The Orphanage

The Spanish film 'El Orfanato' (The Orphanage) is a really good horror film. Some people will watch a horror film, fail to become frightened, then decide that the movie wasn't very good. I think that's a silly approach - a film can be good regardless of how scary it is, even if it's marketed as a horror. You're going to dismiss so many decent films if you rate them by your level of terror. 'The Devil's Backbone' (directed by Guillermo del Toro - producer of 'The Orphanage') is a really well made ghost story that just isn't that scary - but there is still a lot to appreciate in it. 'The Orphanage' is beautifully filmed, has good acting, and an intriguing story. I also found it to be very scary!

It's a ghost story that takes place in a creepy old house, formally an orphanage - the type of place you'd never go into, let alone live in, if you were sane. There are some intense scenes which made me jump (2mm into the air), and there are some interesting, freaky characters. The film borrows a few classic horror techniques, but puts them to good use. I was totally sucked into this movie.

'The Orphanage' treads a fine line between supernatural horror and psychological thriller and it never descends into b grade gore-fest action. Another thing that added to the suspense, was the depth of the characters - I actually cared about them, so I was drawn into the tense moments of the film, much more than I would have been had there been cardboard characters involved. Also, it's in Spanish, which can be quite a scary language.

A couple of modern classics...

Last night, I revisited 'Ocean's Eleven' (the modern version). It has got to be one of the coolest films of all time; the suits, the soundtrack, Vegas, the dialogue, George Clooney... it's all cool. But the best thing about it is the detail of the plot - it's so meticulously put together. Even though I'd seen it a couple of times before, I was totally hooked on the suspense. That's why 'Collateral' was so average; there was no attention to detail given to the script or reasons why the characters even existed. 'Collateral' took itself too seriously, when it really wasn't much more than a popcorn flick. 'Ocean's' knew exactly what type of film it was, and played to that strength.

Another film I re-watched recently was 'The Prestige'. This is another example of a totally gripping, twist 'n' turn, modern classic. You just can't fault the writing. I love watching movies that are made by people that so obviously care about their film and have managed to get the best out of everyone involved. One of the great things these two gems have in common, is that they take a particular topic (casinos and magicians) and brilliantly summarise the vibe, adding elements of mystery. The themes that are explored in these movies seem totally appropriate to their subject matter. A story about magicians and magic will conjure up (if you'll forgive me) thoughts of obsession and deception. Casinos and gambling - the same things.
I reckon these two films could go the distance and remain popular after several decades have past.

Collateral

I watched the much-hyped Michael Mann film 'Collateral' on the weekend. I've been meaning to see it for a while and was looking forward to doing so because it's in a genre that I have a soft spot for - the Thriller. I love these kind of films.

I was a bit disappointed with 'Collateral' though. I still enjoyed it, and there's a lot about it that's impressive - Tom Cruise and Jamie Foxxxxx are both excellent, and Michael Mannnn's treatment of Los Angeles as a setting is really cool. There are a lot of shots from unusual angles to bring out the city's skyline... LA was basically as good as a supporting actor in this film - much like New York is in Lumet's and some of Scorsese's work (gee, how much of a wanker do I sound like?!)
However, I was unmoved by the attempt at profound dialogue between Cruise and Foxxxxxxxxx. Also, the story was quite empty; I really wanted to know more about the characters and why Tom Cruise was killing them all - apart from just (POSSIBLE SPOILER) "they're all involved in some court case". Maybe I missed some key explanation due to the terrible sound quality on the TV I was watching.

In my opinion, a more intricate back story would've elevated this film from OK to excellent. The ending was an anticlimax too. But there was a cool, slightly surreal, vaguely symbolic scene with a wolf (or maybe a coyote?). I really liked that scene.

Am I the only one...

...that can't stand this movie?



It seems inexplicably popular to me. I love a good adventure and fantasy story as much as the next bloke, but this one is just annoying. The thing I hate most about it, is the part when the grandpa is telling the Fred Savage kid the story. Not only is this cheesy and dated (talk about 80s!), it is completely pointless. Why does it have to be a story about a story? Why can't the story about Westly and Butterhead be enough for the film? It devalues the fantasy and makes people cringe.

Also, the quotes. People quote this film to death. And they aren't even good quotes! "As you wiiiiiiiiish", "inconceivable" - inconceivable is a common English word and somehow people think you're referring to this film if you use it... and the worst one: "Hello. My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die." Now, in what situation can this quote possibly be of any relevance? That's right, none. It's so specific to the context of the movie that it doesn't even make sense to quote it in real life. But people do. Inconceivable.

I don't think 'The Princess Bride' is a bad film at all, just a reasonable one that's been overrated by people that go on about it. There are other good movies out there you know...

Old People II

Old people often can't tell you if they've seen a film before, until they are 3/4 of the way through it. The name of the film, actors that are in it, or the story's synopsis are not enough to trigger any remembrance.

If they do remember a film, they will usually get the title slightly wrong. For example: my dad referred to 'Being John Malkovich' as "Inside Mr Malkovich". So close but so far!

Nice, slow, entrancing films

Sometimes, if I'm in the right mood, I like to watch slow-moving, visually mesmerising films - a bit like the visual equivalent of a Sigur Ros album.

Examples:

Lost in Translation
Marie Antoinette
(Sofia Coppola)
I do like The Virgin Suicides but it's too depressing for this list

The New World
The Thin Red Line
(Terence Malick)

Heaven (Tom Tykwer)

2001: A Space Odyssey (Stanley Kubrick)

You know, that sort of thing.

Action

The other day I watched The Rock again for the millionth time (but I hadn't seen it for a couple of years). It is one of the best action movies ever and there have been very few decent ones since it came out. The mid eighties to late nineties seemed to be the golden age of action movies. This perception can be partly attributed to my age - I was a teenager in the nineties and teenage boys love action movies, but I think it's still fair to say that the standard of action film making has dropped in the last decade.

Part of the reason why The Rock is so good is the actors. It has a great cast of "proper" actors. Ed Harris plays an excellent morally compromised villain, Sean Connery plays his best character since Indiana Jones' dad, and Nicolas Cage is great as the reluctant hero. A lot of action movies feel the need to use an "action star" in the lead role and this is often to the detriment of the film. Vin Diesel cannot act. The Rock (not the film, the wrestler) cannot and should not be allowed to act. The only reason these people are in films is down to an incorrect assumption that if Arnold Schwarzenegger can do it, then these guys can. Don't get me wrong, I'm not for one minute suggesting that Arnold was ever a good actor, but his meat-headedness was used to great effect by the people that casted him in a lot of action films. This idea was poorly replicated by a lot of other action stars like Sylvester Stallone, Jean Claude Van Damme, Wesley Snipes and worst of all - Steven Seagal.
Bruce Willis, Mel Gibson and Harrison Ford can all act reasonable well, and they've been in some classic action movies - I don't think that's a coincidence.

Here are some must-see action classics:

The Rock
Terminator 2: Judgement Day
Predator
True Lies
Die Hard
Lethal Weapon
The Bourne trilogy
Aliens (not as good as Ridley Scott's 'Alien' but it is more of an action film)
Léon
Patriot Games (perhaps more of a thriller but who cares)
Mad Max