Fernando Meirelles directed a great film, Cidade de Deus "City of God". It is a moving, sometimes shocking exploration into environment and character. It is a reminder of the power of cinema and is one of the best movies I've ever seen.

This ain't City of God.

The first act of this film about a plague that blinds its victims is wonderfully constructed and executed. Merielles' stark visuals and thoughtful scenes develop the paranoia, isolation and fear that comes with of the uncontrollable threat of disease. A virus blinds its victims and one by one people are left stumbling around town, crashing their cars and getting lost in their own homes. Before too long the government steps in an quarantines the victims in an abandoned mental hospital. One of the victims "Doctor" (Mark Ruffalo) is an optomistrist who loses his sight early on. His wife, aptly named "Doctor's Wife" is immune to the disease. She can see. She pretends to be blind so she can keep tabs on and help her love. Its at this point things hit a big, unmovable wall.

While instituationalized, it becomes clear that the outside world is falling apart, but things aren't much better inside. The blind prisoners wander the halls naked, filth and execement smudge the floors and trash lines the rooms. Their life in squalor and fear gets worse when the food shipments stop coming. A group of thugs, who live on the first floor of the building, take over the food supply and demand payment for it from the other residnets. They back up their demand with a gun and the fact that one of their members has been blind his whole life. Unlike everyone else, he is used to being blind uses his experience to control others.




The story descends into a confusing, unpleansant mess at this point because once the thugs take all of the trinkets and property from the rest of the asylum they then demand the women. The women in the asylum submit so people can eat. What follows is a disturbing rape sequence where the women are brutally victimized, one even dies. Meirelles doesn't descend to showing much but the audio and shadows of women being raped isn't something most people want to sit through. The point is made without forcing the audience to experience it. What is so frustrating about the whole situation is that the lead, Doctor's Wife (Julianne Moore) IS NOT BLIND. In the kingdom of the blind the one-eyed man is king. In this case she's queen. She has the ability to put an end to the conflict at any time. She can see and the thugs can't. She allows herself and others to be raped. She allows for people to live in squalor. We're not given solid reasons for her choices, other than it all goes to feed the film's overall symbolism. The problem is that symbolism doesn't outmatch logic. Her failure to act makes her, the heroine, as evil as the villains.

Eventually, Doctor's Wife does confront the thugs, after the thugs have visited every possible evil on the rest of the people in the asylum. She burns the place down and leads the residents out on the streets. There things are better but they're left to scavange along with everyone else. After a while, and some minor conflicts, everyone regains their sight. End of story.

Sound stupid?

It is.




Related Reviews:
Julianne Moore movies
Children of Men (2006)
Short Cuts (1993)


Other Critic’s Reviews:
Film Critics United
Intermedias Review

Labels: Alice Braga, Danny Glover, film, Julianne Moore, Mark Ruffalo, movie review

Short Review: This illogical heap is a huge success, if its goal was to make the audience as remorseful and confused as its lead characters.


This film blindly sprints its plot forward and runs straight into the hurdles of its own logic. I understand the need to mold a character’s behavior to push a plot in a predetermined direction. It’s poor story management, but sometimes it’s needed. However, it is rare to see it occur throughout the entire story. I’ve seen plots on Sesame Street that are less contrived than this one.

Even the chase scenes have their character’s making illogical, yet correct choices. The main character drops out of sight of the bad guys. The bad guys automatically know which route to take to get to her. It is as if they have a copy of the script and are following the scene description. "No! Hold on! It says here, she’s run down this hallway and then taken a left!" It’s illogical and worse yet, its bad film making.

Julianne Moore can act, but is still a distant performer. Her failure can be partly blamed on the films she chooses. You can’t expect a NASCAR driver to win the race driving a Prius. She has to start picking better projects otherwise she’ll end up like Glenn Close: talented but irrelevant.

Forget about renting this useless, confused mess.


Related Reviews:
Julianne Moore movies
Short Cuts (1993)
Children of Men (2003)


Other Critic's Reviews:
Beyond Hollywood
eFilmCritic

Labels: film, Gary Sinise, Julianne Moore, movie review

Labels: film, Harrison Ford, Julianne Moore, movie review, Tommy Lee Jones

Screenwriter: Jeb Stuart (Die Hard) and David Twohy (Below)
Director: Andrew Davis (Holes)
Actors: Harrison Ford (Firewall), Tommy Lee Jones (No Country for Old Men), Sela Ward (The Day After Tomorrow) and Julianne Moore (Blindness)

Labels: film, Harrison Ford, Julianne Moore, movie trailer, Tommy Lee Jones

Screenwriter: Don McKellar
Director: Fernando Meirelles (City of Men)
Actors: Julianne Moore (Children of Men), Mark Ruffalo (Zodiac), Alice Braga (I am Legend), Danny Glover (Lethal Weapon), Gael Garcia Bernal (The Motorcycle Diaries) and Sandra Oh (Sideways)

Labels: Alice Braga, Danny Glover, film, Gael Garcia Bernal, Julianne Moore, Mark Ruffalo, movie trailer, Sandra Oh

Short Review: In the future humans find they can no longer breed. Being diligent, NARAL keeps the abortion clinics open “just in case”.

Short Review #2: In the future, humans lose the ability to breed. The film doesn’t explain why but I think we can all assume its because this current generation of men have had their testicles snipped off.

Soon the world will be in ruins. Everything will be gray, the skies will be cloudy and you’re going to die a painful and unfair death. That’s the thing about filmmakers, they always see the future as a miserable hellhole where we suffer the inevitable consequences of today's sins. We never seem to improve ourselves and pull ourselves out of the horror that awaits us on the horizon.

This film shows a dismal future where humans have lost the ability to propagate. Civilization has fallen (or is in the middle of its death throes) and only Clive Owen, along with a gaggle of self-important leftists can save the day. By the way, what is the deal with Clive Owen? He talks like he has a mouth full of cotton balls and always looks like he just woke up. He’s a human lint trap that mumbles. Back to the film, Linty Mumbler spends his screen time trying to get Kee, the only known pregnant woman in the world, out of England. It’s never clearly explained where she’s being shuttled off to, but given that Britain is a crumbling war zone, it doesn’t really matter. The movie, at its heart, is little more than a chase film.

Western Civilization is of course the bad player in this future. Tedious cries of future fascism and police state policies litter this pompous pile of political mush. The film is a string of vibrant and well shot liberal fantasies brought to life. Jackboot thugs round up immigrants, seize control over human freedoms and allow the masses to kill each other. The interesting thing is that like most politically liberal thought, this film is loud with babble and silent in thought. Director Alfonso Cuarón is so distracted by his intent on saying something important he fails to say anything valuable. Yes, our civilization is becoming more and more stagnant and it often feels like we have peaked. Cuarón intends for the film to show the results of our generation. The story takes place in 2027, which means the dystopia shown on screen is one of our making. There are clear signs that Cuarón wants to assign blame to the Bush Administration (and by extension their supporters) for the snuffing out of all mankind. He then bemoans our endless conflicts and lack of civility. He clearly wants to criticize the noisy conflicts that seem to define today's society by making an incoherent and noisy film. Ultimately, this film is loaded with hollow charges and a narrative that fails to come alive. Given the lack of depth to this film, it simply becomes another confused pseudo-intellectual rambling that does little more than join the ranks of sub par muck that is smothering our culture to death.

To be fair, credit has to go out to production designers Jim Clay and Geoffrey Kirkland who managed to create a believable disintegrating world. You can see the rot of civilization in the environment as Linty Mumbler shuffles through the awkward plot. Also cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki deserves kudos for some technically masterful work throughout this piece. This film is an intellectually jumbled mess but it is an interesting mess to watch.

To put this film in context, if you thought V for Vendetta was a well conceived film, full of logic and truth, this film is right up your alley. If you see V for Vendetta for what it was, a hysterical and laughable load of diaper filler, you'll be best served by skipping this flick.

Even putting my opposition to this film based on political standing aside, this is simply a poorly constructed film. The scenes are without depth or tension. The main thrust of the film feels inserted and doesn’t flow with the remainder of the piece. The central character Theo (portrayed by Linty Mumbler) is a non-character. He retains no interesting qualities and doesn't evolve in response to his situation. He defines the word “vapid”. The characters surrounding him are equally as hollow. They belch out over heated dialog and never expand beyond their role of propelling the limping plot forward. Despite some technical marvels, by the time the film comes to a stuttering end there is little to take from the piece other than “Hey, how about those two, long, unedited scenes? Cool, eh?”

If you're looking for a smarter and more enjoyable film about the direction of this listless culture, check out Mike Judge's Idiocracy. Yes, I'm actually saying the creator of Beavis and Butthead has made a superior movie to this one. Judge's movie is coherent and isn't so wrapped up in its own arrogant need to be important that is fails to do its basic jobs - make a point and entertain.

Click on the image to view the trailer

Cautions: Violence abounds as does language. It's in context and for the most part is handled with some care. If you're sensitive to violence, that's yet another reason to skip this film.

Worldview: This is existential slop. We're condemned and there's no hope - boo-hoo. This is a typical view of the future by the learned elites, or at least what we've come to expect. While the base concept of the film is compelling in its own right, and seeing the fall of civilization is interesting, the overall tone of the piece is like listening to drunken undergraduate art students complain about how unfair the world is. Basically what we have here is an existentialist whine about the inevitable result of existentialist thought - life without God creates a vacuum of meaningful human achievement and advancement. When one denies God they deny purpose - no purpose = no civilization.


Related Reviews:
Linty Mumbler movies
The Croupier (1998)
Sin City (2005)


Other Critic's Reviews:
People who disagree with me on this one...
ReThink
We Are the Movies

Labels: Clive Owen, film, Julianne Moore, Michael Caine, movie review

Labels: Clive Owen, film, Julianne Moore, Michael Caine, movie trailer