Bom yeoreum gaeul gyeoul geurigo bom [Spring, Summer, Autumn, Winter... & Spring] (2003)

RATING:	80%
FORMAT:	DVD

(Image: http://thecia.com.au/)

Good movie about the things we do in life coming back to haunt us and that actions always have consequences – no matter how slight.

With elegant and ascetic simplicity, this film gets to the nub of sin and redemption – particularly the temptations of the flesh for its own sake when one conflates infatuation with love.

(Image: http://canonmovies.blogspot.co.uk/)

Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Choristes [Chorus] (2004)

60%

Charming, if slight, movie about a school for the children of unwed mothers that receives an inspiring teacher who doesn't believe corporal punishment has any real value.

Really, this is a story about the value of Family and the bad things can happen when either you have none or they are rotten to the core. It asserts the value of pride and self discipline as the means to a healthy and wealthy adulthood without the sentiment tipping over into sentimentality so typical of the breed. The emotional hothouse that is a boys' boarding school is clearly shown through the sexual mindedness of the boys coupled with their essential homesickness in this home from home.

The boy actors are all as spontaneous and as unaffected as you would expect. While the underplaying adults are either bitter & resentful that they never became more successful – and take this out on the kids – while the rest make the best of things. The plea for self acceptance is palpable.

A half decent Sunday afternoon film, with enjoyable music, that will bring a tear to the eye that does not feel extracted by the usual Hollywood means of emotional cheating – aka melodrama.

Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Leopard (1963)

80%

Too long for its length this is a somewhat sprawling epic with many highpoints. Not least of which is Burt Lancaster's towering performance as the family patriarch who knows he must change to meet the new political reality while still clinging fervently to the past. One only wishes he had been in every scene.

The images though beautiful tend toward tableau vivant and one cannot help feeling that a little judicious cutting here and there would have improved matters.

The plus side of this movie is the delicious visual analogies to the ideas conveyed. The crumbling villa that represents the ancien régime as the young populates it and makes it something modern. The poor dress sense of the parvenu and nouveau riche middle-class businessman, who is richer than the aristocracy, so is welcomed as a potential father-in-law to save what remains of the various family fortunes through marriage.

Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Ladybird, Ladybird (1994)

80%

Ladybird, ladybird, fly away home,
Your house is on fire,
Your children shall burn!

The dependable director Ken LOACH has crafted yet another fine tale of those who can't seem to get a firm grip on their lives that are spiraling out of control through unresolved flaws in their personalities.

Kenneth LOACH presents poor people as people and not as stereotypes. Blacks are also presented positively which, for a white filmmaker, is unusual. This, indeed, is his main contribution to cinema: Visual naturalism coupled with psychological realism. Most drama is psychologically unrealistic because it is stereotypical rather than archetypal. Attempts are made to politically and culturally pigeonhole fictional characters to give vent to the political positions of the writers; while little is done to elucidate human nature, as such. In Loach's work, the tail never wags the dog: Characters conform to archetypes and not our neurotic needs.

This is a difficult film to take because it deliberately focuses on a woman who is clearly unfit to be a mother. Yet we are required to empathize with her in her struggles to come-to-terms with her own abusive children, yet protect her children from her liking for abusive males. That Loach should flatter his audience's intelligence with a task so challenging is to be commended, and his style is certainly ingratiating, but this one thoroughly earns its 18-certificate through its analysis of the conjunctive nature of domestic violence.

Not a simplified view of reality - and all the better for it. Social workers are shown as being as ineffective at finding solutions to problems as the people with the problems. A childish parasite who was abused as a child and looks for abuse as an adult.

As usual with Loach, the naturalistic acting is first-rate in seeming to not be not so much acting as overheard conversations.

Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Signs (2002)

60%

As usual with director Shyamalan, he eschews explicitness in favor of mental jolts and emotional depth. This allows us to engage with the drama in a more meaningful way, as we are filling in for what we do not see with our own imaginations. Moreover, his ostensible plot forms the basis for a disquisition on religious faith and family values.

Much like the Exorcist before it, signs places at the center of its action a Trinitarian priest who has apparently lost his faith because his wife has been killed in a road accident. In truth, he still believes in god and has merely changed his relation to Him for one of love to one of outright hate.

The film's subtlety is its greatest strength. The director's technique proves he has great confidence in his ideas and he is willing to do what few other filmmakers are. Long takes, not moving the camera, stars with their backs to the camera, for example. And yet he gets away with it because the strong emotional undercurrent to his movies draws you in even as you are required to do half the work. You are not being spoon-fed by a movie director who thinks his audience is essentially dumb. The effort required is oddly flattering to one's self esteem hence his popular success.

Yet despite all this, Shyamalan still has room for humor; thus proving that he does not take himself too seriously and is not held back by the constraints of an ego that does not know itself at all well

Where this film fails is Shyamalan generalized inability to make his execution the equal of his concepts in making them believably real and convincing. If aliens are harmed by water, why invade a planet that's 70% water? If aliens possess advanced technology, why do they have such difficulty entering a wooden house - albeit that it is boarded up?

However, Shyamalan would be a much better filmmaker if he could find convincing plots that suitably enhanced and allowed him to explore his ideas. These (apart from the Sixth Sense) are mired in a too abstract view of reality rather than being solidly grounded within it. Like Quentin Tarantino, Shyamalan does not seem to live in the same world the rest of us 'civilians' do and his work suffers more for it.

Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com/) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.

Lone Wolf (2004)

RATING:	80%
FORMAT:	Book

(http://www.amazon.co.uk)

Real Poetry About Life

At last, here is a book (& CD & DVD) of poetry for those who do not normally like poetry.

Most modern poets eschew and ignore most modern people, which is why most modern people ignore and eschew modern poetry. However, here is a poet who writes about life as it is lived – from personal experience – who easily connects with his audience.

Dennis is also funny which helps a great deal in drawing you into both his world and his work.

Despite his great wealth, Felix Dennis is both earthy and accessible.

---

Copyright © 2009 Frank TALKER. Permission granted to reproduce and distribute it in any format; provided that mention of the author’s Weblog (http://franktalker5.blogspot.com) is included: E-mail notification requested. All other rights reserved.