We Are Marshall (Widescreen Edition) is available at Amazon for $9.49. To Order click here
Amazon Product Pages contain a lot of other details on this product as Customer Reviews, Sales Ranking, Special Offers, Alternate products that customers are going for and much more.Want to read these details? click here

Want to get some other Format / Binding / Version? You can search for them from here

Other Products of Interest

• License to Wed
• Lucky You
• The Astronaut Farmer
• Disturbia (Widescreen Edition)
• Next

--Come to Los Angeles! The sun shines bright, the beaches are wide and inviting, and the orange groves stretch as far as the eye can see. There are jobs aplenty, and land is cheap. Every working man can have his own house, and inside every house, a happy, all-American family. You can have all this, and who knows... you could even be discovered, become a movie star... or at least see one. Life is good in Los Angeles... it's paradise on Earth." Ha ha ha ha. That's what they tell you, anyway.

It’s hard to believe that it’s been over ten years since this movie premiered. It served as my introduction to the director Curtis Hanson as well as actors Russell Crowe and Guy Pearce. Both Crowe and Pearce are Australian. Confidential was Pierce’s first American film, but not Crowe’s. I had seen him before in The Quick and the Dead but had paid more attention to the fun showdown between Sharon Stone and Gene Hackman. L. A. Confidential served as Crowe’s calling card. His turn as Bud White led to his later being cast in such great films as The Insider, Gladiator, A Beautiful Mind, and Master and Commander. Pearce would go on to do Christopher Nolan’s Memento and John Hillcoat’s The Proposition, as well as the period pieces The Count of Monte Cristo and The Time Machine. Both were relative unknowns in Hollywood when Hanson cast them in his adaptation of James Ellroy’s novel.

They are joined by veterans Danny Devito, James Cromwell, Kim Basinger and David Strathairn. The third leading role was taken by Kevin Spacey, fresh from his success in The Usual Suspects. Hanson reports that the studio wanted him to simplify the storyline and eliminate two of the leading roles, but ultimately he won the fight. Thank goodness! One of the joys of watching this film is its multi-threaded plot. This is a story that takes your full attention, but the rewards are fruitful. Not only do the disparate threads come together in a most satisfactory manner, but the dialogue is intelligent and biting and the performances full-bodied and unsentimental. This is neo-noir done right.

Crowe, Pearce and Spacey all play cops in Los Angeles of the early 1950s. Crowe is Bud White, ostensibly a hotheaded muscle man whose past ensures his burning hatred for men who beat women. Pearce is Edmund Exley, the son of a highly respected policeman who died in the line of duty. He possesses a sharp intelligence, burning ambition and killer political instincts. Spacey is Jack Vincennes, the consultant for a popular television show. He is treated much like a movie star himself. These three men, although possessing considerable flaws of character, nevertheless also adhere to a sort of code of honor. A skirmish between some drunk racist cops and some Hispanic prisoners leads to Vincennes being temporarily stripped of his consultant status, White losing his partner, and Exley getting promoted to Detective Lieutenant in Homicide. There are plot twists aplenty – including one so unexpected yet perfectly pulled off that it will take your breath.

Kim Basinger does her finest work here and was rewarded with an Oscar. Danny Devito is as funny and sarcastic as ever. James Cromwell turns his back on the kindly farmer from Babe to create a tougher persona. David Strathairn gives his oily millionaire, Pierce Patchett, a touch of airy grace. Watching this movie ten years later, I was amused to spot actors now more famous for their television roles like Alias’s Ron Rifkin or CSI’s Paul Guilfoyle.

The cast is uniformly excellent. If you think that I have a tendency to say such things about the casts of the films that I review, you might have a point. Many of the movies I’ve been reviewing lately have attained a classic status, and one routine ingredient of a film that gets the label “classic” tends to be a standout ensemble cast. The one Hanson has put together here has talent aplenty as well as that indefinable quality, chemistry. The soundtrack, the cinematography, the sets, locations, costumes along with the acting, script and directing make this a must see.

Wong Kar-Wai has the ability to turn an ordinary event into extraordinary, and that's precisely what he did in My Blueberry Nights. Elizabeth (Norah Jones) caught her boyfriend with another women at a cafe, and decides to leave her keys to the cafe owner Jeremy (Jude Law). The two of them became friends over time but Elizabeth sporadically decides to leave town one day only to keep in touch with Jeremy via a series of postcards.

With his films it's not necessarily the storyline but rather the human experience, the human interaction that makes his works beautiful. Compared to his other Chinese movies, this isn't anything new. My Blueberry Nights is essentially what Wong Kar-Wai saw in America the way In the Mood for Love was genuinely what he saw in 1960s Hong Kong. And in his eyes, this movie was very much American.

I was very skeptical when i first saw the trailer of this movie when the dialogue seemed too forced. Narration has always been Wong Kar-Wai's trademark to connect the character's thoughts with the audience, and after watching the movie i was relieved to see it was much better implemented than what the trailer had initial portrayed. In fact, the only iffy part was Jeremy's (Jude Law) key analogy from for what seemed preachy and unnatural.

And whilst this movie was panned by many film critics, i for one really enjoyed it. The story isn't as abstract and the dialogue isn't as deep as 2046, but the feeling was definitely there. A lot of people were complaining about Norah Jone's performance, of how she didn't seem talented enough, and i'm pretty sure that's precisely why she was chosen for this movie.

Wong Kar-Wai likely wants a fresh face to complement the storyline about an average girl, and since this movie is deeply tied with the jazzy soundtrack (which is also very good), Norah Jones would be the perfect fit.

It was stupendous.

The story itself, especially in today's climate, was nothing less than inspirational. A few men dared to stand up for what was right, despite the repercussions, and eventually a tainted politician fell as a result. The director, a surprisingly talented George Clooney, kept the pace perfect and mixed his filming with actual footage seamlessly.

Most impressive, however, was the lead actor who played the newsman Edward R. Murrow, David Strathairn. I am completely unfamiliar with this man's work, and I had never heard of Edward R. Murrow before this film, but Strathairn was nothing less than completely magnanimous and charismatic as the reporter. He played Murrow as deadpan, intense, and low key, and it worked perfectly. I completely understand his nomination for Best Actor at the last Academy Awards.

Along just being a great movie, this film provoked a lot of thought about what's going on with today's politics, the reporters covering the news, and television and its purpose. There is a strong message being conveyed, a message that I happen to agree with. See the movie and tell me if you agree with it as well.

THE STORY: Meet Elizabeth (Nora Jones). Elizabeth is heartbroken because some asshole, like all self-respecting assholes do, decided to start cheating on her. She goes to a diner said asshole frequents and asks Jeremy (Jude Law), the owner, to give AH a set of keys next time he sees him. A week later, she returns and AH never came by. Elizabeth and Jeremy start to talk, every night, over the left over pies—she always takes the Blueberry (hence My BLUEBERRY Nights…so clever). He eats something unidentified that looks like an overgrown onion. Obviously, we know where this is going. But wait! Hold on, let’s take a random turn in the narrative without any explanation and send Elizabeth to Memphis! Why does she leave? This is one of my problems with the film. Okay, obviously she’s heartbroken and wants to get away from her ex’s turf. If the movie started there, it’d make much more sense. Instead, Won Kar Wai (the director) starts her healing process in the city (New York) and when all seems to get lovey-dovey with Jeremy, she vanishes. I felt bad for Jeremy. He was laying on moves, comforting her, refraining from kissing her after she fell asleep on his counter. Hell, I’d fall for Jude Law’s Jeremy and I’m not even into dudes. So that’s where the “.5” comes in. I wasn’t convinced by her leaving, making the first of the three stories incomplete.

The two following stories were of self-discovery by watching other people horribly mess up their lives. Yeah, sounds bad, but this is actually quite good. They work as two separate films—and I think Wai might have had three short films in mind that he simply mashed together, but with enough style to get away with it. I don’t want to go into too much detail about the stories, because the emotion invested in each one is worth seeing. There’s a Memphis story, centered on a separated couple who destroy each other. And then there’s the Vegas story, about a girl who trusts no one and is hurt horribly by it. Now, the Vegas story should have somehow came before the Memphis story. It’s too bad there was this distance theme going on and Vegas is further from New York than Memphis. The story is just kind of there. Not bad, but not as wrenching as what happens in Memphis, where I believe Elizabeth is defined the most. What she learns in Memphis is far more important than what she learns in Vegas.

When these two stories are finished, she returns to New York, but if you skipped the two stories and kept watching from when she left New York, it didn’t seem like much changed for her. It just wasn’t convincing that she had to go on this cross-country trip to become a stronger person. Her Blueberry Nights seemed like it should have been enough (but I suppose it needs to be a longer film than 20 minutes, huh?). What was missing was some sort of defining reason for her to leave that we needed to see. If she ran into her boyfriend and it was a bad confrontation and she just hopped on a bus would have sufficed. But we have to guess our own reason (and I can see six dozen of my creative writing professors yell at me for trying something like that). Another thing is: why stop at Vegas? I think, since this movie was a series of vignettes, Wai should have taken her all the way to Los Angeles or San Diego—somewhere on the west coast—and told one more story. In fact, the Memphis people in a smaller west coast city would have been perfect and would have worked with the “Miles from NY” thing going on. Still, over all, each story worked. And the main reason why is because of…

THE ACTORS: This had a good cast. First off, it had three gorgeous women—Nora Jones, Rachel Weisz, and Natalie Portman. Weisz especially delivers well. She does some things in this film I have never seen her do before. Portman is always brilliant as well, but doesn’t exactly do anything new—she just is a phenomenal actress and that’s enough. Jones…for her acting debut, this is great. Not incredible, there were some flaws, but a lot was riding on her being the star of the movie. It was a risky move, but it worked out well.

And though those three very beautiful, lovely and altogether yummy women were great, the two men in the film take the show out from under them. First, Jude Law, whom I’m not actually a big fan of, gave what I think is his best performance yet. But even at his best, he couldn’t come close to David Strathairn. As I said in my review for The Bank Job, I got his name mixed up with Jason Stratham, but can you blame me? They’re pretty fucking similar if you ask me. But I’ll come back to Stratham (really, I have a reason for mentioning him). Strathairn outshines everyone in this movie with an amphibious character hopping between happy-go-lucky police officer of a small Memphis town, to a dark and brooding drunk who hangs out at the bar and collects sobriety chips. Now, Jason Stratham would have actually been a good casting choice if they expanded the role of Elizabeth’s boyfriend beyond “asshole in the window with a whore.” Especially since they played off of Jude Law being English, they could have had a good English guy/bad English guy thing going on. But that’s just my opinion. Alas, I am not…

THE DIRECTOR: War Kar Wong or Kar Wair Wong or Wong Kar Wai…I’ve seen it in each order but I’m pretty sure it’s Wong Kar Wai or Wong Kar-Wai. Anyway, this is Wai’s first American film, having directed a number of Chinese films including 2046 which I haven’t actually watched, but is apparently very good and is now on my queue on Blockbuster. Besides the disjointed stories, which may be more the fault of the editor of the film, the directing in each story is quite amazing. The muted tones of the film, with barely any music—most of which is in the form of the location—worked well. Especially in the café, when the chatter, cooking, and clanking of dishes turn into its own kind of music. The one thing missing…I am a firm believer that if there is a character whose job is to cook, then we should see him/her cooking. Jeremy has, supposedly, one of the best café’s in New York and is one of the best cooks of the city. Let’s see him searing a steak or something. You can tell what kind of character they are by how they cook, how they move, and that’s the one thing missing from Jude Law’s performance, but more of a directorial choice in the end. Unless Jude Law couldn’t pull it off, in which case, retract all the nice things I said about that talentless hack.

So, watch it for the performances. Watch it for the nice little vignettes. Watch it to lust over one or all of the beautiful actresses (I like Rachel Weisz, but my star fantasies usually end up with Natalie Portman…or Scarlett Johansson…or both). It was a good film, worthy of any avid filmgoer, but to a general audience, it would probably suck. Sorry to say it, but it’s true. The Fool’s Gold and How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days lovers probably wouldn’t like this film (speaking of those films, Kate Hudson’s pretty hot too).

I'd like to briefly recommend a movie to you, this being the weekend, and a popular pastime being to watch a movie on Friday or Saturday night. Instead of wasting brain cells watching another brainless comedy from Will Ferrell's cloning machine, I suggest "Good Night, and Good Luck." It's about newsman Edward Murrow's fight against the injustices of McCarthyism in the fifties. My wife and I watched this last night, I for the second time and she for the first. The movie is shot in stark black-and-white that gives it an utterly realistic feel, with actual CBS broadcast footage from the time seamlessly intercut to give the viewer a sense of being there. The grayscale also serves to highlight the contrast between the calm, serious network news of then and now--today's news shows barely have time for the talking heads to scream at each other between flying, acrobatic graphics and thundering sound effects. The film is a great, compelling production and Murrow is perfectly executed by David Strathairn.

There are a few good themes running throughout that are worth your consideration. How we wield the instrument of the television. What TV has done to us. How the television news corps has changed since its inception. The responsibility of the press in general. Fighting against mass-hysteria fear-driven witch hunts and convicting those accused of nebulous charges with no evidence and no trial. Truth versus hyperbole. Truth versus fear. The consequences of a fear state. And on and on.

"To those who say people wouldn't look; they wouldn't be interested; they're too complacent, indifferent and insulated, I can only reply: There is, in one reporter's opinion, considerable evidence against that contention. But even if they are right, what have they got to lose? Because if they are right, and this instrument is good for nothing but to entertain, amuse and insulate, then the tube is flickering now and we will soon see that the whole struggle is lost. This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box. Good night, and good luck." - Edward Murrow

Oh, this is even more petty, but you guys just don't do introductory videos like the Dems do.  Thank you, Ken Burns, for that magic you work.

Freddie Highmore, David Strathairn, Nick Nolte

This is a child-movie so I am not the best person to form an opinion for it since I am not a kid anymore.

A family which includes a mother, twin brothers and a sister move to house in the country. One of the boys discovers a book that reveals that there is more to this world than we know, like fairies, goblins and other mythical creatures. The book contains knowledge of this world that if it falls in the hands of the evil Mulgarath (Nick Nolte) it will grant him great power and will make him even more powerful. He discovers that the book is still in the house and tries to get it.

Nick Nolte has a 3 minute physical presence, but like always he is a great actor no matter what he does. Freddie Highmore is still very young, but he has great potential as an actor if he chooses to continue acting when he grows up.

I have to admit that I had a great time watching this movie, but I also have to admit that I prefer movies with more intense violence and partially nudity than this. If you have kids probably they will love it.

Laurence Fishburne, Kurt Russell ou David Strathairn? Um destes actores está em negociações finais para integrar o elenco regular de CSI.

Saiba qual deles, já de seguida.

Será Laurence Fishburne, mundialmente conhecido pela sua participação na trilogia Matrix.

De acordo com o Hollywood Reporter, o actor está em negociações finais para interpretar o famoso papel do substituto de Grissom. Como sabem, William Petersen está de saída e para o seu lugar os produtores ambicionavam encontrar um nome sonante para dar continuidade à franquia e para co-protagonizar a série, ao lado de Marg Helgenberger.

Se as negociações correrem bem, Fishburne interpretará um professor universitário que ajuda Grissom (Peterson) a resolver um caso e posteriormente acaba por integrara a equipa. O twist - O professor terá em comum algumas qualidades genéticas comuns a serial killers. E sabe disso. Este conhecimento levará a personagem a embarcar numa jornada em busca de si próprio e do que ele é capaz de fazer.

Fonte: Hollywood Reporter

Direção: Mark Adam, David Gow

Roteiro: David Gow

Elenco: David Strathairn, Andrew W. Walker, Ivan Smith

É tão difícil ver um filme que retrate temas como neo-nazismo, movimento skinhead e violência sem cair no clichê e informações completamente equivocadas que "Botas de Aço" me surpreendeu. O filme trata da violência de um jovem membro de um grupo skin neo-nazi, mas faz isso de forma inteligente, mostrando o lado psicológico das coisas, sem cair no "achismo" e no costumeiro "pessoas sem cérebro". A idéia passa longe de justificar atos de violência ou ódio racial, mas sim de mostrar as razões pelas quais um jovem inteligente se envolve com movimentos extremistas e seu amor pela causa. A violência aqui é psicológica, tanto pelo lado do advogado judeu, quanto pelo jovem que quer ser julgado pelo crime que cometeu e não pelo grupo que pertence.

Danny Dunkleman (David Strathaim) é um advogado liberal que recebeu um caso difícil de ser defendido, a agressão de um jovem neo-nazista que resultou na morte de um imigrante indiano. Os primeiros encontros entre cliente e advogado são infrutíferos, já que Danny não esconde que não gosta do jovem e Mike (Andrew W. Walker) está convicto que suas motivações são justificáveis. Ao longo da trama, o envolvimento entre os dois vai aumentando e Danny encherga o potencial de Mike e tenta de todas as forma mudar a sua forma de pensar.

Uma das frases mais significativas está no início do filme, quando Mike diz a Danny que em um mundo ideal ele mandaria matá-lo, mas que no mundo real precisava mais dele do que de qualquer outra pessoa. A abordagem tensa do roteiro e as excelentes de David Strathaim e Andrew W. Walker, renderam a "Botas de Aço" três prêmios em diferentes festivais. Para quem quer uma abordagem inteligente de um assunto muito controverso, "Botas de Aço" é ideal.

My Blueberry Nights (2007)

"How do you say goodbye to someone you can't imagine living without?"

Ki a rendező: Wong Kar-Wai, aki jó úton jár afelé, hogy egyik kedvenc rendezőmmé avanzsáljon. A shanghai születésű direktor soha a büdös életben nem járt semmiféle filmművészeti egyetemre, viszont rendezett rengeteg játékfilmet és jópár videoklipet illetve reklámfilmet (ez  utóbbi kettő részben megmagyarázza erősen vizuális látásmódját). Stilizált, már-már expresszionista kifejezésmódja mellett rendezői védjegyei közé tartozik, hogy filmjei gyakran épülnek improvizációra, ebből kifolyólag soha nem dolgozik fix forgatókönyvvel. Ez aztán karrierje során többször is különböző problémák forrása lett (pl. 2002-ben a Szerelemre hangolva forgatásakor át kellett helyezni a forgatási helyszínt Pekingből Makaóba, mivel a kínai cenzorok látni akarták a kész forgatókönyvet - ilyen azonban nem létezett). A fesztiváldíjak hadát nyerő Kar-Wai olyan elismert filmek rendezője mint a Vadítóan szép napok, a Csungking expressz, az Édes2kettes, a Szerelemre hangolva (kötelező!), a 2046 vagy az Eros.

Ki játszik benne: Kiemelkedően jó szereplőgárdát sikerült összegerebélyzni ehhez a produkcióhoz. Először is itt van ugye a kiváló Jude Law, aki egyszerűen nem tud hibázni (Hideghegy, A tehetséges Mr. Ripley, Közelebb - csak hogy a legkézenfekvőbbeket említsem). Natalie Portman, aki már ősidők óta egyik kedvenc színésznőm, nem tehetek róla, egyszerűen imádom a csajt! Aztán feltűnik még a magyar származású Rachel Weisz illetve a legutóbb a Bourne Ultimatum-ban szemétkedő David Strathairn is. Az igazi kakukktojás azonban a fátyolos hangú Norah Jones, aki civilben énekesnő, és ez az első film(fő)szerepe.

Mi a sztori: Nos maga a direktor meghatározása szerint a My Blueberry Nights "egy olyan lány története, aki inkább a hosszabb utat választja a rövidebb helyett, hogy aztán végül találkozhasson azzal a férfivel, akit igazán szeret."

Értékelés: Második filmélményem ez Mr. Kar-Wai-tól, és bizony azt kell mondjam, alaposabban be fogom vizsgálni a pasas filmográfiáját, ugyanis nagyon bejön nekem ez a különös hangulatú romantikus melankólia, melankólikus romantika vagy hogyan is nevezzem ezt a fajta stílust (és akkor a Csungking expresszt még nem is láttam, pedig sokak szerint az a mester főműve).

A My Blueberry Nights Kar-Wai első angol nyelvű filmje, méghozzá nem is akármilyen szereposztásban. Mikor annak idején kijött a trailer, már akkor tudtam, hogy ezt a filmet látnom kell. Na meg persze ilyen cast-tal vétek is lett volna kihagyni: Jude Law, Natalie Portman (mindketten a Közelebb óta játszanak együtt újra, ez utóbbi egyébként szintén kötelező darab!), David Strathairn (akit igen furcsa volt újra látni a Bourne Ultimatum főmocsokja után, elég nehezen is szoktam meg az alkoholista fejét - nem tudom miért, de pont azon járt az agyam, hogy talán Tommy Lee Jones-hoz jobban passzolt volna ez a figura), Rachel Weisz (rosszmájúan mondhatnám, hogy Mrs. Aronofsky, de nem mondom, mert Rachelt szeretjük, különösen a konstans kertész [hogy mi?] óta). Na és persze itt van adu ászként Miss Jones, az elismert és népszerű énekesnő (a szitárgéniusz Ravi Shankar lánya). Olvastam valahol, hogy Kar-Wai belezúgott a hangjába, és eleve neki írta a szerepet, így került a csaj a filmbe; meg aztán ha már ott volt, akkor fel is énekelt egy vadiúj tracket az OST-hez. Úgy ám.

Le a kalappal Jones előtt: fene se gondolta volna, hogy ennyire elviselhető lesz a vásznon (nem csak esztétikailag értem, hanem színészi kvalitások szempontjából is). Már csak azért is, mert a felkapott énekesnők filmes kiruccanásai általában nem szoktak túl jól sikerülni: még most is nevetek, ha eszembe jutnak Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton vagy Avril Lavigne színésznői próbálkozásai. Ezzel szemben Jones egyáltalán nem volt idegesítő; oké, nyilván olyan hű de nagyot sem alakított, de én elégedett voltam vele, és nem igaz, hogy ez a film pont rajta csúszott volna el (mint ahogy több neves kritikus is állítja).

A My Blueberry Nights tökéletesen egyedi stílusú szerzői film. Technikailag brilliáns, méghozzá három szempontból: rendezés, operatőri munka és vágás. Nézzük őket szépen sorjában.

Először is nagyon bejött nekem ez a videoklipszerű megoldásokkal operáló rendezői stílus: sok-sok kilassítás, agyonszűrőzött képek (jó értelemben véve), élénk és kontrasztos színek, gyönyörűen megkomponált felvételek  - ennyire intenzív és tudatos színhasználatot utoljára talán a Suspiriában láttam. Azért azt gyorsan kiemelném, hogy ezeket a kilassításokat nem úgy kell ám elképzelni mint a Michael Bay filmekre jellemző műmájer heroizmust, amikor harci helikopterek bukkannak elő a lemenő nap aranyló fényéből, hogy aztán lágyan tovasuhanjanak a horizonton; vagy hogy egy másik konkrét példával éljek, mikor a Shooter-ben Mark Wahlberg ultracool napszemüvegben kilassítva úszik feléd a vásznon. Nos, nem, ez nem ilyen volt: talán úgy tudnám legjobban leírni, hogy egyfajta szakaszos, töredezett slow-motion technikát használtak, mely úgy néz ki, mintha tizedmásodpercenként kivágtak volna egy-egy képkockát a filmszalagből. Nem éppen megnyugtató érzetet kelt, Kar-Wai talán a karakterek zaklatott lelkiállapotát prábálta ezzel a technikával felerősíteni. Hozzátenném, sikeresen: az elején zavart is rendesen, azt hittem, a lejátszó krepált be. :)

Az operatőr Darius Khondji-t (Delicatessen, Elveszett gyerekek városa, Hetedik, Evita, Pánikszoba, A part), azt hiszem nem kell különösebben bemutatni. Az iráni származású DOP messze a világ egyik legjobb operatőre (nálam egy listán említendő Roger Deakinsszel, Matthew Libatique-kel, Janusz Kaminski-vel, Caleb Deschanel-lel, Conrad L. Hall-al vagy Emmanuel Lubezki-vel). Statikus közelik (azt a jelenetet, amikor a kamera Jones kisasszony álomban szendergő arcát pásztázza, miközben az áfonyás pitétől maszatos ajkára fókuszál, azt egyszerűen tanítani kéne), profi totálok (lenyűgözően szép tájképek, elvégre részben road movie-ról van szó), szokatlan beállítások és kameraszögek (többször is visszatérő motívum volt, amikor a Jude Law karaktere által használt biztonsági kamera képein keresztül követtük az eseményeket).

A vágást az a William Chang végezte, aki nem mellesleg Kar-Wai állandó munkatársa, és egyben a direktor számtalan filmjének vizuális megjelenítéséért felelt. Tökéletesen együttműködik a Kar-Wai és Khondji által diktált koncepcióval, jórészt neki köszönhetőek a fentebb említett látványos videoklipes megoldások is.

Sajnos a forgatókönyvvel nem voltam teljesen kibékülve: a sztorit helyenként zavarosnak éreztem, pár jelenetet nem tudtam logikaliag hova helyezni (pl. a cameozó Cat Power hogy a fenébe került abba a bizonyos jelenetbe?). Rachel Weisz karaktere eléggé idegesített a maga kirohanásaival - nem tudom, lehet ez tudatos döntés volt, de én nem láttam többet benne egy szterotíp buta libánál.

A film hajlamos elég rendesen belassulni (még számomra is, pedig én anno nemcsak hogy végigbírtam ülni az Őrület határán-t, de még tetszett is :) ). Ráadásul végig olyan érzésem volt, hogy nem is igazán a történeten van a hangsúly, hanem inkább a hangulaton (olyannyira álomszerű az egész). Oké, ez utóbbi nem zavart túlzottan (jópár évig David Lynchen edződtem), de ha Ti nem bírjátok az ilyen filmeket, akkor inkább kerüljétek el!

A soundtrack úgy klasszik, ahogy van (ez így volt a Szerelemre hangolva esetében is) - úgy látszik, Kar-Wai nagyon ért a történeteihez kiválóan passzoló zenék kiválasztásához. Van itt Ry Cooder, némi Otis Redding, Neil Young féle Harvest Moon egészen korrekt feldolgozása, illetve a zseniális Cat Power (az előzetesben hallható The Greatest már azelőtt megfogott, mielőtt láttam volna a filmet). Na meg persze Norah Jones is közreműködik egy új dallal a főcímnél.

Wong Kar-Wai amerikai bemutatkozása egészen jól sikerült: ugyan nem ez lesz a hongkongi direktor életművének csúcspontja, azonban a tőle elvárható minőségi szintet simán teljesítette. Viszont fontos megjegyezni, hogy ettől függetlenül a My Blueberry Nights továbbra is rétegfilm marad, és moziban történő megtekintését inkább csak azoknak javaslom, akik már jól ismerik és kedvelik a rendező stílusát illetve fogékonyak a poszt elején említett lassabb, melankolikus hangulatra. Akiknek nem mond semmit a direktor neve, azok inkább DVD-n próbálkozzanak be ezen darabbal. 7.5/10

"My Blueberry Nights" premiered at Cannes in 2007 as a nominee of the prestigious Palme d'Or award. In competition with films like "Persepolis," "No Country for Old Men," and "Zodiac," the movie lost to "4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days." Amidst all these wonderful films, Wong's new work managed to get mixed reviews. I don't know how it managed to get positive quotes from critics.

Many of Wong's films have been praised by critics, especially "Chungking Express," but I've only managed to watch "In the Mood for Love," and an artist who is capable of making a movie as patient and beautiful as "In the Mood for Love" has no excuse for making a movie as lazy--and, dare I say, pointless?--as "My Blueberry Nights."

Elizabeth (Norah Jones) is gullible and naive. She leaves her cheating boyfriend and retreats into a local New York cafe run by the handsome and charming Jeremy (Jude Law). They talk, they eat pie, and they make off-the-cuff chatter sound like foreshadowing dialogue.

Later, she takes back her boyfriend, finds out he's cheating again, and leaves the city for Memphis in order to start fresh. At this point, Wong seems to be interested in making a pastiche of the American landscape, but he populates the story with stereotypes. Arnie (David Strathairn) is the self-destructive town drunk who is capable of so much more. He's obsessed with his separated wife, Sue Lynne (Rachel Weisz), and he thinks they are still married. Sue Lynne has an accent, sports a bob, and goes out with different guys, perfectly fitting the stereotype of the town hussy. And when Elizabeth gets tired of this pathetic landscape, she goes to Las Vegas with Leslie (Natalie Portman), a gambling loser who can "read" people but still can't decide whether to fold or go all in. And don't we all know that's so, like, metaphorical?

To top it off, like a dollop of fatty whipped cream on top an already-sugary piece of blueberry pie, Wong injects sentiment into the story at will. Of course, each segment of the movie should have meaning, but if it comes organically from the story, it works. The story, however, forces characters to say specific dialogue and perform certain actions to make the movie's point, which Elizabeth spells out in the all-to-easy voice-over technique at the end of the film.

"My Blueberry Nights," essentially, is all tell and no show. This main problem is captured in one wonderful image near the end of the movie: Elizabeth remembers passing by the cafe, opening the door slightly, thinking, then letting the door close. Instead of letting us infer the shot is a flashback--we see her in the cafe already, so we know it's not an action she's currently doing--and what it means in relation to the story, she explains it in abstract terms to Jeremy and, in effect, to us, too.

Hopefully, Wong will take a note from Palme d'Or winner "4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days" by letting images speak for themselves instead of spelling out everything for the audience. Surely he knows this already: the silent moments of "In the Mood for Love" are what make it so beautiful, working as an emotional coloring book for the audience and letting us shade in what we see fit for the scene as Maestro Wong gives us a hint what we should be thinking about.

Rating: *1/2 out of ****

In an incandescent performance Gretchen Mol (The Shape of Things) stars as Bettie Page who grew up in a conservative religious family in Tennessee and became a photo model sensation in 1950s New York. Bettie's legendary pin-up photos made her the target of a Senate investigation into pornography and transformed her into an erotic icon who continues to enthrall fans to this day. Complemented by an ensemble cast of acclaimed actors such as David Strathairn (Good Night and Good Luck) and Lili Taylor (High Fidelity) the film brings to vivid life Bettie?s fascinating world.Running Time: 90 min.Format: DVD MOVIE Genre: DOCUMENTARIES/MISC. UPC: 026359329524 Manufacturer No: 93295

The cult pin-up idol Bettie Page gets the full-fledged biopic treatment in The Notorious Bettie Page, a movie that somehow seems as tame and innocent as the naughty photographs Bettie made in the 1950s. After a few scenes of Bettie growing up, the film quickly leads us to her more-or-less glory years, when she posed for countless peekaboo photos and some nudie films. These would make her an underground star for decades--long after she gave up modeling for religion, in fact. Gretchen Mol, a premature starlet in a redemptive role, does nicely at suggesting Bettie's too-trusting nature, maintaining her equipoise in a sleazy world. Her nude scenes are as liberated and no-sweat as those old nudist films always wanted people to believe. Director Mary Harron plays most of the film in the black-and-white that Bettie thrived in, which seems fitting enough (although the Kodachrome-bright color interludes are welcome). There's an air of "Ed Wood" about the project, and Harron maintains a similarly jovial tone, but the film does have a tendency to fall into the and-then-this-happened metronome rhythm of film biography. Even a promising venture into the Senate hearings on pornography is a minor joke. Jared Harris and Lili Taylor, veterans of Harron's "I Shot Andy Warhol," play colorful characters out of the grindhouse world, but few supporting players get a chance to make an impression. The main draw is Mol's commitment to the role and the film's goofy re-creation of a most peculiar subculture at an unlikely time. --Robert Horton

The Notorious Bettie Page is available at Amazon for $27.98. To Order click here
Amazon Product Pages contain a lot of other details on this product as Customer Reviews, Sales Ranking, Special Offers, Alternate products that customers are going for and much more.Want to read these details? click here

Want to get some other Format / Binding / Version? You can search for them from here

Other Products of Interest

• Gwendoline - Unrated Director's Cut (aka - The Perils of Gwendoline in the Land of the Yik Yak)
• The Bettie Page Collection
• Bettie Page: Varietease/Teaserama
• Sherrybaby
• The Black Dahlia (Widescreen Edition)

Runtime: 97 Minutes - Country: USA

This family film focuses on the Grace-family and their fantastic experiences due to a house moving. The twin brothers Jared and Simon (a double-role by Freddie Highmore) and their sister Mallory (Sarah Bolger) are moving into the Spiderwick Estate according to their mother Helen (Mary-Louise Parker) - who has been separated from her husband. One day Jared finds a mysterious book in a secret room that originally was the working room of Arthur Spiderwick (David Strathairn). There is a little note with a big warning on it... but Jared decides to open and read it.

It seems like this was a big mistake... since a horde of fantastical evil creatures are now brought to life again. They are leaded by the evil Mulgarath, who desperately wants to get hold of the book - to gain more and more power over all mystical but also human creatures. Meanwhile there is a serious family conflict going on... Jared is the only one who can see the upcoming danger; he is trying to convince his family members - but they are rather ascribing this to his general frustration and the resulting power of imagination... please note that this film is based on a book series by Tony DiTerlizzi and Holly Black. To state it in advance; I have not came to read the books yet - so I will review this one totally unprejudiced...

Jared is encountering the secrets of the mysterious book

Ok - this one is officially labled as a fair family film, totally suitable to a younger audience also - beware, it is rather gritty, and has some very brutal scenes also. Do not get me wrong, I am not too sensitive - but when I imagine that children around 5 or 6 years of age are watching this film - I am sceptical, most certainly. Especially the scenes in which the evil monster are killed by Jared and his family - are appealing rather brutal - since here we have stabbing, cauterization, chopped fingers... and so on. I guess that is nothing suitable for a younger children's audience, even though it are "only" monsters that come to harm. And these "monsters" are looking and behaving very scary, too.

Of course, the main storyline can be ascribed to the overall fantasy genre - it is all about a mysterious book, that has a certain fantastical meaning. Since there are two sides which want to get a hold of it - the good ones that are trying to conceal it, and the bad ones that are trying to use it for their own purposes. Unfortunately, this isn't anything new ! Still, this film manages to deliver a totally unique mood. And this is mainly ascribable to the good actors: especially Freddie Highmore in his dual role can convince; such as the other family members which are portrayed by very talented actors also. I think the audience would get a good feeling for this familiar constellation, since it seems to be very authentic.

But, and to state it: I had my problems with this film. If we look at it, we can see see that it actually consists of two big parts: the whole mystery behind the mansion and the book; and the familiar problems and conflicts - I think that this mixture does not really work out. Since it is just like this: when the familiar problems are reaching their climax, there are the monsters appearing... conclusional, the whole differentiation between a normal world and a more fantastical one turns out out to be rather annoying and a little compelled in this case...

Click to get to Amazon.com...

Speaking of the general technical part - it is just outstanding. The creatures are well and lovely animated, single scenes like the ride on the gryphon or the final fight between Jared and Mulgarath are just terrific and amazingly realized - although I do not really like this exaggerated occurence of CGI-effects. The soundtrack has been composed by James Horner - a great choice, if you would ask me; especially towards the ending it releases its full power and variety.

Finally: I think that this film is way too short. Although I have not read the books, it is obvious that they could have made more out of this source material. Pressing all this topics into a 90 minutes format - I think that was the wrong choice here. Furthermore, and because of this: it is lacking of this certain magical feeling that not many similar productions are able to deliver. As soon as the overall storyline is introduced rashly, the film ends - this could not be better described by the death of the overall evil mastermind Mulgarath; who dies in a rather hilarious way - see this for yourself. And this is a feeling that I had troughout the whole film: all what has been pronounced loudly is relativized within a split second. Another rare occasion: the lovely made outro works even better than the whole film itself ! My final rating: 5.4 out of 10 points - a thrilling and entertaining choice for (older!) kids. But do not expect anything special here.

The DVD at Amazon.com - The Trailer

He also, quite simply, wrote one of the best American books of the 20th century.

Eight Men Out I had heard about long before I read it, and that was due to another striking work -- John Sayles's movie of the same name, released in 1988. While I did not see it upon initial release, as time passed and Sayles's considerable reputation grew further I had a chance to tape it off cable sometime in the mid to late nineties during a nighttime broadcast. (Pre-TiVo days, gotta love 'em.) Somewhere around this time, I believe, I acquired a paperback reprint of the book issued to tie in with the film's original release, which I still have to this day -- I'm looking at my copy as I type -- and which has a then-new introduction by Stephen Jay Gould, the kind of delightful detail that makes me smile. Why shouldn't it be Stephen Jay Gould? Why should George Will have all the fun? (I somehow think Will wouldn't have had an introduction to a book like this citing, among others, Jacques Barzun.)

Just flipping through the book now makes me smile -- not in a mocking way against the story, but simply to see the work of an excellent writer at the top of his game. Asinof's own introduction to the original story -- which, as the obituary linked above indicates, grew out of a planned documentary for TV in the early sixties that was squashed by pressure from the sport's then commissioner Ford Frick -- deftly spells out the many factors that made researching and reporting on the 1919 Black Sox scandal so hard to do, even four decades and more on from its occurence, giving a reader a sense of the pressures of the researcher, the troubles of the interviewer, the concerns of the writer, all of which Asinof was. Wisely, there's only a slight romanticization of the sport itself which appears, at the very end of the introduction, which sums up baseball's particular position in the American consciousness without overdoing it, as Asinof notes the help of a writer to focus the story on the core eight men charged:

Why did they do it? What were the pressures of the baseball world, of America in 1919 itself, that would turn decent, normal, talented men to engage in such a betrayal?

Let me stop here briefly to say something personal -- I am not a baseball fanatic by any stretch of the imagination. But its place in my upbringing was that of many kids, I think, who knew it and inculcated it as 'the' sport, or one of the core ones -- football easily being the other -- that was seen as a normal baseline of activity. Of *course* there's baseball! It's out there and people play it. I've only attended two major league games in my life, and both were appropriately when I was young and carefree and etc. etc. The second was in Candlestick Park when I lived in the Bay Area at the end of the seventies and in the early eighties -- I forget who the Giants were playing, but I had a good time and my dad did too. The first is more memorable -- the Padres, the team who I still have an affection for above all else (if I have a baseball hero, easy -- Tony Gwynn, and the fact that he didn't get the World Series victory he deserved in 1984 is why I was quite happy to see the Detroit Tigers NOT win the Series the other year, thanks). This would have been around 1978 or so at Jack Murphy Stadium -- Qualcomm, bah, useless name -- and their opponents were the Reds, which meant that, yes, I got to see Pete Rose play. Had a couple of hits and maybe even a home run but the Pads won the day and I was a happy camper.

But arguably the fact that I saw Rose at my first game meant that I got a small, very small taste of the whole mixture of professional sport as it functions right then and there -- I wasn't aware of all of it, who would have been in my position, but everything from gambling to celebrity to the ideal of sport and more, all right there on the field, itself a wonderfully alien thing (a lush green lawn in a semi-desert coastal location near Mexico!) that symbolized something greater than itself. That romanticization of baseball that I mentioned is potent and is used and abused and always has been, it seems. That Eight Men Out was made into a film during a decade when The Natural was filmed and given a happy ending, and perhaps more appropriately when W. P. Kinsella wrote Shoeless Joe -- the novel that later was turned into Field of Dreams, and which Gould mentions briefly along with a reference to the Black Sox in The Godfather, Part II in his introduction -- that Asinof's book was made into a movie in this decade and context seems only right, a fusion of the light and the dark that aims to portray the dark in clear, pitiless light. If that decade's Bull Durham aimed to leaven the mythology with attractively scruffy comedy, the laughter in Eight Men Out is of the bitterest kind.

Asinof himself ties into a larger literary tradition of America seen with this ambivalent eye with his choice of epigraph at the start of the book -- a selection from The Great Gatsby that similarly references the Black Sox scandal, Gatsby pointing out the man who 'fixed' it -- and in creating his story that notes a baseline as it does -- the 'decent' men involved, the very fact that baseball held and still holds this particular place -- proceeded not to undermine it, but to force its contradictions to the fore. Asinof doesn't use the Black Sox scandal to condemn the sport; rather he uses it to study the people and the time, and to show, above all else, that it wasn't a perfect world and never was. A cliched thing to say, maybe, but the importance lies here:

There's a reason why John Sayles found the book of interest and filmed it -- and there's also a reason why Studs Terkel took a part in it as a newspaperman, acting opposite Sayles himself in a sharp performance as Ring Lardner, whose son would find himself blacklisted much like Asinof was. Such people look or looked at America through eyes that were open to wider realities more than myths, and found those realities of equal importance to document as the myths, if not more so. In Sayles's case this has mostly been within the realm of fiction-on-film, but his choice of Asinof's book is almost parallel to, say, Mike Leigh's lovely take on the story of Gilbert and Sullivan, Topsy-Turvy -- both are films from directors most commonly associated with stories of 'real' or marginalized figures, in a broad sense, and who in taking on nonfiction stories seek to apply this 'realness' to something that in fact actually happened, and to do so in order to evoke a time but in a far more inclusive, aware way than a simple pasteboard drama would do.

Thus, to turn back again to Asinof's book, the way that he follows up a brief opening chapter capturing the drama and interest of the World Series in 1919 as it began with these lines is crucial:

Exactly three weeks before the World Series was to begin, a tall, beefy, red-faced man in a white suit and bright bow tie stepped out of a taxi and walked into Boston's Hotel Buckminster. His name was Joseph "Sport" Sullivan. His occupation: bookmaker and gambler.

It's a bald opening on the face of it, but that's the appeal -- it almost reads like fiction in a stylistically straightforward way, dramatic, and self-consciously aimed that way too. It attracts the reader -- what will Sullivan be doing next? What does he gamble on, if the nickname doesn't give it away? Why Boston? -- and puts the gambling front and center after that brief bit of seemingly carefree excitement and romance.

To speak more of this book in some respects is to cheat you of a good experience -- take it as read that I recommend it unhesitatingly, and that what comes at the end of it isn't a sense that the eight men in question were demons through and through, but sinned against and sinning. The figure of Charles Comiskey in particular is seen raked over the coals -- a grasping skinflint who treated his players basely and crudely, setting the stage for the betrayal, and whose paying for their attorneys in the court case was essentially too little, too late -- and Kenesaw Mountain Landis's appointment as commissioner, followed by his banning of the players from the professional game despite a jury's exoneration, becomes not a cleaning of the house but a cruel trick by established forces. That the players did something inexcusable Asinof never contests, but he renders their decisions explicable and understandable -- and that is what above all else must have upset Frick when he halted the original documentary, that Asinof made sure they were not simply stock figures for an establishment to tut-tut at.

Asinof, as he does throughout, sums it up with calm, understated passion:

So, in the end, organized baseball won its battle. They had rescued the ballplayers form the clutches of the law, only to make victims of them on their own terms. Baseball, the club owners could boast, had cleaned its own house. "Regardless of the verdict of juries...," Judge Landis repeated for America to take note. It was a pronouncement that sent the status of the Commissioner of Baseball skyrocketing. Landis was hailed as a hero, a savior, a mighty power for the forces of honesty and clean sport. To Comiskey and the other owners, his effectiveness was not to be denied. If the public would respect the integrity of Kenesaw Mountain Landis and the dignity of his Commission, he was worth every penny of the $42,500 they were paying him.

So desperate had been their fears, it was even worth the risk of having created a potential threat to their own domination!

Asinof's critique -- of hierarchy, of money and power, of the use and abuse of the law, of the acceptance of double standards depending on what side of the financial scale one is on, of much more besides -- is throughout. Sometimes implied, sometimes forceful -- a battle always fought, with few victories (the pages just before the end describing Shoeless Joe Jackson's attempts, with an excellent lawyer in his corner, to get back pay out of Comiskey, succeeding with a jury and then immediately being foiled by a judge professing moral outrage, are a mini-masterpiece of bitter farce) -- it's no wonder that an observing eye and mind like Sayles's would want to make a film out of it, that a similar eye and mind like Terkel's would agree to be part of it.

The film is exquisite, a period piece -- again, like Leigh and Topsy-Turvy -- that evokes nostalgic sweetness and harsh realities. It summarizes and telescopes by necessity, it plays up parts and sequences to dramatic effect -- Comiskey's 'bonus' for the team's 1917 pennant victory being only a case of champagne, Lardner's drunken singing of "I'm forever blowing ballgames..." to a crowded train car that the White Sox are riding on -- but even so it does the job very well. The late summer sunset glow on the playing field, the touches like the Irish tenor singing the national anthem, all these romantic moments are present, underscoring the bitter choices made by people under pressures too great to bear, and combined with a fine script, Sayles's directorial eye and a great ensemble cast -- it's easily one of John Cusack's best performances, and is definitely Charlie Sheen's -- the result is and remains golden.

Perhaps my favorite moment in the film is David Strathairn as Eddie Cicotte, giving his softly crushed admission -- taken from the book, though I think set at a slightly different point in the movie timeline though not much differently -- sitting in a chair, his choices and complicity and hopes all bound up and about to be fully forced into the open, and saying, simply but with the resigned anguish of someone for whom there is no wait out: "Yeah...we were crooked...we were crooked." Strathairn's careful pauses, whether his choice or Sayles's, are spot-on perfect, and say it all.

Asinof had a brief cameo in the film, which must have tickled him a bit, another example of having a bit of the last laugh -- his documentary was long dead, but the movie would immortalize the story all the more clearly. But perhaps the greatest sense of a last laugh, of seeing things through to a better time, can be seen in the reason for his blacklisting, noted at the start. To quote the obituary:

During the McCarthy era, Asinof was blacklisted and had to resort to writing under the names of other writers, his son said. Years later, after he obtained his FBI file, he told his son that he had been targeted because he once signed a petition outside Yankee Stadium saying that black ballplayer Jackie Robinson should be allowed to play in the major leagues.

Perhaps it was only to be expected that somebody who clearly saw certain hypocrisies at work would be trapped by another. He doubtless looked at the current ones in the sport with a sense of history repeating, in different guises, and tied them in again to larger observations of the society as it functioned. But he saw some things get better, at least. And some progress is better than none at all.

Rest in peace, and thank you.

Wow, we're heading into new territory. Exciting, no? This is our first Fictional Journalist of the Day that is based on an actual journalist! There will be more to come. Also, if we have to tell you who this is and who it's supposed to be, you should be ashamed of yourself.

We'll tell you anyway, after the jump of course. Now for the links!

- This has to be a joke. There's no way this is their official blog. Are you kidding me? (America Airlines on friggin blogspot)

- More bloggers on blogger burnout. At what point do we start comparing bloggers to addicted gamers? (Boston Herald)

- Douchie financial "humor" blogger takes a stab at snarking journalists/Washington Post. Comments indicate results were less than desirable. Aside: what the hell happened to Dealbreaker? Did they jump the shark while we weren't paying attention? (Dealbreaker)

- This was supposed to go on yesterday's job posts, but here you go. Ever wanted to intern for free, from your own home? The Big Lead, a five-tool sports blog, may have something for you. (The Big Lead)

- Schadenfreude! Former Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez is having trouble finding a job. We sure didn't see that coming. It would probably help if he could actually recall what he did at his last gig. (NY Times)

- Hopefully, we'll be getting to these soon. (Britannica Blog)

Alright, now that that's out of the way, let's move on to David Strathairn's portrayal of Edward R. Murrow in Good Night, Good Luck.

It was no small task undertaking the role of the embodiment of all that is pure and right with journalism, but Strathairn did a fair job.

To be frank -- and we understand this is perhaps blasphemous to some of you -- but we felt the movie was a bit overrated. It relied to heavily on stock footage and pre-written scripts from old Murrow broadcasts.

In addition, the Murrow in this movie was stuck on one gear, almost robotic in his determination to take down McCarthy. Then again, perhaps that stone cold resolve was exactly what was needed to accomplish such a goal. We just feel it would've been nice to see Murrow with his guard down a few times, but five packs of lung darts a day will do that to a man.

In any case, Strathairn's Murrow, though seemingly somewhat one-dimensional to us, still carried himself with such an air of bravado and purpose, that it makes one proud to follow in his legacy.

That's why he's our FJOTD for today. Good night, and good luck. Retraction: the day just started, so um... Good Morning!

geovisit();

Assisti Um Beijo Roubado meio que por acaso. Era o único filme que estava passando naquele horário em que escolhi ir ao cinema com meu namorado. E com certeza não me arrependi dessa escolha não premeditada.

Nora Jones estréia nos cinemas no papel de Elizabeth, uma jovem mulher de coração partido que descobre que seu namorado foi com outra no charmoso café de Jeremy (Jude Law), localizado em Nova York.

Zangada com a traição, Elizabeth termina o namoro e deixa suas chaves com Jeremy, caso seu ex-namorado as queria de volta. Noite após noite, Elizabeth volta ao café para conversar com Jeremy, onde eles acabam ficando cada vez mais atraídos um pelo outro.

Decidida em sair da cidade para tentar se conhecer melhor, Elizabeth parte em uma viagem através dos EUA, onde acaba em Memphis, Tennessee, e começa a trabalhar em dois empregos, pois quer economizar para comprar um carro.

Sem revelar seu endereço, Elizabeth manda um cartão-postal para Jeremy, que fracassa ao tentar localizá-la de volta. Em Memphis, ela conhece o policial Arnie Copeland (David Strathairn) que se tornou alcoólatra pois não consegue abandonar sua ex-mulher Sue Lynne (Rachel Weisz) e testemunha o trágico fim dessa separação.

Após sair de Memphis, Elizabeth vai para Nevada e conhece Leslie (Natalie Portman), uma bela mulher viciada em jogar pôquer e com vários problemas com seu pai.

Após suas experiências pelos EUA, Elizabeth volta à Nova York e vai ao café de Jeremy, onde só assistindo o filme mesmo para saber o que vai acontecer! E Realmente vale a pena!

Um Beijo Roubado vem recebendo muitos elogios e já está em cartaz nos cinemas de São Paulo há mais de 2 meses. Dirigido pelo diretor Wong Kar-Wai (Amor a Flor da Pele), o orçamento de Um Beijo Roubado foi de US$ 10 milhões e foi o filme de abertura do Festival de Cannes 2007.

Além de Otis Redding, Cat Power e Nora Jones, a trilha sonora do filme ainda conta com Ry Cooder, compositor da trilha de Paris, Texas, e já está disponível aqui no CineLounge.

Elenco: Norah Jones, Jude Law, Rachel Weisz, Natalie Portman, David Strathairn, Cat Power, Frankie Faison
Duração: 111 minutos
Gênero: Romance / Drama
País: China / França
Ano: 2007
Diretor: Wong Kar Wai
Roterista: Wong Kar Wai e Lawrence Block

Para assistir o trailer do filme clique aqui

Confira também a trilha sonora de Um Beijo Roubado em AINDA MAIS TRILHAS

Voto: 8
Ciao, J   

With a cast of greats including; Robert Redford, Sidney Poitier, Dan Ackroyd, Ben Kingsley, David Strathairn and the late River Pheonix, Sneakers sees a group of genuinely fine performers revelling in an opportunity to have a little fun. Sometimes the enjoyment that must of come from making a film like this can be almost tangible on-screen, and there's not better example of that than here. 

The movie itself is a lighthearted thriller about computers and cryptography, government and espionage, secrets and deception and betrayal. Sounds complicated at first, but even as a child it was easy to follow and never does it take the unnecessary plunge into complexity some films dealing with similar subject matter have been guilty of.

Director Phil Alden Robinson (Field of Dreams) should also take his lions share of the lavish praise being handed out. Throughout the film the shot composition and lighting is beautiful without ever being flashy or distracting, the pace is perfect, almost Sunday afternoon-like in its gentle saunter and the Jazz saxophone soundtrack sets a perfect background to something that wasn't meant to be an enlightening, powerful or heart-rendering piece of entertainment - it was meant to be enjoyable, and it scores top marks in that department.

I can vividly recall renting Sneakers with my brother and friends as a child and watching it one rainy afternoon when we couldn't find our entertainment outdoors. 16 years later in drizzly, over-cast Bristol I'm just about to do the exact same thing again - the good things, you never grow out of.

Va, voy a decirlo: no me gusta Wong Kar-Wai. Tras esta terrible confesión que puede que haga que más un cinéfilo se arranque el pelo a mechones, voy a puntalizar un par de cosas.

De las dos películas que he visto del director hongkonés “In the mood for love” (2000) me dejó la extraña sensación de que me gustaba sin acabar de convencerme, aunque su impacto visual (acompañado de esa excelente BSO fundamentada en la maravillosa “Yumenji’s Theme”) era innegable. Luego llegó la (para mí) insufrible “2046” (2004) y aquí ya me di de baja de la lista de potenciales admiradores de Wong Kar-Wai. Curiosamente esta especie de manía no me ha impedido ver “My Blueberry Nights” (2007).

No sé si será porque esta película es más accesible o por el incontestable hecho de que es más occidentalizada que las anteriores, pero la he visto y no me ha desagradado en absoluto.

Los temas recurrentes y los rasgos estilísticos de Kar-Wai aparecen en “My Blueberry Nights” como en otras de sus producciones y así asistimos a una serie de historias que tienen como denominador común la pérdida-búsqueda del amor, las escenas en cámara lenta, la noche, las calles mojadas, la importancia básica de la música o ese abrumador dominio del color/oscuridad que nos deja en la retina imágenes impresionantes.

En esta ocasión la historia tiene como escenario a Nueva York en donde Elizabeth (o Lizzi) acaba de sufrir un revés amoroso y entabla amistad con Jeremy, el dueño de un pequeño bar especializado en postres de todo tipo. Huyendo del desamor, Lizzi emprende un viaje que le lleva primero a Memphis y después a Nevada. Tanto en uno como en otro lugar, trabajará como camarera y entrará en contacto con otras personas que, como ella, son tristes corazones rotos o corazones solitarios. Así como Jeremy conocía las historias que sus clientes han ido compartiendo con él, Lizzi experimentará lo que es estar tras una barra de bar y convertirse en la confesora improvisada de las penas de los demás y comprobará que Jeremy tenía razón y que algunas puertas que llevan al pasado nunca se cierran.

La película, siguiendo una clara estructura circular (Nueva York-Memphis-Nevada-Nueva York), tendrá a Lizzi (el sorprendente debut de la cantante Norah Jones) como hilo conductor a través del cual conoceremos a una serie de personajes que protagonizarán tres historias distintas, aunque con elementos comunes:

En la primera historia Lizzi y Jeremy (Jude Law) debaten sobre el desamor y sus consecuencias ahogando sus amargas penas en la dulzura de las tartas de arándanos y del helado.

En Memphis Lizzi conocerá a Arnie (un impresionante David Strathairn), un policía alcohólico al que su mujer (Rachel Weisz) ha abandonado.

Una ciudad de Nevada será el escenario donde Lizzi entablará una cierta amistad con Leslie (Natalie Portman), una ludópata sin suerte que intenta dar una imagen de chica dura que no se corresponde con la realidad.

De las tres historias antes mencionadas (salpicadas de transiciones que nos muestran imágenes distorsionadas, ralentizadas, hechizantes paisajes y nubes, muchas nubes), me quedaría con la segunda por su excelente construcción y por sus magníficas actuaciones que llegan a poner los pelos de punta.

Y todo esto aderezado por una sobresaliente BSO en la que Norah Jones interpreta algunas de las canciones (atención “The Story” que abre y cierra la película remarcando aún más la estructura circular antes comentada). Señalar, además, que uno de los temas que aparecen es una versión de “Yumenji’s Theme” que, como hemos citado anteriormente, era el tema estrella de “In the Mood for Love”.

Película muy sensorial que impacta sobre nuestros oídos, nuestra vista e, incluso, nuestro gusto y que me ha hecho creer que Kar-Wai no es tan peñazo como yo pensaba.

Trailer de la película

(ver ficha)

Briony