oso_travis

There have been great classics in this sub-genre. Father of the Bride, the original, and its two remakes with the just appropriate Steve Martin. Muriel's Wedding, directed by Hogan, with the great Toni Collette. And My Best Friend's Wedding with Hollywood princess, Julia Roberts. And then this TV movie that has a shining Shannon Elizabeth, that proves the audience a good range of acting.

The film's finest and funniest moments come from the whole crazy rush on the wedding's arrangements. Just shows how a pain in the ass is to get married! The two families becoming relatives now thing, was very funny too.

Shannon Elizabeth and her "fiancée" Eddie McClintock show some sparks and very good chemistry. Good acting and good writing make it up for a predictable, conventional premise in a well-directed film that is so self-aware and not serious that is really a delight of charming and funny moments. A good one.

7/10

SOME MILD SPOILERS.

One of the greatest comedies made during the Golden Age of Mexican Cinema, back when American companies bought the films to their worldwide theatrical distribution, is without a doubt "Préstame tu cuerpo".

The plot is charming. An exotic dancer on a tour in Cuba, Leonor (Silvia Pinal, one of our greatest actresses of all time), suffers and accident in a boat. She's sent to "the place between Heaven and Hell", only to discover that her "accidental" death was all a mistake made by her guardian angel, Simplicia. So she gets a second chance to spend her remaining 40 years on Earth by possessing the body of a recently deceased girl. She wants a hot body though, because (in one of the most brilliant acts of self-mockery in the History of cinema) she knows she is not that good of a singer.

So, she ends up possessing the body of an upper-class uptight scientist Regina (the same Pinal in a glorious second role), who is bound in a disastrous marriage to the millionaire Manuel (the legendary theater producer Manolo Fabregas, offering one of the best performances ever by a Mexican actor). But she makes everyone believe she's got amnesia. That's when the fun starts. She calls her former secretary, Romualdo, by the name of Pepe, and claims that he's her boyfriend. In the other hand she claims that her boss is now her father, and that her husband, Manuel, is her secretary, Manolo.

Exiled Argentinian director Demicheli directs with wit and grace this lovely film. Never before and I think never after has a happy menage-a-trois been implied so openly in mainstream Mexican Films. The Servant becomes the Master thing makes the deal even funnier, with some of the best lines and gags coming from the battle of power between Manuel and his secretary-now boss Romualdo.

Even though the film's ending sticks to the safe ground of the morale of the conservative (but wealthy) 1950's, Fabregas and Pinal show some explosive and authentic sexual tension which is ready to ignite your screen anytime and provide sincere and powerful laughters too.

7/10.

I was one of the few guys that bought the Borat hype. How a bunch a serious critics claimed this film was one of the greatest and funniest comedies of the decade. The truth is this movie pushes the limit of political incorrectness, and... that's about it.

Funny it ain't. All it was a series of stale, stupid, primitive jokes that aren't funny. I don't mind scatological humor when it's well done and witty. But this wasn't.

I like my good Political Incorrectness quota in my comedies. But really, there's has to be more to it to make people laugh. I've laughed my ass off watching R-rated comedies; "There's Something About Mary", "Fargo" and "Crimen ferpecto" almost brought me to tears. "Borat" didn't.

It's incredible what passes these days as good (sophisticated or raw) comedy. Uh! The wonders and magic of publicity and media hype.

Well, I can always have my "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia" and "Reno 911!" on TV for some Polical Incorrectness AND some hysterical laughs.

5/10

A lot of people has stated that this has been the worst film they have ever seen in their lives. Geez! you should have seen just a few movies during your lifetime.

Kind of sad to hear this type of reactions on this film. But here we go...

I've just watched it on premium cable. Not by any chance the worst film. Though preachy and very flawed, I admire the film's courage, in a time when the U.S. government doesn't allow the fallen soldiers ¡caskets! to be photographed and when neither Hollywood mainstream or the news have the balls to talk about Irak, unlike their documentary director's counterparts who have bravely captured the horror and irrationality of this war.

I believe the acting was top notch. There were parts of it that really moved me, and certainly some scenes made me want to cry. Particularly because in very politicized wars, the common soldiers are the ones that take the worst part.

I'm not American but the film made me root for this guys. At least I wanted them to be safe and alive.

Maybe Hollywood can learn some lessons from Canadian cinema, which is not afraid to speak its mind.

A good one. Especially because of its simple and humble emotional truth. 7/10

Eli Roth is a genius, and Hostel is a twisted, sick, depraved masterpiece.

I was one of the few that had high expectations when I went to see Cabin Fever in theaters. Boy, was I disappointed. I still thought back then that Eli Roth was a promising guy even if his first film wasn't that accomplished.

Let's say that for that matter, my expectations were kind of "neutral" when I went to see "Hostel", but I was anxious to see it anyway. During the first 10 or 15 minutes I was thinking "hey! I guess Roth sold himself after all". More wrong couldn't I be.

What I found was one of the sickest, darkest and above all, most intense films I've seen in my life. I found out that Roth didn't want MTVish flashy editing cuts, and after seeing this film a total number of 7 times (5 times at theaters, and 2 times at my home theater, and still going up) I see that is true, and works perfectly for the story. Roth wanted the film to have a classic (and classy for that matter) feeling to it and he succeed in every single aspect of it. The editing is just invisible and discreet, the photography is stunningly gorgeous, and the music score is one of the finest and most memorable I've listened to in a long time; there is no need for filling up the soundtrack with your one-hit-wonder of choice.

Kudos to Roth for making one of the best screenplays in recent years. The dialogues feel so natural and real, with every situation grounded in some logic. His directing skills are brilliant too. There is no a single frame or scene that is a waste. Every single shot, every single frame is as beautiful as it can be. And in a horror film that makes the whole thing more disturbing.

What I found more remarkable about this film, it is the amount of intelligent ideas that float around like subtexts, consciously OR unconsciously. One of the most clever ideas is why we like to see horror films: because we like to see people being tortured, chopped, or beaten to death and that is true. As the Dutch Businessman would say, that is part of human nature. We, horror films fans, PAY for watching someone going through gruesome suffering and we don't pay once, we do it twice, thrice, or more, just to feel that adrenaline rush the American Client talks of.

-Some Spoilers-

It is amazing how we come to "rationalize" the deaths to suit our beliefs, attitudes and fears. We feel bad for Josh, Kana, Oli, and Yuki, but the audience was clapping and cheering when Natalya, Svetlana, and Alex get rolled over by two cars, when the chasers get beaten to death by the Bubble Gum Gang, and when Pax finally gets his revenge at the Dutch Businessman, in the gentlemen restroom.

-End of Some Spoilers-

I guess it is just part of human nature. Revenge is in our genes. See the trashy state of the world for that matter.

***1/2 And #02 of my Top Ten of 2006 (just behind Love Me If You Dare).

Note: Though I'm certain that Roth and Hernandez won't get any Oscars nods (even if they deserved them for their marvelous work behind (Best Director) and in front of camera (Best Actor in a Leading Role), there are other things that need to be taken "For Your Consideration". Editing, by George Folsey, Jr., the beautiful score composed by Nathan Barr, and the gorgeous cinematography by Milan Chadime are such a fine work that deserved some nominations. But they won't get them. Roth's attitude towards American film unions (that could be resume in a big Screw You!) won't let them get the recognition they truly deserve.

8/10

Yann Samuell's first work is exceptional. It has achieved what no other film in years has... It moved me, it shook me, it rocked me. I mean... What a film! Samuell in a very smart move makes his characters so mean, selfish and self-centered, wise movement that counter-balances every last piece of corniness or cheese left. The film is a solid bittersweet fantasy about the crazy, mysterious and eternal nature of Love.

The chemistry between Canet and Cotillard is incredible. You don't see their mad love, you feel it. That speaks of how good actors they are. Shame on the Cesars for shunning them both from the Best Actor/Acress race.

The visual part of the film is brilliant. You can see Samuell's influence of his career as a drawer and a designer there: all kind of tricks, camera movements, editing cuts and special effects only to get this wicked fairy tale ahead.

Can we blame Julian and Sophie for their irresponsible, childish, absurd behavior? Not really. After all, they are just two psychos in love. Like we all are when we fall. It will top my Top Ten of the Year for sure.

9/10 ****

WAR OF THE WORLDS, Spielberg's 23th film, again in full shape after shameless turkeys(Catch me if you can 02,The Terminal 04), reconstructs an exterminating invasion done by beings from an unknown planet to the Earth, all of this seen through the eyes of the divorced father Ray Ferrier (Tom Cruise), his son Robbie (Justin Chatwin)and her daughter Rachel (Dakota Fanning surprisingly bearable and intense), avoiding all kinds of dangers, almost miraculously.

A sober and fancy Science Fiction and End of the World master's film work reconstructs itself avoiding successfully, like one car alone on the highway, the cheap cheese in Deep Impact (Leder, 98), the cocky cynicism in Armaggedon (Bay, 98), the patriotic propaganda in Independece Day (Emmerich, 96), and even any kind of emotional manipulation, a thing that Spielberg is so endeared with, like in Saving Private Ryan(98) or Schindler's List (93) and denying all the way any kind of ideological trash, moralize, or verbal vomit.

The heart-wrenching post 9/11 pessimism, as destructive as the lights coming down from the tripods, reconstructs the darkest Apocalypse fantasy where the hope in religion to bring salvation is forever lost and almost so, is the faith in the human race.

Strange metaphysics on clear and present Destruction reconstruct beautiful poetry on Chaos and Panic, with every member of the cast properly installed in Hysteria, middle shots with hundreds of horrified and desperate extras, escaping or assaulting mobs and fear-frozen faces.

Spielberg's unconscious betrays him reconstructing a cruel and brutal war in imperial American soil and not forgetting out of his personal film imagery, the Holocaust, being doomed to be repeated for ever and ever, with that gray dust as a result of the fulminating rays, the victim's clothing falling slowly, thousands of refugees traveling by foot, corpses floating quietly in the Hudson river.

A narrative device apparently rooted in Hollywood's neoclassicism reconstructs itself paradoxically, not by psychological motivations, but by Fate or Randomness, in the style of the great European and Asian auteurs.

And the most clever notes criticizing American imperialism, reconstructing themselves with amazing subtlety, shed new light on truths and intuitions on the essence of the human beast, as beautiful and as terrible as the film itself.

8/10. War of the Worlds. ***1/2

Les Riviéres Pourpres 2. Directed by Olivier Dahan. **

Luc Besson will be remembered among French filmmakers as the one who brought Hollywood to the French mainstream... in a ridicule and absurd way. Fortunately,he has given himself a break from directing, but he still threatens us with turkeys produced by him.

"Les Riviéres..." is just a stupid, mediocre, incoherent film, with characters that I don't give a damn, a mystery too dull to care about solving it, and an awful script. French superstar Jean Reno lacks so much strength in his performance, and hunk Benoit Magimel acts like his hormones are out of control and wants to jump under the pants of every other female police/nurse in the movie.

My girlfriend has this crush on Benoit Magimel. If you feel like her, go and watch it. Otherwise, avoid this boring turkey.

6/10

Alexander. Directed by Oliver Stone. *

I am so grateful for a film like "Alexander". And here are the reasons why:

1) Because its box office bombing status and the madness (in a "we want to rip you apart" kind of way) among critics could bury the "return to epics" we had this year; don't take me wrong, good old epics were great, but when you start getting stuffed with major turkeys like "Troy", "King Arthur", and our national treasure "Zapata" it is time to say the idea good-bye.

2) It is living proof that either Stone got old and lost every last bit of his talent or he has been the most overrated director around for a long time. For every Zemeckis, Howard or Spielberg there is actually a director that knows what he is doing (i.e. Payne, Haynes, Araki); but this year Stone might defeat them all and be crowned as the new Overrated Champ. It is so funny to see over 30 years old hardcore Stone's fans to stand up and defend Stone and his new "masterwork", when in fact a motion picture should speak for itself: the film is awful.

I will not go into big details on how bad this film is. Let's just say that both my ears and eyes could not believe it. Angie Jolie embarrassing herself for the 15th time. Farrell giving the audience a stalwart masterclass on Bad Acting. Hopkins granting the expression "verbal vomit" a new dimension. One of the most dreadful screenplay written in years; and probably the most talky film in the last 10 years! There's not a moment of silence or meditation on it. Talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk and talk. Geez!

I think the only people that can keep themselves from embarrassment is Rodrigo Prieto and his photography, Elliot Cowan as Ptolemy, Connor Paolo as Young Alexander, and Rory McCann as Crateros. Holy Cow! Even Vangelis' music is as corny and mellow as it can get. Totally, out of place.

Save your time, money and self from this stinker. You've been warned.

Note: One thing is "killing" a lot of extras, and a different one, "killing" innocent elephants and horses. It made me sick. I know they are not hurt because of sues, but why do you have to abuse the audience? I hope some elephants may escape from San Diego Zoo and go straight to WB studios.

5/10

Clara et moi. Directed by Arnaud Viad. ***1/2

Probably, one of the best romantic films in the past ten years.

There are a few bunch of films that still can surprise you. Films made with a very small budget, no FX, and no twists or violence on them. Films without any sex on them but that can be very erotic and intense. "Clara et moi" is one of those films. I'm so grateful I've found it.

Praise should go to Viad, who wrote a delightful screenplay: it is so tender, yet it never gets corny; it is powerful, yet it does not sound overworked. Viad's fine direction, along with the gorgeous Digital Video photography (I'm not kidding, the film looks GREAT) are proof that you can have emotional depth and formal beauty on contemporary cinema. Viad's realistic approach knocks you out, because the feelings and emotions portrayed in the film become so truthful and intense.

Praise should go to the sensational leading couple. Julien and Julie are in their very fine shape. Wow! It is one of the finest chemistry and attraction that has been ever brought to the screen. J.Lo and Ben should learn something from them! I hope they (Julien and Julie, of course) get some nods at the Cesars, next year.

Don't miss it! You will deeply regret if you do so.

9/10

Podium. Directed by Yann Moix. ***

I haven't had this much fun for a while!

Courtesy of the 8th French Cinema Tour, "Podium" just hit theaters in a festival-like run here; Oh! I got so lucky! It's such a funny comedy, one of the best I've seen coming out of La France, and one of the best of the year for sure.

Benoit Poelvoorde is Belgium's national treasure for sure. He's performance is outstanding; he played Bernard Fréderic with such emotion, wit and realism that I'm gonna be real mad if he doesn't get a Best Actor nomination at the Cesars. The thing that is so great, is that his character is hateful and charismatic at the same time. He believes he's a star, so he starts acting like one: mean and rudely. He's a great singer and dancer too (maybe Kevin Spacey could borrow him some ideas).

Great writing, solid direction, hot French chics (or according to Bernard, "sexual bombs") in a comedy that smartly explores the obsession for fame, celebrity and pop idols. You won't regret if you watch it. Believe, it is worth it.

The tribute to French super star, Claude Francois is there, making the whole thing nostalgic. And one more thing... perhaps Americans should keep their hands out of it, and not starting to think about a remake. I suppose it will start its international commercial run in 2005, so where it's available, don't miss it!

7/10

Éloge d l'amour. Directed by Jean-Luc Godard. *1/2

Godard has become a pompous and pretentious prick.

I just laughed my guts out, reading other people's reviews and calling this piece of crap "A Masterpiece" and "The Best Film of 2001" What!? %$%$&%! You gotta be kidding me! Grow the hell up! You know it's crap don't deny it. What are you trying to achieve? To be recognize as an intellectual? Ha!

The film is SO boring. Boring, boring, boring. I like slow-paced film but this one goes beyond my boredom scale. The film doesn't say anything and doesn't make you feel anything. Please avoid it, like the plague and save yourself an embarrassment. I beg you: Do not waste you precious 96 minutes on this trash!

Stay away from it! Gosh! I regret so much the moment I walked in that theater... One of the worst films of the decade for sure. Godard: Please, retire and relief us from grief. Go to the beautiful Blue Coast but stop making films. If you do so, you will get my praise.

5/10

Il Cuore altrove. Directed by Pupi Avati. **

It looks great. But it isn't.

I had such high expectations for this film and it was a complete let down. The acting is mediocre, the plot is stupid, Angela isn't hot neither romantic, the screenplay is overworked over the top and loaded with the worst cliches, and Nello, though he looks like a cool guy, just proves himself one more time, that he's a retard.

Great costumes, great photography but the film doesn't say anything and doesn't make you feel anything. It is empty. You've been warned; don't fall into the trap like I foolishly did.

6/10.

Catwoman. Directed by Pitof. **

It is incredible the trash that "Catwoman" has been receiving from critics and from comic's hardcore fans. Geez! I can think at least half a dozen films that have been worse and came out this year. "Van Helsing" was cocky, annoying, and corny as hell. "Troy" and "King Arthur" dreamed of being masterpieces, but they only achieved turkey-status, both of them well founded on mediocrity, that made the whole thing boring as a turtle. "Torque" and "The Whole Ten Yards" shows Hollywood insistence in making pointless films.

Of course, "Catwoman" is not "Harry Potter" or "Spidey 2" . But I must dare to say that as popcorn, entertainment value is on the same level. I had fun watching it. Campy fun, but still fun. I am not ashamed of it.

"Catwoman" comes to be the anti thesis of "Spidey ". Catwoman was ditched by most of the critics, while "Spidey" got an overrated love from most of them: it was qualified as the ultimate cinematic masterpiece. Give me a freaking break! It is a great film, but it's not flawless. Catwoman was a box office bomb. Spidey domestic gross alone stands close to the 400 million mark.

Acting is over acting. Writing is pure trash (what would you expect if three people created the "story" and other three wrote the screenplay). Pitof's direction is way weak. But "Catwoman" has charm. Halle Berry performance is on top of overacting, but she still is so hot. Mrs. Stone's lines are ridicule and absurd, but she's having fun like a dwarf.

In the technical aspects Catwoman is a good film. It performs one of the best Sound Design I've heard in ages; that part is truly Oscar worthy. It is visually stunning as well. Watching it makes you abnoxius; and that actually is a good thing.

6/10.

Alexandra's Project. Directed by Rolf De Heer. ***1/2

Brilliant film directed by the talented Aussie/Dutch director Rolf De Heer. In so many aspects the film is outstanding. As other people have mentioned, in its technical aspects such a photography, sound design, editing, is truly a wonder.

The acting is great. Gary Sweet is so natural; it seems the role was written for him. In the other hand, Helen Budday is an actress who shows a wide performance range. Sometimes, we feel sympathy towards her, other times we hate her.

Subject matter is a delicate issue here. The film is the ultimate shock fable for female liberation that started in the 1960's. It goes all the way in humiliating the husband, in horrible ways that we may not know, but we might guess through it. This is a great example of a film where substance overcomes form. Most of the people who hate this film, feel so uncomfortable and disturbed by it. But it is the subject that they feel repulsion to. You just can't handle such a complex and grim situation on the screen.

Truly original and sinister enough. I recommend it all the way.

9/10

The Notebook. ***1/2

I got lucky to get a sneak-peek of this one. The film is just stunning. At some times, touching and deeply moving, other times fun and sensual,"The Notebook" has something that made Hollywood great Romances classics during the 30's and the 40's: strong leads and a fine chemistry between them.

McAdams and Gosling are superb. Their performances are so true, living and real that you actually believe they did have a crush on each other at the set! Keep watching for these guys, they are going to be huge stars.

The screenplay is great: fancy, well-constructed, solid, it captures the spirit of the book. Unfortunately, Cassavettes' clumsy and choppy directing skills keep the film from reaching Greatness Heights. You can feel the guy is on a rush. Geez, the film could have been 15 minutes longer!

Still, a very fine film. McAdams' and Gosling's master work makes the ride worth it.

8/10.

House of 1000 Corpses. Directed by rocker Rob Zombie. ***

Back in 1996 "Scream", directed by Wes Craven,was released. It certainly was a hit, involving both audience and critics. It was an open invitation to re-visit the gore subgenre that have been forsaken by big studios, when they were going after subtle and more atmospheric horror fare("Interview with the Vampire", "Dracula").

But like usual, studios went nuts about it and they focused their efforts in bringing cheap and light slasher gore, in the vein of "I know what you did" and both "Urban Legends"; nothing serious, everything was a parody of itself. More crapfests were yet to come with "Valentine" and "Freddy vs. Jason", this one being the best example of the low point gore films had reached.

That's why I'm happy: Mr. Zombie first directorial effort is very impressive and refreshing: it vitalizes the gore subgenre just as Mr. Boyle vitalized zombie. He takes the film seriously and shows some real talent behind the scenes. He is on the right way to become a great gore director.

Using with intelligence and wit "old" video and sound footage, he creates textures, pacings, environments that work pretty damned well on the film. The structure and pacing follows a virtuoso crescendo towards the climax, which is shocking and disturbing. In deed, both the visuals and the pacing turn the film into a nightmare that was conceived in the pit of hell. If Lynch had directed a gore film, I'm positive that "House of 1000 corpses" would have looked alike.

Of course the film is far from flawless, but still, the key elements on it, help it to get above mediocrity. The film has good writing, the actors are very competent, and the sound design is especially made to support the "textures" Mr. Zombie worked on here.

I can't see why it has polarized opinions. The film is closer to films like "The Hunger" and "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" than to usual slasher fare. Actually I don't think "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" was a direct inspiration for it.

More disturbing and shocking, than actually scary or chilling, this film is a must-see piece for genre fans. Other people should stay away... unless you are craving for some nightmares.

7/10

The Tracker. Directed by Rolf de Heer. ****

"God respects our law, as He respects also yours... maybe more."

"Alexandra's Project", De Heer's wicked, dark and brilliant 2003 film opened here back in April. Before that, hardly anyone knew who he was. But now he is starting to have a name around here.

"The Tracker" which will have its commercial run here during the summer , thanks to the UNAM Festival, and no thanks to the distributors who have foolishly ignored it, and who are more worried about going after French crap like "Tais-Tois" and "Pere at Fils". It is a rare brilliant gem that came from beautiful Australia, being also overlooked in the U.S., getting a tiny exhibition circuit.

But I'm so glad I've had the chance to watch (twice!) this amazing motion picture. It's outstanding in deed. I don't know how to even start praising it.

Director, Rolf de Heer, is a brave auteur. Both "Alexandra's..." and "Tracker" were made with a very reduced budget, with very few people in the cast, no FX, few resources. But, hear my words, the man HAS talent. He has created gripping, engaging, original films that make you stay on your seat, UNTIL THE FILM ENDS. I felt "Alexandra's..." was a little uneven but "Tracker" it practically flawless; It doesn't have one weak moment. He knows how to be a good storyteller. He knows how to let the film flow, with a minimum number of characters. And he doesn't need the corniness Linkater used for his "Before Sunrise / Sunset" to succeed.

He wrote the screenplay for "Tracker". The dialogues are beautiful, yet natural; they never sounded overworked. Sometimes the situations are funny, other times are tragic and moving, still there's a perfect balance on this and there's the best character development I've seen in years; the film lasts for 90 minutes, when it's over, we know A LOT about each one of the characters.

The cast is superb. David Gulpilil is great as usual. Grant Page as the Veteran is funny and charismatic. And the great acting wrestle involves Gary Sweet as the Fanatic and Damon Gameau as the Follower. They are both PERFECT. Right in the note. Jackpot. They did their best to get into the characters' shoes and the brilliant results are at sight.

Violence is showed in a very measured, respectful way, but the film still manages to be very provoking and disturbing. Racism is a delicate matter, so the way the characters change from racists to anti-racists and back again could stir up the debate. Their personalities are so HUMAN, so ambiguous, like the beautiful landscapes we see through the film.

The film looks good an it is. The beautiful folk songs are an essential piece of this work. And though, it never, never gets preachy I think it portrays a valuable lesson to learn: Hope and Peace, will come when Respect and Tolerance are brought to pass between Nations. So Mr. Bush, please watch this film.

10/10

Twentynine Palms. Directed by Bruno Dumont. (Unrated). ****

The victory of brutality over civilization.

At a first look "Twentynine palms" is just another trivial film. You might be tempted to think that is "Gerry" going porn and you may say "Come on, Frenchies. Grow up!". You may think is only sex, sex, sex, and sex with some violence. But analyzing the film more in depth, I found it rather disturbing and fascinating in its sociological and moral context.

Be aware. It is not a film easy to seat through. The first half shows walking around in the desert a la "Gerry", mixed with some hardcore sex scenes at the pool and at the motel. When the second half starts the film turns into a "lynchean" nightmare. We get to see mean white trash and three-legged dogs. And then the brutal ending, that every likes to talk about, which it seems it was extracted from somebody's worst nightmare.

Bruno Dumont has created a shocking metaphor with this film, shocking in deed. At the beginning of the film we see David getting ready to leave L.A. And then the whole film takes place in the barrel Joshua Tree desert, where the first trivial, then tragic events take place. The desert as a metaphor of the world after 9/11, with all the moral devastation, its raw madness and its social chaos. The world has become a lonely place, where "there's nothing to understand" and "where we are not alone" according to Katia's wise words. Nobody in the desert is subjected to anything. Forget morals, ethics and law, and give a new meaning to your life: to satisfy instincts, passions and impulses, doesn't matter if they are erotic, warring or psychotic.

Dumont brings to debate the contrast between civilization and barbarousness. And the thing that is so hopeless, is that barbarousness has triumphed and overcome humanity. It is the victory of brutality over civilization.

10/10.

Etre et avoir. ***1/2

Recent French cinema clearly has had dominant trends in recent years. In one side, light and silly comedies like "RRRrrrr!"," Taxi", "Podium". In other front, we got the shock cinema with titles like "Irréversible", "29 palms", "Tiresia", "Chóses Secretes", "L'adversaire", "Haute Tension". And we also have the urban, smart and sophisticated comedies like "Confidences Trop Intimes" and "Le Gout D'Autres".

So it's really a surprise to find a wonderful film that doesn't belong to any of the trends described above. And it is also a big surprise that such a small and wise documentary, can be so deep, charming and touching.

There is no really a plot on it. We are just witness of the French rural education system. We see the love and devotion that the teacher has for all of his students, whose age range goes from 4 years old to young teens. We see their daily problems and how they solve them.

Truly an important film. Now I understand France's urgency to keep their people literate, no matter how remote their home is. We, the countries in development, should learn very carefully this important lesson.

(the first half an hour goes kind of slow, but please be patient. It is worth it.)

Les Invasions Barbares becomes the first sequel ever to win the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film. It is also the first win ever for Canada. It kind of swept at Cannes last year. So, going to watch it with such high expectations, I'm glad to state that all of them were fulfilled and surpassed.

What a wonderful film! What a fine job by the cast! What a great script! What a marvelous direction by Mr. Arcand! I can't believe there are people who have said that it is pretentious and pseudo intellectual, when in fact, I feel it like one of the most honest and sincere films in recent cinema. The film feels intellectual and thought-provoking because it's about a college professor and his friends, who also happen to be college professors!

For some strange coincidence, there was another brilliant film last year, that deals with the topic son-reconciles-with-ill-dying-father and was directed by Tim Burton. It is Big Fish. And watching The Barbarian Invasions I couldn't help it. I had Ed Bloom and his son in my mind as I watch Remy and Sebastian going through strife and love.

They are both celebrations to the joy of life and to the miracle of human existence. Ed Bloom finds his peace and hope in its tall stories. And Remy finds it in idealism.

**** out of ****

I loved this film! The novel that is based on, must have a lot of Freud psyche theories, because the film just reflects it. And in such a perfect manner. Cronenberg has reached a point where he has got a mature talent.

It is a brilliant exploration of the Unconscious, of The Edipus Complex, and of Guilt. Cronenberg does for The Edipus Complex here, what Lynch did for The Nightmare in "Mullholland Dr." We really get into Gleg "Spider"'s mind. And it's very terrifying and disturbing inside. Not pretty at all.

The cast did an outstanding job. All my praises should go to Fiennes, and especially to Miranda Richardson who plays three different characters with a master talent. She's living prove that there's no justice at the Oscars.

If you study psychiatry or psychology go and see it! It's a must see. If you love cinema, go and see it also. One of the year's best.

A lot of people has criticized `Chicago'. A lot of people has criticized the Academy for giving it top honors in the past Oscar Ceremony. A lot of people went mad, when `Chicago' won 6-Oscars, and `Gangs of New York' none. I think `Chicago' it's a really, really good movie, but further more an excellent musical. And probably that's its main problem. It's a genre film. Not since `Unforgiven', a western, a genre film had won the Best Picture award. And of course, the problem with certain genre of films is that some people just love it, are some just hate it!!

Above that, `Chicago' as a musical is outstanding. What more can you ask?? There's a criminal plot on it, there's all that good singing and dancing from ALL THE CAST. And there's a legendary closing musical number, in which we are truly witnesses that `it swells with two people'. That energy and that razzle-dazzle shown by Velma and Roxie, are potential cinema classics.

Third is a charm. Two previous Bob Fosse's musicals had been nominated for Best Picture. But none of them won. `Cabaret' won a nod for Fosse's direction. `All That Jazz' swept at Cannes the top honors, and won some well-deserved Oscars for art merits. And, although `Chicago' wasn't directed by Fosse, his ghost was around all the time. So giving an Oscar for Best Picture to `Chicago' was like, awarding Fosse and his great bad boys band: Fredd Ebb and John Kander. All we are thankful, because All That Delicious Political Incorrectness ( A Fosse's trademark) is everywhere in `Chicago'.

Was `Chicago' the best picture in 2002? Certainly not. There were far more interesting and risky films like `Far from Heaven', `Narc', `Secretary', `Confessions of a Dangerous Mind', `The Pianist' and even Almodovar's new masterpiece `Talk to Her'. But certainly `Chicago' was the best film produced in the Hollywood system. And it became one of the greatest musicals of all time.

There are films that made history. Films like "Nosferatu", "Psycho", "A Clockwork Orange", "The Exorcist", "Platoon" and "Pulp Fiction". Films that will be remembered in 20 or 30 years. And "Requiem for a Dream" is one of them.

Shocking? Yes. Dark? Yes. Risky? Yes. "Requiem..." is all that and more. It has an almost perfect direction and outstanding performances. All the actors were pushed to their limits, doing their very best. And Ellen Burnstyn, shows that she was cheated-out in almost every acting award in 2000.

This film is "A Clockwork Orange" for our generation. It shows things that hardly anyone had the guts to show before (in so crude way, anyway). And just like the author of "A Clockwork..." could be seen as a genius after "A Clockwork...","Requiem..." talks more about Darren Aronofsky, than drug itself. It talks about a risky and creative director(probably the best of his generation), who could break cinema rules, and expand them in the future.

Why did the Academy praise "A Clockwork Orange", and almost ignore "Requiem...", if they are both very controversial? Well, "A Clockwork..." is set in a distant future, in England. And "Requiem.." is set in the US, right here and right now. It shatters the American Dream. But unlike "American Beauty" there's no hope for ANYONE here. Although I think that the VERY LAST SCENE in "Requiem...", it's a little tiny spark of HOPE.And as violence, HOPE is part of our human nature too.

Enjoy (or Be shocked by) this instant classic.