of the urban populace where people go around their daily chores in a zombie-like fashion devoid of life or excitement, even before the outbreak.
The unique crisp direction, and the dialogues loaded with satire make this a refreshingly comic romp through the zombie-movie-land. But its not just about the comedy. There are scenes loaded with emotions too - for example, scenes between Shaun and his stepfather, and with his mom, before he has to part ways with them... It displays the acting skills of Simon Pegg, proving that he can be versatile enough to take on serious scenes too.
It is the first movie in the Flavours Cornetto Trilogy, co-written and directed by Edgar Wright and starring Simon Pegg and Nick Frost. It is a complete movie in itself and has no relationship whatsoever with the other two movies in the series. The fact that the three movies form a trilogy is probably a joke by the movie makers, in the same way they poke fun at a specific genre through each movie. Though its story is not as intricate as Hot Fuzz, nor is the characterization and scripting as well-crafted as that of The World's End, yet the movie stands out because of the unique directorial skills of Edgar Wright and good script for a parody.
This parody about Zombie movies, does not contribute anything new to the Zombie movie genre, except to add a few laughs and poke fun at the outrageously ridiculous outbreak of the Z-word in movies across the world. There is action and gore aplenty, apocalypse and adventure, and lots and lots of dumb zombies out to get you. But don't watch this one for the Zombie fun. Watch it instead for the rollicking antics of Simon Pegg who plays Shaun, and Nick Frost who plays Ed, both good comic actors.
I had quite a lot of laughs watching this one. Its certainly worth watching at least once...
My ratings: 2.5
No. This is not about the World's End. Or is it?
The World's End is a pub at the end of what the teenagers of Newton Haven call the Golden Mile - a pub crawl that covers 11 other pubs before terminating at this one. On the day of their graduation, Gary King and his 4 buddies decide to "conquer the Golden Mile", drinking a beer in each of the "twelve pubs along a legendary path of alcoholic indulgence"... They never manage to finish it...
That was 20 years back. Flash forward to the present. All the 4 friends are busy and settled down in their respective professions. And Gary King? He is institutionalized. Trying to come to terms with the disappointment and meaninglessness that life has become. But there is the business of the Golden Mile. The crawl they started but never finished. Unfinished business.
So Gary decides to go and finish it once and for all. But of course he cant do it without his 4 buddies. But its "Gary fucking King". The guy who, according to his best pal Andy, can do anything... So Gary visits each one of them. And using his obnoxious charm, manages to convince, persuade and at times emotionally blackmail them to join him in their 20 years old quest.
So the four friends find themselves back in Newton Haven, following the indomitable and insufferable Gary King. And while they are at it, they stumble upon a conspiracy that threatens to change their world...
This is one movie that, for me, defies classification. It is the concluding part of the famous Flavours Cornetto Trilogy (though, it is in no way related to either of the 2 predecessors). But unlike its prequels, it is not really a parody. It is a good comedy. At the same time it is quite an interesting piece of "social science fiction". It boasts some pretty cool action scenes. But best of all, it paints the characters of the 5 friends quite well. The shattered promise of youth, the nostalgic collective memories of a bunch of friends before life separated them, their trip down that memory lane, and their unresolved hopes, conflicts and desires. The movie manages to capture all this very nicely.
The script is well written. Much detailed and well crafted than either of the predecessors. Hats off to the Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg. Edgar Wright's direction is, as always, awesome - bearing the unique signature that anyone who has seen the other two movies in the trilogy would quickly recognize.
Simon Pegg plays the role of the cocky, obnoxious and gritty Gary King. That Simon Pegg is a great actor has been evident in the previous two movies from the trilogy. But this one exhibits equally great acting skills by Nick Frost. He plays the role of the adorable but grumpy Andy, Gary's best buddy. The rest of the actors have played their parts well too.
The movie picks up very nicely and never once slows down.
The dialogues are at times funny ("What the fuck is WTF?"), and witty ("He used to ask me what I wanted to do with my life.told him I just wanted to have a good time. He thought that was funny. It wasn't meant to be."), and at times serious enough to the point of being philosophical ("How can you tell when you're drunk if you're never sober"). Sometimes they are a commentary on us humans and our idiosyncrasies ("Your reliance on profanity is a measure of your immaturity as a man and a species.")... That's what I liked a lot about the script... It has a lot of substance to it.
The action is at times intense. As compared to the other two movies in the series, the action sequences in this one are very professionally shot. Many action movies rely on the shaking of the camera to portray intense action. This one avoid the shaky camerawork. Instead it portrays the fight sequences very lucidly and in detail. Its fun to watch, except if you can make yourself digest the fact that all the five protagonists who are bashing up so many people, are supposed to be in their middle ages, with no indication of their acquaintance to martial arts.
Compared to the other two movies in the trilogy, this one has the best climax. The climax of Hot Fuzz was, according to me, a serious botch up. The climax of Shaun of the Dead was simply mediocre. But the climax of this one is well executed. It wraps up the story to a very satisfying and logical conclusion.
The science fiction part of the movie does not necessarily consist of an original premise. But the idea is well executed. The main idea is to make a social commentary on the vagaries of the human race, while proclaiming our right to be free to mess up ourselves the way we please. Which the movie sets forth pretty effectively, using comedy or satire as a medium.
According to me, this one was the best one of the three movies that make up the Flavours Cornetto Trilogy. And its certainly worth a watch at least once.
My ratings: 3.5
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
