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.