http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1149362/

I have seen many disturbing films in my time, but this has got to be one of the most disturbing I have seen recently. Many films try and shock with scenes of blood, gore, and sex, but few really create the tension, and atmosphere that gives these scenes the edge they need. This film however creates a cold atmosphere very similar to what you might see in an Ingmar Bergman film. Michael Haneke is not the most subtle director around. He has an emotional detachment that makes him seem to a casual observer to the chaos he creates. This film though is much more subtle, and in depth when it comes to it's characters. The film starts out with a doctor falling off his horse because of a wire strung between two trees. This makes him a sympathetic character instantly, and the only mention of him we get is the occasional update regarding his health for a while. Later on when he has recovered he comes home. This is where the story takes a twist. I wont reveal how, but I will say that the doctor turns into something unexpected. He is one of the most unlikeable characters I have seen in a film in a while. The film is narrated by the town's school teacher, who has a romance with a 17 year old girl. This is the part that makes the film stand out from the director's other films. Their relationship is very sweet and it provides some relief from the bleakness of the rest of the film. There is also a pastor with many children he is very strict with. He beats his kids for disobeying him, and ties a white ribbon around them to represent innocence and purity.

I have to say that the kids were fantastic in this film. They had a subtle way of acting that made them sympathetic, yet oddly eerie at the same time. They appear at odd times, usually doing something weird like walking on a dangerous bridge or peeking into windows saying they want to help. They are not emotionless though, so it's not like you don't feel bad for them when things start going bad. This film does not like to explain itself. Weird things often happen like a boy being nearly blinded, and another being severly beaten. All of this is off screen too, which I liked. This is not an exploitation film that loves violence. It is better for the mind to imagine sometimes. All these events in the film happen in the years before WW1 in a remote German town. The people in this time seem happy at first, but then we start to understand how repressed they are. The children are submissive slaves to adults, and are always overly kind. This film is meant to show human nature at it's worst. It shows how people can be lead astray by gossip, bullying, and religion. In some ways it seems to be very critical of religion's effect on people since the Pastor is not the nicest guy, but he has moments of compassion that are quite heartwarming. Don't think this film is anti religion, it is more anti humanity. There is a little side story involving an injured bird that the pastor's son is taking care of that is a welcome break from the brutal way the pastor runs his family. This was a tough film to enjoy for me at first, but after I got into it I found it fascinating.

There are many things going on at once ,whether it is the local Baron's problems with his wife and kids, the school teacher's romance, the abusive doctor, or the problem a local farm boy has with the Estate and his father it all somehow comes together perfectly. The cruelty that goes on in this film is very symbolic given the time and setting right before WW1. It can be seen as a kind of foreshadowing of Germany's future repressive and cruel government. This film is disturbing in a very different way to most. Precious is a disturbing film where pretty much everything is shown, but The White Ribbon doesn't really answer anything. It is a slow paced mystery without an answer, but it's atmosphere, and use of visuals are some of the best I have seen this year. It is not for everyone though, some may find it's lack of resolution and reason frustrating. People do things for no apparent reason, and even disappear without a trace. There are hints as to what might have happened, but you never really understand anything. Overall though I highly recommend it. I found it highly engrossing. It has more traces of compassion, and humanity than Michael Haneke's previous films, but it is still a very bleak and disturbing film about how how depraved and cruel humans can be to each other. We watch as a town tears itself apart in a very slow, and tortured way. It takes a while, but eventually the true hidden and repressed misery of these people comes to the surface and sometimes the results are quite chilling. In some ways it is a powerful examination of the power of hate, and how far people go to repress others and themselves. It is nowhere near as depressing as The Road though, so you won't need to take a shower or anything afterward. However it is Michael Haneke's best film by far, and one you need to watch. He seems to be almost like a modern Ignmar Bergman.

Overall I give it a 9.5 out of 10.

The band of the week this time is WORLD PARTY!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1mtxibzN4Q

This is one of the most underrated bands of the 90s. I dont think they were ever very popular, but I love their sound. They remind me of the symphonic pop bands of the 60s like The Kinks, and The zombies mixed with an electronic influence that is kinda similar to The Super Furry Animals. Their best album is Goodbye jumbo, I recommend it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1054606/

Terry Gilliam is one of the best directors around. He is one of the few who can balance good visuals effects with story, and characters. His films are usually about what isn't shown and explained rather than what is. There are many themes that he uses in his films, but the most used is the imagination. Most of this characters have trouble seperating reality from fantasy. Tideland is a great example of this where the little girl retreats into her own world to escape the real world, and in Brazil where Sam retreats into his own dreams to escape the dystopia he lives in. The Imaginarium of doctor Parnassus is the same. In this film Doctor Parnassus, played by the brilliant Christopher Plummer is an immortant man who promised to give his daughter to the Devil when she turns a certain age. The devil is played by Tom Waits, who does a great job at being weird and appearing out of nowhere. Doctor Parnassus takes his imaginarium mirror on the road with a dwarf, his daughter, and a slight of hand expert.This film is not what it seems from the trailers. It is very complex and at times quite convoluted. Gilliam has always been a very visual director, and with this he goes all out. The imagination scenes are all very beautiful and well done.They are all unique and are meant to show the imagination and mind of the person who enters the mirror.

Sometimes when more than one person enters the mirror different imaginations are mixed, which can lead to many strange results. One in particular involves dancing policeman was probably the most surreal. There has been a lot of talk about this film, but sadly not about the film itself. Many are hyping it because it is Heath Ledger's last film. While he is good in it I think it is unfair to give it tons of hype based around him. Christopher Plummer is the real star of the film, and while Ledger's death was sad he is not the most impressive part of the film. The power to control people's imaginations is all because of a deal Parnassus made witht he devil, and he has to collect souls for him to keep his power and his daughter.He of course has never told anyone this for obvious reasons. Eventually the traveling gang encounter Heath Ledger hanging by his neck under a bridge with a flute in his throat.He gets rescued and Parnassus is scared that the man is a tool of the devil since he can't rememeber his name or why he was was hanging under a bridge. He travels with them and seems to be natural at drawing crowds. There is also a love triangle between him, the daughter Valentina, and the slight of hand guy Anton.Many people have said this film is self indulgent, and overly complex.

Well to be fair it kinda is, but in the best possible way. The story has many layers, some obvious and others more symbolic. It is probably not a coincidence that Doctor Parnassus looks like a god with his long beard and powers, and having the devil involved makes it easier to see. I can understand many people not liking this film. It is not one to enjoy on a casual day off. However I think it has some mass appeal. The mainstream will love it's beautiful visuals, and Heath Ledger while the hip indie intellectual crowd will dig it's complex narrative and metaphors, and Heath Ledger. Since Heath died during filming his part is sometimes played by Johnny Depp, Jude Law, and Colin Farrell. This sounds a lot weirder than it actually us. In the real world part of the film Heath is the star, but whenether he enters the mirror he changes into one of those actors I mentioned. This works surprisingly well, and even the characters in the film don't recognize him when he changes and this gets thrown into the plot. I will probably give this another watch, I find it oddly fascinating. I don't know if I would recommend it to everyone, but Terry Gilliam fans will probably love it. I thought it was fantastic, but again I can understand why many wouldn't. It is a very odd film that is not for everyone. My only real complaint about it personally other than it's confusing plot is Verne Troyer as Percy. He is pretty good, but there are other actors like him who could have done better like Peter Dinklage. This is a small complaint though, and it doesn't effect what the film that much. This is one of the most unique films of the year. Whether you think you will hate it or not, I wouldn't miss it. This is one of the best films Terry Gilliam has made. It is an entertaining film sure, but it is also a complex and deep film about the mysteries of life, and the the stretch and limits of the imagination.

Overall I give it a 9 out of 10.

The film of the week this time is A FISH CALLED WANDA!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095159/

This is one of the best comedy films ever made. Kevin Kline is brilliant as Otto. I think he is one of the only actors to win an oscar for acting in a comedy. John Cleese, Michael Palin, and Jamie Lee curtis are great too. This is one of the best dark comedy films ever. It is mean, backstabbing, and involves the deaths of several animals. It is one of my personal favorites. See it, I demand you to:D

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0926380/

I have always liked Clive Owen. Ever since his early days in the TV show Chancer. He has a great charm in his roles whether he is a caring father, or a badass like in Shoot em up. Here he plays a sports writer Joe. He has a comfortable life with his wife Katie. They live together in Australia with their son Artie. She cleans up after him and pretty much keeps the balance in the house. If it wasn't for her the house would fall apart like a dusty turd in an unused bathroom toilet. He never really had to do much with his son Artie, so when Katie suddenly dies he tries to do everything. This doesn't seem to include cleaning up after him or his son. Their house eventually has junk build up to a point where they just stop thinking about it. Joe takes Artie on a road trip, not because the boy wants to but because Joe can't handle his wife's death. He needs to get away, and his son just happens to be there. After a while the driving trip seems to be getting to little Artie, who didn't seem to react when his mum died. His reaction when she died was to tell his aunt that he told her that his mum would be dead before the morning. The road trip finally gets to Artie and he freaks out, and starts kicking the back seat. Joe just thinks he is hungry and asks him if he wants some chips. Which is a very typical responce to any kind of emotional problem for the Brits it seems. I don't want to generalize, but every time I visit my family there it seems everyone's reaction to a problem is to offer tea. Not that I mind though since I love tea. Anyway back to the story, Joe takes Artie back home to their house and for a while we observe how they live. Their lives are wild, they have water balloon fights in doors, and cause chaos pretty much all the time. Joe feels bad about Katie dieing so he tries to distract Artie in this way. He gets a call from his ex wife who he left when he knocked up Katie. She wants him to spend time with his son he hasn't seen in a while.

The boy Harry comes over and at first he is confused by the chaos and lack of order in the house but he soon gets used to it. Joe hasn't been to work for a while, but when he returns he finds out he has to write sports articles which will require him to take trips to cover tennis matches.He lies and says he there while watching the match on TV and writing from home. This doesn't last long though and he has to leave to cover a match, so he leaves Harry with Artie. This turns out to be a mistake. Artie, and Harry bond and get along very well, but then Harry finds tons of people in his house partying and wrecking the place. Also Joe gets punched in the face by a crazy idiot. I will stop talking about the plot from here because you can pretty much guess the rest. Joe tries to get closer to a parent of one of artie's friends, and a lady who works at a bar. These do not end as you would expect. Well one does but I won't tell you which one. Clive Owen is fantastic in this, he gets to show his more sensitive side after being an awesome badass for years. The boy who plays Artie is good too, very convincing in how he handles his mum's death even though he can be annoying at times. Harry is great too, though I kept thinking he looked like Rupert Grint who played Ron in the harry potter films. This film was much better than I expected. It doesn't do anything new with it's story, but it tells it in a very heartwarming and sometimes sad way. The music was a bit dull though, it was done by Sigur Ros but it got a bit dull after a while.

What makes this film interesting is the chaos in the house. That may have been done before, but here we really get an in depth look into how Joe is really not a very good guy at times. He left his wife and his kid for a lady he knocked up, and he doesn't seem able to handle his kids very well for a while. He puts them in many situations that could injure them and he can be very selfish. He may have them in mind, and he never has bad intentions but they usually come off as general incompetence. Usually films like this would show the dad being a perfect guy who meets a new girl after his wife dies and lives happily ever after. This film really handles it's tender and sweet subject well. We really feel for Joe, he has a heart of gold but he just doesn't know how to deal with life. His wife was everything to him, and she did pretty much everything for him. Overall I would recommend this film. It may be a bit predictable, but it always does something with it's subject that you either didn't expect or that is so well done and heartwarming you don't care how cliche it is. I also watched Couple's retreat today, but that film doesn't deserve the time it would take for me to write a review. It sucks, there that is my review. The Boys are back doesn't though so see it:)

Overall I give it an 7.5 out of 10.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0875034/

I am not a big fan of musicals, but there are some that can be good because they have a perfect mix of story, characters, and songs. This is not one of those films. Daniel Day Lewis plays Guide Contini, a famous director who is admired in Italy. He is having a creative problem, he wants to make a film but he hasn't written a script yet because of his problems with the women in his life. The first problem with this film is Daniel Day Lewis. He is one of the best actors around, but he was just dull in this. I understand that he is supposed to be depressed and going through a lot in the film but he just wasn't very compelling or interesting. His songs were okay, but Day Lewis is not a very good singer. Raul Julia, and Antonio Banderas were much better in the original Nine musical. They had charm and charisma which brought the character to life. Day Lewis is just tiring to watch as he has affairs with various women, and struggles to be creative. The impressive part of the film are the various women in his life. Not all of them are good, Kate Hudson's part is awful and her song is the worst in the film. She is not a very good actress in general actually so I wasn't surprised. Nicole Kidman was also pretty dull as Guido's muse. She is barely in the film and when she appears she is gone pretty soon after. Marion Cotillard however is fantastic. Her character isn't given a lot of background but she really knows how to handle her character with grace. She is both beautiful and tragic in the film as Guido's wife who has been with him for years. She is struggling to supportive of him as he has affairs, her character is by far the best in the film. Her last song near the end of the film was one of the best. That brings me to another problem with the film, the songs.

The best musicals have songs that feel natural, they flow with the story of the film and don't seem like filler. The songs in this film are mostly bland and seem thrown in to fill space. The only other good song is Fergie's song "Be Italian." which shows that Fergie is not as terrible as we all seem to think. Now that I think about it, I was more impressed with Fergie's song than I was with the songs by Day Lewis, Nicole Kidman, and Kate Hudson. I think I'm going to need therapy now, my mind cannot comprehend that. Another wasted actress is Sophia Loren as Guido's mom. She appears a few times, but doesn't really do anything interesting. What a waste of a fantastic actress. I try to find the good in all films though, this film is not all bad. Penelope Cruz is great in her part, and her song is quite sexy. Like Cotillard, she does a lot with a character that could have been dull. Judi Dench is also very good as the costume designer. Her song isn't great, but she makes it better by being as awesome as she usually is. It's interesting how most modern musicals cast good actors who can never sing very well. That isn't always the case, but it seems like having a good voice isn't very important in modern musicals. The overall problem with this film is the lack of anything emotional. Guido is a very bland and uninteresting character for the most part, mostly because Day Lewis doesn't play him very well. He has the voice and accent down, but he can't seem to make him compelling. Everything about this film feels detached emotionally, from the mediocre songs that come out of nowhere most of the time like the director got bored and wanted to fill space. The only interesting part is Marion Cotillard's, which could have been much better if it was developed more. Day Lewis has a few good scenes, like a visit to a Cardinal that was quite well done. I also liked how everyone said how much they love his films except for the flops/ This film was pretty disappointing overall. It isn't bad, but it could have been much better.

Overall I give it a 6 out of 10.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0432283/

There are some films that make you ponder things. Intellectual things like life, death, and toast. Then there are the other films that warm your heart. Not in a sappy love story way, but in that special way that can keep you smiling throughout. This is one of those films. I have always liked Wes Anderson, the only film of his I didn't like as much was The Life Aquatic due to it's forced quirkyness. He finds a place for his humor here. I remember reading the old fantastic Mr. Fox book when I was a kid. Heck I pretty much grew up on Roald Dahl's stories. This may not be the most faithful adaptation, but in this case I really don't care. George Clooney is perfect as Mr. Fox. You know his voice by now, and he makes no effort to hide it. He has a great charm that makes him almost impossible to hate. Well to me at least. The only other actors I can think of who would have done Mr. Fox's voice as well are Timothy Dalton, and Stephen Fry. Actually now that I think about it Stephen Fry's voice could have been awesome. Anyway though, the other voices in this film are all fantastic. My personal favorite was Rat voiced by Wilem Dafoe. I did not recognize his voice in the slightest. I had to double check the voice cast on IMDB to make sure, but damn he is good. The basic plot is Mr. Fox, and his wife voiced by the great Meryl Streep move into a new hole which happens to be near three farmers. Mr. Fox, and his friend Kylie start stealing from the three farmers Boggis, Bunce, and Bean. The farmers of course are not too fond of this idea and go after them. They use everything from Bulldozers, to explosions. Mr. Fox, and his family try to escape by digging as much as they can. Eventually they meet up with Badger voiced by Bill Murray, and many other critters. Many cartoons try and be funny, and sometimes they are. Most of the time though they can't mix humor, heart, and plot.

This film is one of the few I have seen recently that does. Every main character is developed well and I cared about them because of their great interactions and development. Some animations try too hard to be quirky and they end up relying on jokes and flashy visuals. Speaking of visuals, they has one of the most unique and interesting looks I have seen in a while. Some scenes look like side scrolling sets, like the characters are moving on a 2D plain. This may look odd to some, but I loved it. You can really see the effort that went into this film. All the characters look amazing, and their movements are realistic with that strange jerky look that a lot of stop motion seems to have. This has really been a fantastic year for animation. Not only have their been superb films like Mary and Max, and Coraline, but they all seem to have a good chance at winning a best animated feature Oscar. Well except Mary and Max, I doubt that will. Not that I care about the Oscars, but it would be good to see these films get some recognition. This may not be an intellectual film, and it may be very silly at times, but damn is it fun. I haven't smiled this much since I first saw Amelie. Whether it is Mr. Fox's relationship with his wife, or Ash, and Kristofferson's cute fights. I also loved Jarvis Cocker's cameo and Petey. Some people may not find that part funny since he isn't popular in America, but it made me chuckle. This film just oozes charm all over the place. It doesn't have that forced quirk that a lot of dreamworks films have, it actually is quite clever and funny. I can't recommend this film highly enough, though I don't think I can give it a perfect score. That could be that some jokes were not as funny as others, or maybe I don't cussing feel like giving it a perfect score! It may be charming and wonderful and many other adjectives, but it felt like there could have been a bit more to it, and some characters felt like they were thrown in just to get a laugh. I felt it was almost too short, at the end I wanted to see more. Then again that could also speak in favor of the film that I wanted more.

Overall I give it a 9 out of 10.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1175506/

I have been interested in theater for years. My family has worked in theater for as long as I can remember. My dad has directed some plays and musicals in London, so naturally I found this film interesting. I watching the theater process when I was in England. Seeing behind the curtain and how all these actors get over their nerves and get on stage. For a moment you feel like a king. When the audience cheers you feel like you have achieved greatness even if only you feel it. I may not have worked in theater before, but I have seen enough of how it works to know that it is both a fantastic and terrifying experience. This is one of the few films that really captures the passion and energy of theater. I don't know if Richard Linklater has worked in theater before, but he really knows how to capture it's energy. Me and Orson welles is about a young man played surprisingly well by Zac Efron who loves art. Not any single kind of art, he see's beauty in all forms whether it is theater art, or literature. He carries around a book by the great actor John Gielgud, and one day because of a remarkable coincidence he gets a part in the new Orson Welles play Julius Caeser. Orson welles is played by the fantastic newcomer Christian Mckay. He captures Orson's persona perfectly.The power he has over people, and his natural charisma are brough to life like no actor has ever done. He is a kind of dictator, controlling not only the stage but everyone around him. He has an affair with the lead actress and has someone warn him when his wife arrives, and he seems to flirt with all the girls he meets.

He is pretty much an arrogant jerk who gives Zac efron's character a chance to have a small part in his play. The rest of the film, while being a bit predictable at times is very entertaining. I have always liked Richard Linklater as a director. He can do romance films very well, and unlike most modern romance films his feel natural.Before Sunrise, and Before Sunset are two of the best romance films ever made. His characters are eccentric at times but they feel more like real people.Claire Danes, who you may remember from Terminator 3, and Stardust, plays the apparent love interest.She likes the youthful energy that Efron's character has. His passion for theater and expressing himself has none of the arrogance that Welles has. He knows he isn't amazing, but he needs some kind of creative medium to feel alive. I have known kids like him when I watched the actors backstage at some of the plays I observed, and I have seen that selfish arrogance in many of the actors I have met. They may not be well known, but they all think of themselves as the greatest person alive.Not all actors of course, but there is something about the theater that can create an astounding ego. Maybe it is the immediate reaction of the crowd, the sound of their applause would make anyone feel amazing and loved by all. Not only is Welles arrogant, but nobody seems to mind. They all do their jobs and tell Efron's character to do whatever he says. Even Claire Danes's character does whatever Orson wants. All this arrogance astounds and angers Efron, he just wants to be a part of something magical like the theater without the arrogance that can possess people and make them do horrible things. In the end this is not so much a story of love, it is a story of life in the theater. I am sure many actors have gone through similar situations, and this is one of the few films that can capture it.

I hope Christian Mckay gets more recognition for his performance, it is one of the most impressive I have seen from a newcomer in a while. This film may not be anything special to some people, but to me it was one of Richard Linklater's best films. It may be a bit cliche and predictable, but in this case it worked perfectly. I hope Zac Efron goes on to do more films like this rather than the high school musical crap. He may not be amazing, but he is better than I thought he would be. This film may not be a deep character study, and it doesn't give you much insight into who Orson Welles was. However it is one of the most entertaining films I have seen this year. The only other film I have seen capture the magic of theater like this is Waiting for guffman.I highly recommend this film to people who find the theater interesting, and to people who just want to watch a fun film. You may not like it as much as me, but that is okay. I am here to spread my words like butter on toast, you don't have to eat it. I have seen people act the way the characters did in this film. it may not be pretty all the time, but hey its theater. This film doesn't really have any problems, but I found Welles such an interesting character than all the other scenes paled in comparison. The scenes with Zac Efron are not bad, but they could have been done by a better actor. All the quirks of theater are here, the odd personalities, the trap doors, the place seems to be a whole world. For a moment you can become somebody else, throw away your own personality and become a character. Some people live for that because they are so afraid of how the world will perceive them that they hide behind characters. For a while it seems the whole world loves you, what could be better than that? Only problem with this film really is that it doesn't have much emotional depth. Not as much as before sunrise and before sunset anyway.

Overall I give it a 8 out of 10.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0448182/

Wow this was a weird one. I have seen a few modern film noir's like Kiss kiss bang bang, and Sin City. But they either make fun of the genre by being ridiculous or use it as a backdrop to something else. This film fully embraces film noir. It is all in black and white, complete with the strange mist that hangs in the air of these kinds of films. The plot is hard to describe, then again so is the film. Imagine if David Lynch, and Howard Hawks directed a film noir that was written by Quentin tarantino, and Carl jung. The film focuses on Hoyle, who talks like a Humphrey Bogart, and looks like a blonde model. She is trying to discover the mystery behind a reclusive genius who has figured out the mystery of time. This film is non linear in a way that will probably confuse some. Events happen out of order in a very Memento like way, but contain hints of a linear plot. You will spot elements and subtle hints from a past scene put into one that is very similar. A lot of the film will not make much sense, until you find out why everything is out of place structure wise then slowly starts to come together. The film gets more and more into it's sci fi nature mixed with a bit of spiritual jung influences as the case Hoyle is working on goes deeper and deeper. The acting in the film may seem a bit wooden at times, but it is meant to be set in a modern Los Angeles with that classic noir influence. Hoyle even uses a Mac computer in one scene. It is meant to be modern L.A girls as film noir detectives so it can seem a bit weird at times. The cast are all pretty consistant, Kipleigh brown plays Hoyle and for an actress I have never seen before she does pretty well. You may also recognize Chase Masterson from Star Trek: Deep space 9. She plays a jazz singer with surprisingly good vocals. John Newton plays dudas, and the inventor of Q Bert Warren Davis plays a psychiatrist.This film reminds me of a Darren Aronofsky film Pi in it's surreal visuals. Hoyle's journey gets more and more strange as parts of her life repeat and loop as she gets deeper and deeper into the case. She tries to reconnect with an old love Dudas who cant seem to let go of her. His refusal to let go is making her life spiral out of control.

Her life starts to seem out of order and she notices several hints left by someone she cant see that her life will keep being non linear until she can control it herself or confront Dudas and make him let go of her. Andrei Tarkovsky has a clear influence here in how he mixes striking visuals with a more scientific plot. Problem with this film is that you don't really understand why she used to love Dudas. All you really get is a picture of them that she keeps with her. The fragmented and non linear aspects of the film may also be a bit intimadating to someone expecting a linear progression through a logical story. Much of this film's logic doesn't make much sense in a scientific way. The sci fi aspect has a heavy Jungian influence with it's use of non linear progression, and unconscious mind controlling a person's life. The film seems to embrace both the spiritual aspects of Jung, and the more scientific and logical parts of Freud. Characters even casually discuss salvodor dali. You will have to suspend belief since the whole point of this film is how a personal trauma can literally change a person's life and morph it making it seem non linear. Parts of Hoyle's life repeat, heck she even repeats dialogue at times. The film may start vaguely normal with the discovery of a body lieing next to a book of poems by T.S Elliot, but it soon gets much more weird. It is hard for me to describe this film really, it can be a bit self indulgent and the acting isn't amazing. Overall though I recommned it because there is nothing else like it this year. At times it tries a bit too hard to be weird and the acting can be pretty iffy. Also the non linear progression can seem a bit obnoxious and self indulgent. It may be hard to see in theaters, it was only playing in one in my city. It will be out soon on DVD though.

Overall I give it a 9 out of 10

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1057500/

I have a lot of respect for Clint Eastwood. Not many American directors these days would make a rugby film, but I like that he takes risks. There is something about sports that can bring us together as a people. For a moment all our past problems can be thrown aside as we are engulfed by the passion of the crowd. I am not a sports fan, haven't been since I was a kid. However I can appreciate a good sports film because most of them are essentially underdog stories. This can get a bit dull after a while though, so the political and social backdrop of South Africa really helped to make this film better. It is nowhere near as good or polished as The Damned United, but it is still quite a good film. Clint's last film Gran Torino was not very good, in fact most of it was pretty poorly done overall but it still managed to be somewhat enjoyable. The same year though he released Changeling, which is a superior film in every way. He may be a bit hit and miss at times, but I respect many of the choices he has made as a director. He has a very plain look when it comes to how he shoots his films. Nothing fancy, he is almost an observer with a camera watching these character's lives. This film is about Nelson Mandela using his country's rugby team to unite his people. The film does mention other problems in the country like a rising crime rate, but they are not really important to the story. We see how Mandela has to fight to keep his people supportive of his choices, and after a while he realizes how useful rugby can be for bringing his people together. Morgan Freeman plays Mandela quite well, but he doesn't really stray far from his usual way of acting.

The real surprise here is Matt Damon, he was much better than I expected. Even though he didn't look like a rugby player and his character isn't very developed he still manages a very good performance. I think his accent is more consistant than Leonardo Dicaprio's in Blood Diamond. Though Leo had more to say than Matt. The main problem with this film is that I never felt involved with it. Even Mandela wasn't very interesting. The political aspect of the film is the backbone of it and the driving force behind why the rugby is so important. When it comes to that aspect it does well. I liked the interactions between Mandela's bodyguards and how the tension slowly eased until they were able to play rugby and work well together. I never really found the film very compelling other than the rugby scenes. I liked how Clint shot them and didn't resort to having commentator's describe the action more than necessaryThe rugby part is interesting enough, it is the typical underdog story with much more at stake since they are respresenting South Africa. Everything else though was rather bland and uninteresing. We never really get a sense of Mandela and his scenes almost seem like filler at times. I found myself waiting for Matt Damon to come back on screen. I think Clint gave himself too much with this film. He has to deal with a very sensitive time in South Africa's history, and there is almost too much going on for him to handle. Clint is at his best when he is directing slower character based pieces like Unforgiven. This though feels too emotionally detached.

I enjoyed watching the characters and the situation evolve, but there were too many unimportant characters who didn't really do much in the end. Mandela's politcal frustrations with his getting his people on his side are all good, but I never felt any involvement. Also when the film tries to be emotional with the rugby scenes it can be very cheesy. There is some very cheesy and unnecassary slow motion used at the end that was just tedious to watch. I may sound overly negative here, this is not a bad film in the slightest. It may not be very emotionally involving, but it is still an interesting film. It did make me want to research South Africa a bit more, so I give it that at least. I remember not too long ago when Spain won the world cup I was in Madrid. I was walking back to my hotel with my dad, and suddenly the city exploded. People were running and cheering and screaming for hours. I may not be a fan of sports, but it was impossible not to feel the passion that made the air buzz with joy. That is what this film lacks. It doesn't have the passion all the way through that a film like The Damned United has. I also found the music very dull other than the African music. The only really emotional involvement I felt was at the end after the last match. The scenes of people cheering and celebrating were the best in the film. It may be a bigger scale film, but in the end it doesn't feel like much more than a very well done underdog story with a political background. It teased me with infomation just enough to make me interested in the film. I hope Clint makes another few films before he dies, he is a very talented director and while this isn't one of his best it is still a good film.

Overall I give it a 7 out of 10.