A classic, if there ever was one.
Tagline : Remember remember, the fifth of November.
"Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran, cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of fate. This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is a vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished. However, this valorous visitation of a bygone vexation stands vivified, and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition. The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose vis-à-vis an introduction, so let me simply add that it's my very good honour to meet you and you may call me V."
____________________________________
The entire cusp of a movie is in that one looooooong dialogue. To call it just a movie is an insult to an enduring classic. There are very few celluloid products that have had such an impact, and "V for Vendetta" stands gloriously as the one canvas upon which an entire industry will change. In an era of mindless action flicks, substandard comedies, disney's feel-good candyfloss releases, superhyped epic movies, sequels, and sequels of sequels, and other such mediocre offerings, suddenly there comes along a diamond in the rough, a movie that has raised the bar. Ladies & Gentlemen, Hollywood may have come of age. And the Wachowski Brothers have made their mark. "V" may have been directed by the newcomer McTeigue, but the Brothers' influence shines clearly through.
Seriously, "V for Vendetta" is one of the finest movies to be made till date. Sure, this will not be appreciated much by audiences who clap and whistle to a frail man beating up a horde of bad guys(read Rajinikanth), a perennial under-achiever(read Ajith Kumar) and not to mention, a supposed top "Actor" who makes his moolah by starring exclusively in remakes, and remakes of remakes(read Vijay), and many more such as these fine Gentlemen.
V for Vendetta has more powerful dialogues than any other movie in recent history, delivered flawlessly by an impeccable cast, none more so than Hugo Weaving. The actor who came to the fore as an almost invincible Agent Smith in the Matrix trilogy and as the wise and powerful Elrond in the Lord of the Rings Trilogy has played the role of a lifetime as "V". The Rest of the cast too have played their part to perfection - Natalie Portman, Stephen Rea, John Hurt to name a few. The Background score fits right into the feel of the story, not too obtrusive, just fittingly enhaces the impact of the story. It is not an action movie per se, but some of the sequences are an absolute delight to watch, especially the mind-blowing climax fight.
There are two scenes of particular interest, that will leave an impact on anyone who has the ability to appreciate them. One is the story of the woman Valerie, followed by the scene of Evey Hammond's "coming out" in the rain. V for Vendetta may not be a box office grosser in the league of Titanic, LOTR, Matrix etc, but is so much better than any of them. I did not reveal anything of the story, because I felt that it would take away something of the impact that the movie will leave on you after you watch it. All I would say is, whatever comments you may hear about this movie, good or bad, I suggest you watch it and then make your own comments.
Godspeed Ladies & Gentlemen, and good luck.
yours truly,
91
Tagline: The journey ends
A Brilliant Conclusion
Over the years, I've read Lord of the Rings four times. During the holiday season of 2003/4, I watched Return of the King four times. While I embraced ROTK as the third part of a dream come true, I was not totally happy, left wondering why so many things vital were missing. The 4-hour extended DVD version explains a lot.My biggest beef was on so much missing about Aragon, and I found most of them in the DVD. One of the vital elements in the Fellowship's strategy is to draw Sauron's eye away from Frodo, and here Aragon's role is crucial. The "last debate" in the movie is totally inadequate in explaining the suicidal march to the Black gate but the DVD makes it very clear, with the additional scene of Aragon revealing himself to Sauron through the Palantir. He is the bait that Sauron cannot resist.
Another important aspect is that Aragon comes into the city of Minas Tirith first and foremost as a HEALER, not as a king. The kingship comes afterwards. This is again brought out in the additional scenes in the DVD, although still missing a lot of details from the book.Still disappointing, even for the DVD, is that so little is given to the story of Eowyn and Faramir. The dialogue through which they come to accept each other could very well be the most beautiful in the entire book. The few shots in the DVD that trace the development of their relationship are far from adequate, although that's a least a slight improvement from the film version. Another disappointment is Aragon's arrival at the Pelennor Fields, which is hopelessly lame compared with the original treatment in the book: amidst the despair of the Rohan and Gondor soldiers in witnessing the approaching black ships, Aragon's standard suddenly unfurls at the main mast:
"There flowered a White Tree, and that was for Gondor; but seven stars were about it, and a high crown above it, the signs of Elendil that no lord had borne for years beyond count. And the stars flamed in the sunlight, for they were wrought of gems by Arwen daughter of Elrond; and the crown was bright in the morning, for it was wrought of mithril gold."
The treatment of Gandalf's confrontation of the Witch King in the DVD departs from the book, in which the two are locked in a face off, then Rohan's horns are heard and the Witch King swings around and leaves. What in heaven's name is in Peter Jackson's mind when he had Gandalf's staff broken by the Witch King. But this did explain a mystery that has been bugging me for a year – why Gandalf had to snatch a spear from the guard when he saved Faramir from the pyre of Denethor.
Enough on the DVD.I shall be remiss if I do not pay tribute to Peter Jackson for the wonderful film he and his dedicated crew have created. Most inspired is the lighting of the beacons to summon help from Rohan. In the book, this is observed by Pippin in the ride to Minas Tirith. To satisfy Pippin's curiosity, Gandalf explains the background to him in a somewhat factual manner. Jackson turns this into one of the most exciting moments in the film, with aesthetically superb shots of the 13 beacons (yes, I counted them) being lit up in succession, accompanied by beautifully rousing music score, culminating in Theoden's heroic utterance of "Rohan will answer". Watching this has to be among the most uplifting moments one can experience in a cinema.
Most poignant is the Faramir's suicidal attempt to retake Osgilaith, under the orders of an unloving father. Starting from the soldiers of Gondor filing out of Minas Tirith in what looks almost like a funeral march to the letting loose of the swarm of arrows by the orcs in Osgilaith, every image of this scene is so hauntingly heartrending. It reminds me of John Woo's favourite scenes, although here, the music is Pipppin's actual singing rather than adapted background music, rendering the tragic mood even more devastating. Directly opposite in mood is Rohan's charge in the Battle of Pelennor Fields. Even if this mission is, in a way, equally suicidal, the spirit is sky high, radiating dauntless heroism and lust for battle. This scene also reminds me of the legendary battle scene in Spartacus (1960) which is universally recognised as the model in depiction of battle strategies. Rohan's charge in Pelennor Field, no the other hand, exemplifies heroism unsurpassed. Although ROTK is first and foremost the King's story, we should not forget, in the overall scheme of things, the ring bearers (no typo here because Frodo did acknowledge Sam as a fellow ring bearer in the end of the book). Elijah Wood and Sean Astin (particularly Astin) have played their roles to perfection. Towards the end of the quest, when Frodo's strength was almost fully spent, to hear Sam say "I cannot carry it (the ring) for you, Mr. Frodo, but I can carry you" and not be moved, one will have to be a hopelessly and irreversibly hardened cynic.
The background music, incidentally, is "Into the west".It is certainly a good sign that the general audience worldwide has reacted favourably to the long aftermath following the destruction of the ring, indicated that their capacity to appreciate has not been impaired by the proliferation of Hollywood style slam-bang endings. Viggo Mortensen's line to the Hobbits "My friends, you bow to no one" is delivered with sincerity and conviction. The final scene at the Grey Havens is graceful, touching, stylish. However, there is one shot that I must mention: Galadriel's final enigmatic, alluring, half-smiling glance at Frodo before she disappears into the ship. Cate Blanchett is among the most versatile actresses around today and in LOTR, she is Galadriel incarnate.
Well, what can i say ? I am unhappy though, because there will never be another series, nor another epic story like this one, never again.
Awards: Won 11 Oscars. Another 98 wins & 62 nominations
yours truly,
91
Tagline: A New Power Is Rising.
The Two Towers is grand, terrifying, and epic on a biblical level
The opening scene of The Two Towers provides an outstanding, yet very brief, taste of action, cinematography, and special effects, only to be matched (and far surpassed) in the final hour of the film. The stunning events of the third hour of The Two Towers are undoubtedly the centerpiece of the film, and while the first two hours serve finely as story development, they primarily build anticipation for the final hour, which mostly depicts the battle of Helm's Deep. More than anything else, the first two hours merely tease and torment the patient audience. It's a shame that such a gap has to exist between the first minute and the final hour, but I take no reservations in saying that despite how you feel about the first two hours of the film, the final hour will make the wait entirely worth its while.
As stated, the road to the battle of Helm's Deep can be enormously long and painful for any viewer aware of what breathtaking scenes await towards the end of the film. Perhaps The Two Towers' biggest fault is in its own accomplishments; the first two thirds of the film are well shot, well paced, and they necessarily and adequately progress the storyline, but when compared to the spectacular final hour, the first two hours seem uneventful and insignificant. However, to be fair, I feel that it's simply impossible to create two hours of film that could appropriately lead into the battle of Helm's Deep. It's difficult to comprehend how such scenes came to exist in the rather short amount of time Peter Jackson has had to create six hours (so far) of finished film. The battle of Helm's Deep is simply unreal; it's unlike any event that has come to pass since fantasy films gained, and regained, popularity.As assumed, The Two Towers begins where The Fellowship of the Ring ended.
The majority of the film follows four separate groups and their story lines: Frodo and Sam; Aragorn and Legolas, Merry and Pippin, and Saruman and his army. The performances live well up to the standards of the first film, with a particularly notable performance from Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn, whose role is significantly larger in The Two Towers. Aragorn satisfies a thirst for someone to root for, a thirst that was left partly unquenched in Fellowship. It's much easier to root for Aragorn than it is for Frodo; Aragorn has many more qualities of a leading man, a soldier, and a hero. More than once did the audience, filled mostly with academy voters, applaud the heroics of Aragorn.
Gollum also shines in a much-welcomed large role, due to extremely realistic computer animation, and a fine performance from Andy Serkis, upon which the animation was modeled. In Fellowship, it was appropriate to consider Gollum one of the many great 'features' of the film. However, here he is more of a leading character and a 'star,' and his convincing dual-personality, stabbing voice, and well-choreographed body movements make him consistently eye-grabbing and the center of focus of nearly every scene in which he appears.
As was The Fellowship of the Ring, The Two Towers is a visual delight. Those who have seen Fellowship are no doubt familiar with the beauty of the landscapes of New Zealand. The cinematography is, again, one of the best aspects of the film. The swooshing camera movements that follow the armies and horsemen throughout the fields are extremely satisfying in this post-Matrix era. The shots of the ascending enemy-laden ladders in the battle of Helm's Deep are terrifying and chillingly gorgeous all at once. The visual effects take an appropriate leap forward from those of the first film. While the visual effects in Fellowship were outstanding, the battle of Helm's Deep provides for the best application of CGI since the rippling waves of The Matrix's 'Bullet Time.' The battle of Helm's Deep features absolutely awe-inspiring and seamless integration of acting, stunts, and computer animation. Each orc seems to have its own personality, demonstrated in its movements and visual features. The masses of armies fight with strategy and true character, which I imagine is much harder to accomplish than animating thousands of identical clone troopers. The only problem I have with the visual department is the look of Treebeard, the Ent. Gimli's visual features seem a bit childish and uninspired, inconsistent with the standards set by the rest of the film.
But again, there is simply nothing that compares to the battle of Helm's Deep. George Lucas and the Wachowski brothers certainly have not created anything that approaches the grandness and magnificence of The Two Towers' final hour, and I doubt they will do so anytime soon.In The Fellowship of the Ring, there were a few minor problems with Howard Shore's musical score. While I thought it was gorgeous and it established several very memorable themes, I don't think it handled the sentimental scenes (opening in the Shire, Gandalf's passing) properly. I thought it caved in to the melodrama a bit too much, resembling the emotions from James Horner's Titanic, though much better than that. However, I believe that The Two Towers requires the type of score which Howard Shore accomplishes best: dark, continuous, and unrelenting, as demonstrated in Se7en and Silence of the Lambs. The theme used in many of the action scenes in Fellowship (low brass, six notes repeated with a rest in between) is much more present in The Two Towers, appropriately.
A brand new theme is also unveiled, the theme for Rohan, a prominent kingdom in Middle Earth. Rohan's theme is played more often than any other melody in the film, underscoring most of the memorable and heroic scenes with great effect. Howard Shore undeniably exhibits his skills as an 'A-list' composer, and with a possible double Oscar nomination this year for The Two Towers and Gangs of New York, he could get propelled to the very top of the 'A-list,' right beside John Williams and Hans Zimmer in terms of demand.If not the picture itself, there should be a way to recognize and award the battle of Helm's Deep. The battle sequence alone represents successful filmmaking in its highest form. The choreography of the battle, the visual effects, the pacing, acting, cinematography, and music, all work together in perfection to achieve grand filmmaking which is as entertaining and enjoyable as film can be. For this very reason, no one, whether a fan of Fellowship or not, should miss The Two Towers.
Awards: Won 2 Oscars. Another 57 wins & 71 nominations
yours truly,
91
Tagline: The Legend Comes to Life
Embrace the magic
It is with no surprise that Peter Jackson's The Fellowship of the Ring film has received such mixed critics. Many viewers refer to it as being childish, boring and uninteresting. Seems to me that it is bound to the same fate of Tolkien's books, destined to be a target for the same type of misunderstandings that keep attacking this literary masterpiece many decades after it's first publication.Having read the books several years ago, I went to see this `impossible' film when it came out with many doubts on my mind. I really liked it, but left the theater with as many doubts as I had before. Was it perfect? Well, maybe not, but what an achievement. After watching it a few times on DVD, and thinking about it for some time now, I find myself loving this film more and more.
Let me tell you why...The Lord of the Rings is a fairy-tale of myth and fantasy. Peter Jackson directed a film that was considered, for a very long time, impossible to make, and not only for technical reasons. The narrative roots are incredibly long and detailed, and the storyline is deeply connected with the creation of a fantastic continent from a time unknown called `Middle Earth'. It's author, Tolkien, dedicated a considerable part of his life developing this continent's background, it's mythology and origins, it's different kinds of people, cultures and languages, and therefore it's geographic references are determinant to the unfolding of the story of the One Ring.Peter Jackson went out to achieve the impossible and came out with a recreation of the original that is pure and true to the story in every detail. The first time the four hobbits meet a black rider on the road, for example, is absolutely faithful to the feeling of the book. The assault of the riders at Weathertop is another great example, and it captures that feeling of danger, density and atmosphere that are the main characteristics of the tale.
Jackson also took some liberties with the story, and made some right choices along the way. If the so called `purists' may not approve the removal of Tom Bombadil altogether, it should be comprehensible that the travel from Hobbiton to Rivendel is a very long and detailed one and could easily make a movie on it's own. I felt more uneasy with how short the Council of Elrond was. In the book, the council is where the whole story of the rings is first explained, and many passages from the past ages of Middle Earth are unveiled. It is a fascinating moment of the story, that had to be shortened for obvious reasons. Still, after some consideration, I now agree with the options made by Peter Jackson, and think that the movie prologue narrated by Galadriel was the wisest choice. The magic is all there when Gandalf shuts his eyes the moment Frodo stands in the council and says `I will take the ring'. It is there at Moria's Gate, and at the fall of Boromir. It is a powerful film that doesn't fit the rhythm of the standard Hollywood action movie. It is a film that breeds, that takes time to unfold, it's tale branching in every direction.I could go on and on, talking about all the different elements that bring this film close to perfection, but I'll end saying that deep down, this is not about action, beards and big monsters. The greatest thing about this film, to me, is that it brought me back to a time when I was in love with a different world where everything was possible. Reading The Lord of the Rings night after night, I came to understand what this thing of `mankind' really was all about. The corruption of absolute power, the importance and value of friendship, the inevitability of growing up, the strength of hope... That this film could capture that magic, and be a new bearer to it's message of humanism, is a statement to it's greatness. Gandalf's words, that even the smallest person may change the course of the world, and have a part to play in the destiny of all, are immortal.
In the end, this is a wonderful film, but that doesn't mean you are going to like it. I cannot tell you what it is like to see this film if you don't know or love the book. But I hope it may plant a seed on your heart to discover a great world of fantasy, beauty and humanity. I believe Tolkien would have liked that.
Awards: Won 4 Oscars. Another 68 wins & 81 nominations
yours truly,91
Ask anybody which TV-show is their favorite, and they are most likely to say "Friends". Since the first episode premiered in America in September 1994, millions of people tune in every week to see Rachel, Monica, Phoebe,Joey, Chandler and Ross cope with their lives in Manhattan.
Before "Friends", the six actors who play the main characters were all unknown. Today, Jennifer, Courteney, Lisa, Matt, Matthew and David are six of the most known people in the world.What is it that makes this show so funny? I don't even know if I can answer that. For the past ten years, the world has been able to follow the gang's lives, which are very funny.Can it be Chandler's jokes, Monica's pedantidity, Phoebe's songs or Joey's stupidity that makes Friends the most liked TV-show in history?
My answer would be that all of the six main characters contribute in their own special ways. Alone, they are useless because something's obviously missing, but together, they complete each other which results in six hilarious people. Every episode of Friends will make you laugh non-stop. We have grown to love the characters and what happens to them. I've got every season on DVD.This sitcom, in my opinion, is the greatest sitcom of all time and it changed the TV world forever. 'Friends' is simply the best series ever aired.The acting is amazing; after watching a few episodes you stop referring to the actors by their real names altogether, even if they appear in another movie.The characters are addictive, none are completely positive or negative. It would be quite easy to get along with or to be very annoyed by any of them in real life. Yet, all of them together (or even divided in groups) create this amazing chemistry that most people desire and few lucky ones have.
The humor is wonderful, no matter what type of humor you like, you will get to a point where you will find at least something absolutely hilarious. There is slapstick, some light humor, some dark humor, some raunchiness, some cheesiness - a little bit of everything. The story is captivating; viewers keep coming back to see what situation fate (being the writers) puts the characters in today. It is truly a television masterpiece. There are, however, many people who scoff at the mentioning of 'Friends'. My guess is they've never seen or paid attention to the show. It is easy to discard something because "everyone likes it" and be "unique", when in reality the uniqueness is actually bias. Just watch a few episodes before making any judgements - chances are you'll fall in love with it too. Any episode can light up your day, however down you may be. I would have serious doubts about one's sense of humor if I heard that they hated 'Friends'.
Well, as for me.... i am expecting the original box set of the complete series - all seasons with bonus scenes and goodies. This is truly a collector's item.
yours truly,
91