Taxi Driver. Martin Scorsese (1.976)

Taxi Driver is a vintage Scorsese movie. Unrelentless street violence, deeply disturbed characters, the streets of New York, brilliant acting and one of the best sequences ever shot on film.

The movie follows the life and tribulations of Travis Bickle, a New York cabbie who racks in an enormous number of hours a week as he doesn't have anybody to go home to and suffers from insomnia. This allows him to earn money to spare, and with this, he buys weapons.

Scorsese slowly takes us through the complicated mind of Bickle, who through his travels gets to meet people from all walks of life and absorbs a little bit of each one. He feels like a man with no purpose, so he decides to find one. he runs into a young hooker by the name of Iris and he insists in taking her out of this life. At the same time, he falls for a beautiful woman, played by Cibyll Shepperd, who happens to work for the campaign of a politician. In a plain attempt to gain attention, he cuts his hair mohawk style and, packed with several guns, shows up at this politician's rally, possibly to shoot him, but has to escape in a hurry when a security guard starts asking him questions.

There's a segment where Travis practices with his gun at his run down apartment in front of a mirror. He confronts an imaginary oponent as he draws his gun while saying "Are you talkin' to me?" in a memorable and frequently quoted scene.

Travis then shows up at the brothel where Iris works. He meets Sport, her pimp, played by the ever versatile  Harvey Keitel and shoots him with no previous warning. He walks into the building and shoots the man who assigns the rooms and is also shot in the neck himself. He continues on to the room where Iris is with one of her customers and also shoots that man. Travis then slumps to the couch, possibly bleeding to death. This action sequence is beautifully shot (if this term is applicable) and shows Scorsese's direction mastery.

At the end of this scene, a voice reads out loud a letter sent to Travis, who obsviuosly survived, by Iris' parents who thank him for saving their daughter and bringing her back to them.

In the end, Travis became a hero, a person of notoriety, something he was anxiously looking for. But, what does the future hold for him?

In the end, Scorsese displays what the streets of New York are like. An ugly underworld filled with drugs, violence and prostitution. Travis Bickle is just a simple man with a social problem, possibly a sociopath, who absorbs what he sees and feels from his bleak surroundings. He's just a by product of modern society.

This is at least my opinion. And I could be wrong.

Donnie Darko. Richard Kelly (2001)

Well, I finally got to see it. Donnie Darko has become some sort of a cult classic and for some reason I had never come accross it either at the theatre or on TV, and it was my teenage son who came up with the idea of renting it last night.

What a pleasant surprise it was.

Although at some point it looks like a coming of age movie, a teen comedy or a teen slasher flick, it combines elements from these three genres with some dark humour and supernatural themes to create something really unique.

Donnie Darko is a mature and brilliant teenage boy with schizophrenia problems who sleepwalks. He has weekly sessions with a therapist who tries to get to the bottom of Donnie's problems. He then starts to see a giant bunny who gives him instructions which he carries out, things like flooding his high school or burning someone's house. On the other hand, Donnie tries to survive high school as well as he can, dealing with friendship, love and social acceptance. His life is a complicated series of events which inevitably come to an abrupt and complicated climax.

Donnie is surrounded by a multitude of quirky characters ranging from a controlling teacher, the usual high school bullies, his tragedy ridden girlfriend, an old neighbour suffering from dementia, and his imaginary bunny friend. These array of strange characters give the movie a special appeal. It is evident that the director, Richard Kelly, decided to create an environment where nothing was normal. Surprisingly enough for an American movie, he decided to make Donnie's family completely normal and supportive. That I found confusing, giving the overall tone of the film.

Given the complexity of the story, it's difficult to summarise the strange events that ultimately occur at the climax of the movie, which I'd need to see again to totally understand (remember Inception?) but in short, Donnie unravels a time travel mystery in a book which was written by his old and crazed neighbour. Once he solves this, he decides it's best for him to die, placing himself in the spot where a lost airplane turbine will fall on his house. He gives up his life so his girlfriend can survive.

I strongly recommend this movie, although I understand its not just for everyone. My son and I enjoyed it, but I'm sure my wife and daughter would have walked out after 15 minutes. A too heavy and intricate story overloaded with strange  and disturbing characters Perfect for a Saturday night at home.

This is, at least, my opinion, and I could be wrong.

The Perks of Being a Wallflower. Stephen Chbosky (2012)

I have to admit this is the type of film that I'd never see just based on its name and the actors involved. Don't get me wrong, I loved Ezra Miller in "We need to talk about Kevin", but this seemed to me like a rom com teenage movie. It wasn't until my good friend Fabiola recommended the movie that I decided to rent it on a Saturday night with no exciting footy games on TV.

This what could be defined as a typical "coming of age" film, but lucky for the viewer it's not made in the "American Pie" tradition of comedy nor is a cheesy first-love experience teen movie. The story is based on the novel of the same name, written by the Director of the movie, Stephen Chbosky in 1999

The movie tells the story of a group of high school misfits who get together and support each other in a world ruled by popularity. The main character, Charlie, is a scared and insecure freshman with no friends or social ability. He's received by the group with open arms when they discover the kid lost his only friend after he committed suicide. Charlie, excellently portrayed by Logan Lerman, is a complex character who is brilliantly described by the Author/Director Chbosky. We start to pick up bits and pieces from his past as the movie progresses. At one point, in series of flashbacks, we find that Charlie is prone to blackouts he suffers when he commits acts of violence. We learn that the boy was abused at a very young age by an aunt, whom he supposedly killed during one of the blackouts.

Charlie's best friends and mentors are Patrick and Sam. They are brother and sister and both are high school seniors. Patrick is witty, very social and openly gay. He's played by a brilliant Ezra Miller. Emma Watson, of Harry Potter fame, is Sam, a troubled girl who chooses the wrong men to hang out or have sex with. Charlie inevitably falls for her, understanding that she's beyond his reach. This unusual threesome cruise through the last year of high school for Patrick and Sam, overcoming several obstacles as well as their insecurities.

After Charlie suffers a crisis, he's confined to a psychiatric hospital for examination. During his sessions with the therapist, the abuse he suffered from his now deceased aunt is revealed, and his family, including his elusive sister, give him support while all of a sudden understand the reason for his erratic behaviour.

The group inevitable splits as all the seniors leave town for their respective universities, leaving Charlie at home. They eventually return and ina memorable final scene Patrick  Sam and Charlie go out on a ride to a spot they used to go.

It's definitely a teenage coming of age movie, but without too many cliches. The characters are rich and complicated, and it doesn't have a happy ending where Charlie regains his sanity and gets his girl. We expect that these three teenagers will continue their lives with Patrick struggling with his sexuality; Sam fighting her insecurities and Charlie confronting his internal demons.

This is, at least, my opinion. And I could be wrong.

Game of Thrones. David Benioff (2011 - Ongoing)

Spoiler alert!!!

I've never written about TV in any form, but after watching the first season of this series, I simply had to. A very good friend of mine here in Australia had been suggesting the books and TV series for a while, but since I've never been a fan of the fantasy genre, I never cared to give this a shot. Until a few weeks ago, when finally I decided to give it a try. On a Sunday, I rented the first season and started watching it with my wife. We were immediately hooked by it. Now, there's no turning back!

This epic story revolves around the complicated land of Westeros (on planet Earth?) where seven families, who rule different kingdoms, struggle to detain power at any cost. The series evolves slowly, as we're introduced to its many characters, their strengths, weaknesses, desires and fears. It takes the viewer a while to start realising who's who and how they're related to each other. Season one is more like an action adventure story in the middle ages than fantasy, as there are hardly any fantastic or supernatural elements (until late in the season)

The casting is superb. Every character seems real. Ned Stark is portrayed by one of the few cast members I had seen before, Sean Bean. He could be branded as the main character of the story in season 1. He's the head of the Starks, a powerful family who rule the Northern land of Winterfell. Then you have the Lannisters, a group of cold hearted scheming brothers seeking to control the land of Kings Landing. The best acting however, is by Peter Dinklage, a dwarf that was usually cast in comedy movies like Death at a Funeral. He plays the brilliant but physically impaired Tyrion Lannister, who wanders through these perilous lands using his wit as a weapon. 

The dense story line is full of subplots and you can clearly see how the story branches out to many sub stories that at some point seem to expand out of control. The author, George R. R. Martin, created a world comparable to that Middle Earth of The Lord of the Rings and you can see clearly how he was influenced by Tolkien. New kingdoms appear while you're still trying to figure out what happened in the previous one. One good thing about renting the entire series is that the DVD's have plenty of features explaining each and every character and each and every family. This helps out in putting the entire web of characters together and having a better idea of what's going on.

I ended up watching the first two episodes again and both me and my wife went "Oh, that's why she didn't get burned" or "Oh, so they are really brother and sister"

I strongly recommend this piece of television, possibly the most exciting and expensive serial ever to be filmed for the silver screen.

This is at least my opinion. And I could be wrong.

The Master. Paul Thomas Anderson (2.012)

Every once in awhile, we come across a movie that defies mainstream cinema, and forces you to watch it with a different approach. I find this very challenging, and most of the time I enjoy the exercise. This doesn't make a movie automatically a work of art, but it is good to be put in a position where you have to think outside the square. This is the case with "The Master"

Freddie Quell, played by Joaquim Phoenix, is a WWII veteran with mental problems that is walking adrift in life, with no home and no purpose. After a wild night he awakens in a boat belonging to Lancaster Dodd, played by Philip Seymour Hoffman, also known as "The Master". Dodd is the founder and leader of a cult named "The Cause" Like any other cult leader, Lancaster Dodd is narcissistic and intolerant. His views on life and his decisions are not to be questioned by his followers who respond to him blindly and with devotion.
These two odd characters engage in a relationship of dominance and admiration. Freddie, whose behaviour has always been erratic and bordering on bi polar, physically attacks those who dare to question The Master's theories and beliefs.
The movie moves along without a clear story line. It's mostly the strange relationship between these two characters. The point is, the acting is so sensational that you are drawn into the lives of these two men, knowing for sure that this could not end well. I was expecting a fatalistic grand finale, with Quell turning violent on his new mentor and possibly committing suicide. And who knows if this would have happened if you gave this movie fifteen more minutes. The thing is, Anderson was not interested in a climatic ending, or an ending with a twist. He leaves us there, wandering what would come next.
The mastery of Anderson's creation lies in the construction of these two characters. Better yet, three characters, as Amy Adams does a subtle but powerful impersonation of Peggy Dodd, Lancaster's wife who seems to be the only person with any control over his life and actions. Adams had prviously teamed up with Seymour Hoffman in "Doubt" where both of them had remarkable performances. I hope she gets the recognition she deserves for this role.
Even when Phoenix has been nominated for Academy awards before (Walk the line and Gladiator) I truly believe this is his best work so far. Just watching him walk and gesture in this movie made me uneasy. He portrays his role as an oversexed psychotic person well. Seymour Hoffman also delivers a masterful performance, but we're used to that already. His role as an intolerant, manipulative, possibly lunatic but very intelligent cult leader is fantastic. My only question would be that he seems to portray this character the same way he has done with others in the past.This is not a bad thing, just not that original.
Overall, this is a great movie, which needs to be seen bearing in mind there will be no clear story line or major developments. Only the rants and tribulations of three very peculiar people.

This is, at least, my opinion. And I could be wrong.

Les Miserables. Tom Hooper (2012)

Spoiler Alert!!!

As a fan of musical theater it's somewhat difficult to evaluate this movie from strictly a cinematic point of view. Les Miserables is the last in a long list of hit Broadway/West End musicals which have been made into successful movies. It seems like a good formula. Choose a hit musical, build up a cast of famous stars (who can actually sing), and throw in  $100 MM. The result, a blockbuster like Les Mis. To refresh your memory, these previous musicals have become instant screen record breakers: The Sound of Music; Mary Poppins; West Side Story; Chicago; Oliver; Grease; My Fair Lady and many others. At least three of them won Best Picture awards.

Les Miserables, or as it is usually known, Les Mis, is based on the best selling novel by Victor Hugo and tells the story of Jean Valjean (played by Hugh Jackman) a man who was given a very stiff penalty for stealing a loaf of bread in the aftermath of the French Revolution, where France was immersed in poverty. Valjean serves his duty and upon release refuses to report to the police as a paroled man. He becomes a businessman and changes his name. Javert (played by Russell Crowe), a committed policeman, looks for him everywhere and their lives cross paths several times, with Valjean narrowly escaping all of them.

One of Valjean's employees, Fantine, is fired by Valjean's merciless foreman, and she turns to prostitution in order to provide for her little girl, Cosette. Fantine is beautifully played by Anne Hathaway. It's a short but powerful role, where the misery and degradation of prostitution in 19 Century Paris is explicitly displayed. Valjean finds out about Fantine and, feeling responsible, vows to take care of Cosette. Fantine dies very young and sings one of the most important songs of the musical "I dreamed a dream" This is a very powerful and dramatic scene. I felt really moved by Hathaway's performance and singing.

The story moves ahead a few years, with Valjean starting over yet again, this time with Cosette by his side, who he treats as his daughter. A few youngsters unhappy with the ever powerful government, organise a protest. Among these men, a young lawyer, Marius (played by Eddie Redmayne), falls in love with Cosette, something that is not approved by Valjean.

At the height of these protests, Javert once more spots Valjean. He (Valjean) then decides to leave once again and alerts Cosette, who doesn't want to as she's in love with Marius. The protests escalate and a whole section of the city is barricaded off. The soldiers, with sheer force, manage to contain these protests and eventually go over and around the barricade, killing most of the young men involved, with Marius being gravely wounded. Valjean decides to help him and carries him away to safety through the underground sewers as he's pursued by Javert.

Javert, who at one point was imprisoned by the protesters and whose life was spared by Valjean, commits suicide, putting an end to a life long pursuit and to Valjean's troubles.

The movie ends with the death of Jean Valjean, while he's reunited once again with Cosette and Marius.

A highly dramatic plot, loaded with fantastic songs and settings. The acting was spot on, especially by Jackman, Hathaway and Amanda Seyfried. I guess Russell Crowe was Ok although his voice didn't do him any favours. The director, Tom Hooper, used extreme closeups with all actors, especially Jackman, I believe to emphasize the drama. I found this really distressing at times, but I guess he manages to obtain that effect. For those who are not particularly fond of the musical theater, I believe this could be a long and slow movie. But for those who admire this art form, this movie is a must see.

The renditions of "I dreamed a dream" by Hathaway and "In my life" by Amanda Seyfried were nothing short of brilliant. Most of Jackman's solo's (a heap of them) were terrific. He has a strong musical background and has played the main part in several musicals. I can recall him as "Curly" in "Oklahoma", where he took me by surprise for his strong tenor voice. The part of Jean Valjean is possibly the most sought after male role in all of musical theatre, possibly rivaled by The Phantom. It;s a difficult, tiresome and long script loaded with songs. The whole movie revolves around him and his internal struggles to find himself and to be a better person. I haven't seen "Lincoln" and once I see it I'll have to compare Daniel Day Lewis' part with Jackman's, but regardless of this, I strongly believe this was a major piece of acting by Jackman.

Once again, if you like musicals, then this is a must see. If you don't, you might get bored.

This is, at least, my opinion. And I could be wrong.

Argo. Ben Affleck (2.012)

I've never believed in the Oscars as a benchmark to define the quality of a movie. I understand though, that it's definitely a good reference of movies you should see. I took that decision many years ago when a cheesy romantic comedy like "Ghost" was nominated for best picture. This theory of mine was once more proven this year with "Argo".

I usually like films based in historic events. "The Right Stuff"; "Amadeus"; "Ghandi" are some of the titles I've truly enjoyed throughout the years. These movies encourage you to read more about the events that took place in real life therefore you end up learning a bit more about history. However, you have to be careful about what you see because there could be a big gap between reality and what the Director wants you to believe. This is the case with "Argo".

Ben Affleck intends to portray the events that took place in Iran when in 1.979 a group of fanatics took the US Embassy in Tehran taking 50 Americans as hostages. Six of them managed to escape and holed up at the Canadian Embassy. The US Government, through the CIA and an officer named Tony Mendez, device a  clever plan to retrieve these six Americans by pretending them to be part of a film crew that were looking for locations for a sci-fi film named "Argo".

The movie itself is interesting, as you realise this happened in real life. The tensions keep mounting because everyone is aware that is the plan is uncovered, everyone would end up executed and tensions between the two countries would escalate. In this sense, the movie is good. A thriller complete with last minute escapes and phone calls taken on the last ring. But in the end, something I'd rather watch on TV during a Saturday night at home.

The acting was relatively good, only Alan Arkin standing out, as he usually does.

But the part I really disliked was the manipulation of the truth for cinematic convenience. Tony Mendez, who is Ben Affleck's character, only spent 2 days in Iran when this all happened. It was mostly the Canadian Ambassador Ken Taylor, who risked his life for weeks by hiding these Americans and issuing false passports to all of them.

In the end, it was another so-so movie made to look important by touching the American's sense of patriotism. Good old USA saving the day once again. 

This is, at least, my opinion. And I could be wrong.