les bureaux de dieu

A social commentary that revolves around a family planning center, it's social workers, and the people mostly women, they take the time to listen and give advice to.

all the cases tackled by the social workers make the case for sexual education, women's rights, contraception, and abortion giving emphasis on having a personal and well informed choice on their respective matters as a crucial ingredient in making important decisions. we hear of cases where it is the total opposite when women don't have the choice at all.

this is in strike contrast to what we have today in the philippines where people are mostly ignorant and sans access to health services. it couldn't be more obvious why this is so when certain prominent religious institutions who have a hand on state policies (imposing their religious beliefs onto the rest of us) continue to halt progress on civil liberties and women's rights.

I find the movie socially relevant and mature especially on how the social workers sympathized with their (patients?). but not very entertaining for it lacked the hollywood formula much like a crutch or an addiction that we have grown accustomed to.

For french language lovers, it is a treat. but for the same reason, when a language is presented as english subtitles (and not entirely translated might i add) could fail to convey the actual emotion accross the language barrier, which could possibly lead non french speaking audiences unable to relate ..

Rating 3 out of 5 ***
women power!

la papesse jeanne

joan (played by johanna wokalek) was born a genius. she had a talent for learning and a natural curiousity towards the world. she picked up things just by listening to them. she grew up with her father who was the village priest, a religious and ruthless man; her pagan mother and her two older brothers.

joan's father groomed her brothers to be servants of the church just as he was. the oldest brother, as soon as he discovers her extraordinary abilities, secretly took time to teach her how to read and write. while her mother taught johnna the ancient healing arts by way of herbs. she learned diligently. her father though thinks that she was an abomination (unnatural) and forbade her from learning anything at all. unfortunately, she lived at an age when there was a low opinion of women.

one day she was discovered by a visiting monk who recognized her gifts. he taught her alongside with her brothers, the classics, philosophy, greek etc. the monk, excited of his find, sent word to the bishop to have her immediately transfered to the school to be given proper education, even though education was traditionaly given only to christian boys, the monk thought that it would be a crime against god not to send her. her father grew exceedingly furious. he only agreed to it if one of her brothers would be sent with her.

when the bishop's emissary came for her back at the village later, and was instructed to bring just one child. her father insisted on sending her brother instead. it was the last draw, joan decided to run away and pursue her calling.

the story is about her remarkable journey to rome where she becomes the pope in a world where she was forced to hide behind a disguise -- that of a man. where only behind this mask that she could be free. she quickly made a name for herself going against tradition but not without adversaries and allies along the way.

she became a distuigished healer and an accompished philosopher infamously arguing for equality. she was a scribe translating into different languages knowledge of the classics. she knew the value of education and took the time to teach others who were willing how to read and write.

unfortunately we could never know if this is a true story or not for if there had been any record of her, it looks like it had long been (maybe intentionally) erased from antiquity. today her inspiring story survives as mere medieval legend.

the film gives us a realistic view of why sexism perpetuates to this day. that there must be a relationship between religious doctrine and how religious people view and treat women. we can see how the story bears comtemporary implications against modern day sexism, ignorance and superstition, against gender roles, of politics in the church heirarchy. and how equality remains to be, not only a religious but certainly a social and political question.

4 out of 5 ****
read more of st paul and st. aquinas views on women

agora

agora is a historical non fiction film about hypatia, an atheist philosopher who taught at the library of alexandria, 4th century AD in roman egypt.

this was at the time when the roman empire was crumbling and the number of christians
have swelled enough to take over the city. at the behest of the pagans who worshipped their ancestral gods (serapis, mithra, horus and the others - all of which by the way had similar attributes with jesus - virgin birth, saviour of mankind, miracle workers, teller of parables etc)

christian zealots performed spectacles like walking on fire to lure the superstitious crowd. and made challenges to the gods for their seeming absence in the mortal realm. they failed to apply the same standard of scrutiny however, to their own god.

the situation worsened, provoked by public mockery of their god, the followers of serapis attacked the christians. against hypatia's pleading for the church leader of serapis to instead file their case with the prefect.

much to their surprise, they find themselves face to face with the christian mob which retaliated en force. by the time the roman prefect intervened, the pagans and other intellectuals were trapped in the library surrounded by the christian mob outside which appear to be composed of slaves, the uneducated, the impoverished, the marginalized, and lead by warmongering zealots. this is significant as it reflects the same demographic of christians today.

it was painful to watch the christians laid waste to the library, destroying all nowledge of antiquity save a few scrolls which the pagans brought with them on their way out.

much later, it became fashionable to be christian. the social elite had for the most part had been converted. most likely to avoid problems with the then now established christian religion and its leaders.

hypatia in the meantime, lived quietly and continued to philosophize about the movement of the heavens, juggling between the ptolemy system, which had the earth as the center of the universe and the other heavenly bodies revolving around it in perfect circles; and the aristacus? system which had the sun as its center and the other heavenly bodies
revovlving around it in perfect circles as well. but something did not match up with her observations and measurements. this goes against the established biblical teaching, that the world is flat.

after the pagans, the christians when after its other rivals, the jews otherwise known as the beginnings of anti semitism. and then the status of women.

when hypatia's former students (now a bishop and the other a prefect) implored her to convert to christianity or else. she said she couldn't because unlike the christian bishop who don't question his beliefs. she must hers. the essence of what it is to be freehinker.

rating: 5 out of 5
*****

Les Fantomes de Goya

Francisco Goya was a court painter to the spanish crown. Ines Balbutia, daughter to a rich merchant, was one of his subjects. Another client of Francisco is Brother Lorenzo who is the one responsible for excacerbating the inquisition by re-establishing torture. Ines was accused of judaizing (practicing jewish traditions) and arrested because she refused to eat pork.

Such was the power of the Catholic church during those times. I watched horrified as they tortured the truth out of Ines. Although we are far from "those times", we could still witness this kind of barbarism in countries where religion/church reigns supreme. And this I believe is central to the message of the movie. It is a warning of what religion is capable of doing given sufficient power over the state.

There doesn't seem to be any justice for Ines even towards the end of the film where Brother Lorenzo was finally caught and executed because of something else (treachery) he has done.

Rating: 4 out of 5
I love history. See Peninsular War and French Revolution

the boy in the striped pajamas

bruno is a small kid whose father is a nazi officer. when his father was promoted to manage a concentration camp in the country, they all had to move out of the city with him.

later, bruno finds his way to the camp and makes friends with shmuel, a jewish kid despite everyone warning him about jews (not actually everyone). children do not have the same prejudices that adults have. we all learn it later from our parents, from school, from people around us.

my favorite scene is when bruno was forced to betray his best friend out of fear and the need to conform in order to survive. it tells us that all capable of treachery even at an age where we are supposedly pure and good.

rating 3 out of 5 ***

two lovers

(photo is by john clifford)

this film portrays in contrast an insight on the type of romantic love that we used to talk about a lot back when we were younger. the question of who would you go for, given that you have the following choice. will you go for "the one" or "the only one".

"the one" is the person you love ultimately but he doesn't necessarily feel the same way or none at all. the kind of love that exists in literature. it is love where the stakes are high. even life itself.

"the only one (available)" is the person who loves you but you don't necessarily feel the same way or none at all. it's the one that you accept because either you are afraid to be alone, that you think there might be no one else, or you need the company. the kind of love that is mundane, tolerable, or that needs years to be nurtured.

leonard (played by joaquin phoenix) was setup by his parents to meet with sandra (played by vinessa ssaw). i am uncertain if this is a usual practice for american jews. it reminds me of how filipino chinese parents actively participate in arranging dates or introductions so to speak for their children. especially when it becomes although subtle as a sort of business merger of mutual benefit between families if it works out well. i can see why it persists. it is practical.

later leonards accidentally meets with michelle (played by gwyneth paltrow) whom he falls deeply in love for. is this not how love should be? is not love a complete accident, like magic, that consumes us.

naturally leonards explores both women. he dates sandra as a fallback, as a duty to his family. the safe route. where some might be quick to judge him. i do not. would you turn down love that is offered. he pursues michelle who considers him a close friend or worse like a brother among other setbacks.

in the story, i savored the honesty of how it ended as i suspect it to be so with many couples. many wouldn't admit it. of course. but i believe it to be the majority in this case. that people do not often end up with those they intended to be with. that couples born out of complacency, convenience, contentment with what is available, end up with "the only one" rather than "the one". though it does happen. not just often enough. or if it does happen. it does not linger long enough. passion dies.

rate 3 out of 5
***

The Bucket List

I accidentally ran into the film a couple of times while channel surfing. HBO had been playing "The Bucket List" on several occasions and I managed to complete the entire movie (like a jigsaw puzzle) after three days.

So what makes this movie interesting, aside from having Jack Nicholson and Morgan Freeman? I guess the film talks about mortality and how people would react if they knew they only had a year to live. Some people might just live in fear, withdraw from the world, or even focus their last remaining days fixing their earthly business. Other people might choose a different path.

Both protagonists are cancer patients who learn that they only have a few months to live. So they made a list of things they want to do before they die and try to do them one by one. Enter the cliche Hollywood formula -- the two fight while doing their list, make up in the end, gain some epiphany about life, love and friendship, die, live life to the fullest and die again.

I think the film would have made a bigger impact to me if it didn't remind me of a Hollywood television series called "My Name is Earl".



Here are some similarities in "Bucket List" and "Earl":

• Both have a list of things that the protagonists are trying to cross out.
• They both have one asshole protagonist who, thanks to Karma or Cancer (take your pick), gets redeemed and becomes a better person in the end.
• Both have quirky supporting casts who help them cross out the things in their list.

I think the movie dwells too much on the positive, feel good aspect of life -- like friendship, love and family. It tends to downplay the actual reality of suffering and death. I doubt if all cancer patients view living and life with such gusto. I doubt if people can make instant life changing decisions just because they know the grim reaper is looking for them.

It all boils down to how a person accepts his death and how he chooses to live out the remaining days of his life.

Leben der Anderen (The Lives of Others)

the german democractic republic (GDR) and the stasi (the secret police) reigned on east germany before the wall between east and west came down.

it was a drab, dreary, suppressive world were the state watches over its citizens in every aspect of their lives. you could easily observe this in the color tone used for the character's costumes and environment they moved around and lived in. it was kind of dead.

a stasi agent was tasked to hold a prominent playwright and effectively his wife who was also a prominent actress under tight surveillance because he became a suspect for being too clean.

the operation was to wait and listen, then record everything that transpires in the playwrite's house. any subversive word or action will be charged with treason or disloyalty to the state. imagine what kind of burden that is for merely saying things could potentially lead to imprisonment.

many artists like the playright before him were known subversives. some had escaped and embraced the west which stood for capitalism and freedom. for others who had been caught and blacklisted (though one of the heads of state in the film vehemently disputes it and that the state never blacklists) to perform their crafts had been silenced. and there were other artists who couldn't take it anymore, had taken their own lives which the state conveniently reclassifies as self murderers.

during the course of the surveillance, the stasi agent experiences a change introspective in him. from being ruled entirely by principle to beginning to feeling things. watch the elevator scene when the stasi agent rides it with a boy who rats on his father about saying anti-state things. normally the stasi agent would have the boy's dad arrested but maybe for this time, he let's it go.

the playwright had begun writing an article to be published in the west which exposes the social conditions and suicide rate specifically of artists in the GDR. this is obviously treason in principle but the stasi agent let's it go because he begins to appreciate the simple lives of his target.

i had always been a supporter of socialism but after watching what true socialism had been at least for east germany. i think that any extreme of the political spectrum could never be good and could only end up oppressing its citizens instead rather then uplift their lives.

maybe the central to the film was a message of striking a balance between the extremes living by principle vs feeling

Rate: 3 out of 5
No to extremes

notes on a scandal

english movie about two women. sheba hart (cate blanchette) and barbara covett (judey dench). i love the name sheba. it's exotic. sheba is the new art teacher. and i found her suited to the job. she is young and handsome, without restraint, new age type, good natured. she is married to an old guy who was her previous teacher. a young woman married to an old guy is already a story in itself.
then there is barbara, an aging collegue who takes sheba under her wing.

the interesting part begins when barbara catches sheba being intimate with one of the students. barbara threatens sheba unless she stops the affair. then it becomes really dark and wierd when barbara begins to ask for more and more. more than just sheba's friendship ..

i loved the language used. what must be like ordinary language for the english people, it comes out poetic to ears such as mine who is accustomed to the bastardized english of filipinoes (learned from americans).

i have often imagined many times that i'd grow old and alone and id be like barbara here .. dried up and wasted, banal, cynical, and desperate for love, .. hopefully it won't happen ..

Rate *** 3 out of 5
I enjoyed the language

The Notebook

An overly sentimental rich girl (allie) / poor boy (noah) love story that works for me (Maybe just me) . I guess one needs to draw something from real life to be able to appreciate it. That sense of wanting to be with someone from another world so bad and things are not in your favor. Where despite the improbability, we pursue it anyway.

A reminder that we have but a short while in this life. And we will all have to deal with endings despite how much we think we deserve eternity. And in the end, we just have our memories.

I disagree with what I felt the movie was in a way saying - that having a full life equals having someone to love (and back). Having someone or not should not deprive anyone from having a full life. There are many pursuits in life. In fact, it is not uncommon to find people who are in relationships to be at the loosing end, having compromised many things just to stay in it.

Rate: 4 stars ****
Made me cry like a baby ^_^

August Rush (Movie Review: 3 out of 5)

You don't have to be a music lover to enjoy this movie. However, you must be prepared to accept all the freaky coincidences and odd circumstances that play around the main protagonist of the film.

The hero (August Rush, aka Evan Taylor) is an orphan who is driven to find his birth parents. He's a music prodigy who has the "gift of listening to the world". Thanks to this gift, he is reunited with his family at the end.

It's a modern day fairy tale of sorts -- we have a young boy who gets thrown into a cruel/nasty world (aka New York City). But thanks to his musical talent, he meets people (like a character named "Wizard") who either helped or exploited him along the way. But August stays true to himself and his dream does come true.

Jen loved the film while I found it just okay. It's a feel good movie with a nice soundtrack, but there are better "feel good" movies out there. The only point that I found interesting were the movie's attempt to portray the "underground society" of New York through the eyes of children. We see the flaws and the issues of the child welfare system and how many runaway kids get used and exploited off the streets. August was lucky that he had the magical talent to get himself out of the gutter. I pity the other kids who got left behind.

The Weather Man

imdb page

Most movies follow fairly predictable plots. You can almost tell what the characters are going to do, what will happen next, and sit smugly knowing that things are going to be resolved, that everything will turn out alright, and that the heroes will be vindicated in the end. The Weather Man is not that type of movie.

In fact, you can't tell what will happen next. It could be good or bad, but in this case, things always get worse. And when you think you finally reached the turning point where things ought to be getting better, guess again. This thing is depressing to watch, but in a good way.

Nicholas Cage is David Spritz - a TV Weather Man. On the surface, it looks like he's doing very well for himself. He's a well known TV personality, has that charm on camera, earns big bucks, gets to have sex with lots of attractive women, and is on target to get a potential six-figure income as the weather guy in the country's number one syndicated morning show, Hello America. He's living the American dream, but there's a problem.

Despite all his successes, his personal life is in shambles. His ex-wife hates him. His kids have no affection for him. He feels like a failure when he compares himself to his father, a world-renowned writer played by Michael Caine. He gets no respect from strangers either, as he is frequently gets fast food and beverages thrown at him on the street. Nobody likes the weather man.

Spritz tries desperately to make things better. He takes his daughter to the company Christmas party, where things go wrong. He takes her out for archery lessons but there's no warmth in their father-daughter relationship. To make things worse, his son is befriended by a pedophile, which Spritz is unaware of. He can't even get things right in his father's "live funeral" (a make-believe funeral you stage with loved ones while the person is alive).

It's like watching a horror movie. I wanted Spritz to win, even just a little. The character is shallow, weak, and oftentimes a jerk, but I found that I still wanted to root for him to succeed. There's a point in the film where he realizes exactly the type of person he is, and I think this is the most powerful point in the movie.

In a way, it's also a film about the modern ills of western society. You can be well off materially, have all the physical comforts, and have all the external trappings of success, yet be very unhappy. One of the dilemmas that Cage's character faces is how his professional success contrasts with his failures in personal life and relationships.

There were some things about this film that I felt were flaws. For one, I couldn't figure out whether Michael Caine's character was british or not. He kind of had a british accent, yet he was supposed to be the father of Nicholas Cage's character who was American. To add to the confusion, Cage's son played by Brit Nicholas Hoult, who was Marcus in About a Boy, also seemed very British. Were Caine and Hoult supposed to be Americans, or were they there to show that Cage's family had some British roots? Though not relevant to the story, it distracted me enough as they just didn't feel as if the three males from different generations were related to one another. Poor casting in my opinion.

Another thing was that I got the impression that this was a comedy, or at least a dark comedy. It's not. In fact I think this plays more like a modern day tragedy. I watched this with the wrong expectations. Perhaps that was the intent of the filmmakers, but it made it more painful to watch for me.

This movie won't make you feel good and will make you probably more depressed after watching it. But I think that's its main purpose. You'll also think of how much your own life either resembles or contrasts with the quiet desperation of David Spritz.

Rating: 3/5 * * *
How are you like the weather man?

V for Vendetta

imdb: V for Vendetta

This was an odd movie. Somehow I couldn’t put my finger on it. Is it about revenge? Or social revolution? Or a political statement based on current events? I’ve read that the original graphic novel was a reaction to the Thatcher administration. And that the Wachowski brothers (who made The Matrix) wrote the screenplay for this, and simplified and revised the story for the benefit of the viewing audience.

It occurs in the distant future, with the entire story taking place in the UK. The United States has fallen into civil war and is in ruins. A fascist, repressive government has taken over, led by Chancellor Sutler. The government has removed all civil liberties and is bent on enforcing its will on the people through propaganda, government enforcers who goes by the name ‘Fingermen’, and through spying on its own citizens.

The two protagonists is a masked character named ‘V’ and a young female, ‘Evey’ played by Natalie Portman. V is hell bent on revenge and justice as he has been disfigured as a result of being incarcerated by the government. Evey has her own back story, starting out as an innocent citizen, but slowly being drawn into V’s world, eventually playing a major role in his plans.

There is a lot of social commentary in the dialogue, mostly from V. The idea that is repeated throughout the film is that ‘ideas are bulletproof’, and are more powerful than men. He also said a lot of other lines that I thought were interesting, maybe a bit idealistic, a little weird, funny even, but it fits in with his overall character and accomplishes its purpose.

I had the subtitles turned on while watching the DVD as I didn’t want to miss any of the quotes. My favorite is the one when Evey asked V whether he was certain of his plans, and he replied “There is no certainty, only opportunity.” Of all the bits of dialog, this was the one I could relate to the most.

I didn’t exactly agree with how V went about with his plans for overthrowing the government. I felt it was a bit too reckless, a bit too idealistic, and self-serving. He also came across as this goofy character, particular in this one scene where Evey wanted to leave, and he kept saying something like, ‘oh before you go’, and ‘could you do me one favor?’, which came out really weird (I kept thinking, uh oh, I think V wants to have sex with Natalie Portman). I’m not sure if the humor was intended, probably not.

There were also some boring and ridiculous parts, such as the one where the TV host spoofs the Chancellor and plays the Benny Hill music. It felt unfunny and out of place. The priest's acting in the scene with Portman was totally dumb and unrealistic. There was also this part where the lead detective kicks a garbage can in a fit of frustration that felt out of character. Many scenes didn't work at all for me.

The Wachowski brothers are brilliant writers and filmmakers, but when left uncontrolled to their own devices, they occasionally turn out some weird crap such as in Matrix Revolutions and some of the scenes in this film.

Natalie Portman was great in her role, and I think she saved this movie from going over the edge. My friend remarked that he avoided watching V for Vendetta because he didn’t want to see a bald Natalie Portman. But she still looked great with her head shaved! And I think the character fit her perfectly.

There were a couple of plot holes which I can’t list without giving away spoilers. I had some trouble believing what happened in the Evey interrogation/torture segment, and how V had rebuilt the subway train all by himself.

This is not horrible. Maybe even an entertaining movie. And it has some good ideas. It felt very preachy, but I believe this was the intent anyway. It will make you think, which is the important part. It’s the ideal movie to watch with your friends and talk about over starbucks afterwards.

Rating: 3/5 * * *
+1 * for Natalie Portman

(Note: This article describes the differences between the movie and the graphic novel. After reading it, I understood why the movie felt so flawed, at least to me. Contains spoilers. -rob)

Bubble

As many of you may know, I like my movies to be 'realistic'. I like having the sense that what I'm watching is actually happening, and that the characters are as believable as possible. Bubble is that type of movie.

As I was watching it, I felt like a distant observer to the private lives of three people who work in a doll factory in their small town and how they manage to go through their daily routine. The situation is very subtle and you can somehow sense what's going on without it being overstated. You get the sense of quiet desperation and desolation these people go through. Something happens that disrupts the delicate balance, causing a chain of events leading to a murder. But that's not the main point of the film, the story is merely a backdrop for illustrating how hopeless life can be when there are no other options. Something is very wrong here.

Bubble was shot with a very limited budget, which helps in setting the ambiance of the story. I liked the guitar strumming played at the start and in between scenes, it fit it perfectly. Plus, the ending credits with the weird music and still shots of the dolls were kind of scary. Very nicely done.

Rating: 4/5 * * * *
Very realistic.

pour l'amour de dieu

pour l'amour de dieu (for the love of god). i thought that this film is so powerful and so relevant that its a huge waste that not too many people were able to watch it especially in the philippines. where like in france, we live amongst muslims, theists, and extremists. the truth about any religion is that it does have positive and yet then sometimes conflicting messages. it says to love and yet it also says to kill, to hate, and to murder.

the story is about a boy's journey from being a regular highschool kid to a religious fanatic. he is a second or third generation immigrant. i am guessing they were from algeria. south of france. his parents made sure that they were fully integrated in french society. this implies that he was brought up free from religion. he discovers islam from a classmate who was a confessed moslem. he became infatuated with her and then attempts to convert to islam himself to get close to the girl. the girl was like him. she was a second or third generation immigrant. she was trying to rediscover her roots. and a huge part of it was her family's religion. she was however what one may say a moderate moslem. the boy then gets involved with some extremist groups. and i thought that to show off the several prejudices and superstitions of these kind of people were priceless. example: laughing is not allowed because it is believed to be the tickle of satan. or that men. true men dont cry. that women are satan's way of seducing men to sin. there are many others. crazy stuff. in retrospect, we find similar beliefs in christian places.

in the end, the boy was forced to confront his extermist views with that of the girl's moderate views, particularly on the wearing of the hijab.

rating 4 out of 5
educational

jeanne poisson, marquise de pompadour

this is a period piece on a remarkable woman named jeanne poisson. she was the official mistress of louis XV. i am uncertain wether the film was historically accurate. i have little way to verify if it is.

the film was intriguing in a way that illustrates how french nobility behaves. maybe a reflection of how the elite, a different kind of norm, behaves. a norm of castes. where society dictates and in so doing expects a certain behaviour of a person based on his/her station.

the film may have presented the characters in almost stereotypical fashion. the haughty and witty dialogues. the political maneuverings. the backstabbing. the eternal struggle to gain allies and outwit enemies. and of course as expected, the pageantry.

jeanne poisson wasnt born noble. but she eventually was granted a title after becoming the mistress of the king. she was innocent but very intelligent. she was purportedly very pretty and fashionable. and thus she was favored. this has caused people around the king, especially the inner circle like the prince and his sister, to despise her. she was not without allies as her brother ascended to the nobility short after her. but her greatest ally is the king himself. the film is filled with plots to ridicule and destroy her. the king's mother the empress was a little more civil. but otherwise was part of the majority which without pretense would like to just about throw her out of the chateau. she was clearly envied.

my favorite part of the movie was when she tripped (not by accident) and fell on the pool/fountain. the other nobles laughed but she stood and cried with innocence and confidence "i am venus" which we know to be part of greek mythology as a goddess that was born out of the sea. i enjoyed her wit just as a priest who saw what happened befriended her and became one of her allies.

reading from history, we find that there is a debate wether jeanne was really influential in the affairs of the state.

Rating: 3/5 * * *
i love history

Rocky Balboa

I was a bit of an action movie fan while I was growing up. As a kid I eagerly awaited and watched every new movie of my favorite action heroes - Steven Seagal, Stallone, Schwarzenegger, among others. I also watched a lot of martial arts films, everything I could get hold of. I especially liked the training montage and fight scenes, and would pattern my workouts with some of the training scenes I've seen in the movies, although I couldn't even get close to the type of physique that my favorite protagonists would have.

Because of all those fond memories from the 80's and early 90's fight movies, I was eagerly looking forward to watching Rocky Balboa yesterday. This is the latest and probably the last of the Rocky sequels. After it was over, I was a bit disappointed. The training montage didn't compare to the training scenes of the previous Rocky movies. Of which in my opinion 'Rocky IV' had the best training montage. Imagine a bearded Rocky doing grueling exercises in Siberia, climbing a mountain and lifting heavy farm equipment, in sharp contrast to the Russian Drago's state of the art gym facilities. 'Rocky Balboa' had a short, uninspiring training scene without much of the emotion or dramatics of the earlier sequels.

The fight scene against Mason Dixon was also very different from the previous Rocky movies. It was shot in a realistic manner, made to resemble a modern day HBO Pay Per View fight. In a sense, it was like Rocky had left the 'Rocky' universe and entered the present-day world. Which is not entirely bad, I thought the effect was interesting. But I still would have preferred if we it resembled the older movies. In fact this one, didn't even show scenes from the ending boxing/fight scene of the previous sequel, and naming it 'Rocky Balboa' instead of 'Rocky VI' was I guess Stallone's way of telling the viewers that this would be different.

I was not too fond of the Marie character because she felt too much like a quick throw-in replacement for Rocky's dead wife, Adrian. Actually while watching, I was concerned that they might form some sort of romantic relationship which would have been a disaster as no one can replace Adrian. I would have also liked to see more scenes with Duke, Rocky's (and Apollo's) old trainer. Rocky's son as well as Paulie were ok, I think they filled their roles well.

I enjoyed the first half of the movie a lot. It showed how affected Rocky was by the death of his wife, and how he constantly lived in the past, where he remembered that things were much better. It also showed how much of a caricature he became, entertaining patrons in his restaurant with old stories from his past. Rocky clearly only lived for the past and didn't like how his old neighborhood had changed so much since then. I can kind of relate to that a bit, and wish that they had explored that storyline in greater depth.

You would have guessed by now that I like Rocky III and IV more than Rocky I and II, although I like them all. Even Rocky V was ok but suffered from not having a training montage and actual boxing match in the end. I enjoyed the colorful characters and simple storylines of III and IV, and thought that Rocky IV was absolutely fantastic as an action movie.

All in all, I thought this was an OK way to end the series. I can understand why Stallone would want to end the series in the style of the first two Rocky movies but I still would have liked a more satisfying training and fight scene to wrap it up.

Rating: 3/5 * * *
A 'realistic' and current timeline Rocky with a different feel from the older sequels.

Magnolia

At first glance, Magnolia appeared to be the type of movie I would enjoy.

Unconvential plot - check.
Weird story and characters - check.
Dark theme - check.

Then I watched the first hour. It wasn't good. But I said to myself, "let's give this a chance, it might get better."

So I watched the second hour. Still not good. This was looking like a disaster. By this time I had invested two hours of my life watching this film. What the heck, might as well finish it, after all, I had only one hour left to go. Maybe there will be some plot twist in the end, some big payoff, some mind-bending profound ending that will give me inspiration and insight in my lonely life.

I watched the third hour.

Then the frogs fell. The movie ended.

There was no payoff. There was no big twist. It was a total waste of time.

Sure, you had Tom Cruise in a minor role, Julianne Moore, John C. Reilly, William H. Macy, even Roehl's favorite Philip Seymour Hoffman. So this had to be good right?

There are so many bad things about this movie I don't know where to start.

Let's talk about the good things. Julianne Moore in the drug store scene where she freaks out. That's it. OK, maybe the scene where Cruise and Hoffman are in at the same time, but it was only good because I could joke that they were both in MI3.

This is a really bad movie. It is boring, pointless, melodramatic, nonsensical, and anticlimactic. And it is three hours long.

In fact, it's probably one of the worst movies ever made. And I really wanted to like it. Too bad.

Rating: 1/5 *
Sucks.

joyeux noel

it is written on the cover that it is a strue story. i distinctly remember that there had been a story about how a certain christmas song that became very popular during the first world war because of extra ordinary events happening that centered on that song. i am only familiar with very vague details about this war. it was never discussed in school as far as i can remember. so it inspired me to read about it in wikipedia. type first world war. wars are between nations / governments / kingdoms. wars are not between people. people are usually just dragged into one without realizing, or are misinformed of what they were fighting for. most people are forced into it.

there were several plots. the first plot was between two opera singers who were lovers. they were german. they were initially separated since the guy was forced to join the war effort. the woman who wanted to be with her lover founded a way to be with him, by asking the german government if they could sing together. all in the service of the nation. the second plot was a priest and two of his sacristans. i wasnt sure which side of the war they were from. they sounded german though. the third plot was about a french man, his wife abroad, and his relationship with his father, who was also fighting the war at a different location.

it was the eve of christmas. every camp celebrated in their own way. the opera singers sang. to which the other camp over heard, where the priest was played bagpipes as accompaniment. the different leaders of each camp agreed to a ceasefire. until all camps exchanged gifts and stories. they got to know each other as people. they got each others symnpathies. they were in general, in agreement that they were in a war that they didnt want. it was moving. i say in general because there was one which had been taken over with hatred, because he lost his friend earlier (gunfire).

one particular scene which i thought was very important was about the seniour priest scolding our war priest of conniving with the enemy. the seniour priest then later held mass to new soldiers, to which he told lies about them. he painted a simple picture of good and evil. he manipulated and appealed to their emotions so that hatred will take hold of their hearts. much like of what we see of priests in the philippines, when they need their political agenda addressed.

rating: 3 out of 5
its out of season, but a good (true) story to watch

Derailed

Here's the plot for this movie in a nutshell without giving away any spoilers: Jennifer Aniston and Clive Owen are married to different people, they meet by chance in a train, one thing leads to another and they have an affair. Then something unexpected happens. Clive Owen ends up being blackmailed.

Owen's character is sheltered, quiet and clean. Yet he ends up having to deal with unsavory characters. He plunges himself to one dangerous situation after another putting him and his family's life in danger. For me this is the most compelling part of the movie, and also the most uncomfortable. There is a very dark and depressing scene with a prostitute and some corrupt cops that illustrates how much of a bind the hero gets himself into, and also how weak and vulnerable he is. It made me feel genuinely uncomfortable and distressed.

There is also a brutal scene that will leave a negative impact to the viewers, which I guess is its intent. What starts as an illicit love affair story ends up as more of a pessimistic diatribe on society. This movie is definitely not for kids. I do believe however that this is the intent of this film so it has achieved its goal.

Other scenes are quite silly, particularly the way Clive Owen's wife acts when confronted with an unknown stranger. I found myself at times shouting at the hero telling him for pete's sake to go to police and stop doing stupid things. Yet he continues making mistake after mistake, getting himself into deeper trouble.

All in all, quite a disturbing film. Not for everyone. If its intention is to shock and portray weak characters, then it has achieved its goal.

Rating: 3/5 * * *
Distressful and disruptive.