FilmBah Watches: My Darling is a Foreigner (ダーリンは外国人)

At first glance, I could have thought My Darling is a Foreigner (ダーリンは外国人) is a romantic comedy that plays on the cross cultural differences of your typical Japanese family having to accept a Westerner as an in-law, which could be fun. But this adaptation of Saori Oguri's manga which is based on her own marriage to an American who is half-Hungarian and half-Italian, is a slow and progressively heartwarming romantic drama that offers no deeper insight other than its shallow conclusion that love is about having differences.

I find that first time director Kazuaki Ue's grasp of pacing is a little lacking here, as some of the scenes are needlessly resolved slowly, but the narrative, particularly the arc that leads to the romance of Saori and Tony, is rushed so that it can get into the turbulence of the barriers that they would face in gaining their families' blessing and approval, except that that gets rushed as well and doesn't turn out to be a major issue for the couple. Saori's parents, played by Jun Kunimura and Shinobu Otake, who I was expecting to be the central conflict against the relationship were not given the right amount of screen time to raise the stakes for the emotional climax, and the quick death of the father doesn't bring a serious impact. This is hurt even further with the already relative short run time of the movie, as scenes become wasted and it could have used to create deeper empathy for the characters.

Kazuaki does add something to the table by making use of  mixed formats of having small interview segments of actual Japanese women married to foreign men and animated inserts from the cutely drawn caricatures from Saori's manga, but doesn't fully expound on its full potential to be any insightful, other than to lighten up its slow pace.

This should have been funnier than it looks

The ultimate saving grace for this movie, however, is Mao Inoue, who I hadn't seen since Rebirth (八日目の蝉). She is the screen darling and she gives it a heart to what would I would have dismissed as a thoroughly dull progression as the relationship begins to fall apart (more of indifference between the characters, rather than their cultural differences). Given the not thought out script that constraints her character to be one dimensional, she works because of her adorable temperament and knows how to shed a few tears when it counts. Even with a slightly stilted performance from Jonathan Sherr; a long-time resident of Japan himself, he serves as a serviceable male lead with a heart of glass and his fluency of Japanese makes him sound less skin crawling.

It is a little disappointing and unbelievable that My Darling is a Foreigner has a lot less to offer given its subject that could be explored more widely from a real life examples, but the chemistry between Jonathan Sherr and Mao Inoue is where the heart of this movie is, that is able to make me feel a littler warmer inside by the end, instead of throwing this out as a dud.

FilmBah Watches: Lincoln

  

Spielberg's Lincoln is one of the three Pro-American nominees at the Best Picture race this year, that probably looked like an odd choice to reach Malaysian cinemas. Unlike Argo and Zero Dark Thirty, which would have likely resonated better with Malaysian audiences due to its currency to modern real-world events, I highly doubt that the average Malaysian viewer in the cinema hall with me as I was watching this would know much about the 16th President of the United States and their American history. Heck, even we can't figure out who truly owns Sabah, so history has never been our strongest suit. 

Then again, the Malaysian distributor could have been banking on the image of the president as an axe-wielding badass slayer in a pseudo-biographical depiction, but I can't complain that I would get the chance to go see at least one out of the three 'Murica films in one of our hypocritical hate for Zionist screens, in case I would never see the other two (in the bigscreen, anyway).

Fake hate aside, my expectations for Lincoln were still high since this was Spielberg's next serious attempt to snag the Best Picture and to add another trophy Best Director trophy so that he could start giving them out for charity. But I'm not just saying that because Spielberg's name is attached. No. It was after that beautifully rendered opening scene of Daniel Day Lewis' Lincoln talking to the black and white soldiers. So beautiful that they could've just ended the movie there and then, and I would be writing a glorious review of how it deserved to win Best Picture at the Oscars.

But it didn't win the Oscar for Best Picture. For a reason. 

It's almost the end of the American Civil War after four years of bloody battles, as the Union are closing in to force a surrender from the Confederacy. After making the Proclamation of Emancipation, President Lincoln, who is re-elected for his second term as the President (of the Union), is eager to have the 13th Amendment to the Constitution passed through the House of Representatives, that will abolish the right to own men as property. Going against his legislation are the Democrats who understands that by removing slavery in the country could prolong the Civil War as a paradoxical legal conflict of interest could make the Confederacy withdraw their terms for peace. In his last days, President Lincoln must win the political favours to have enough votes from the House to have the Amendment passed as he struggles with his own moral dilemmas as a war-time President to end the war and his own personal wars. 

I read a review that compared Lincoln to a more than 2 hour long episode of The West Wing and I don't think they are far away from the truth. There are great lines from Tony Kushner's script, but there just aren't as many great moments to love the film, even from the few moments that showcased Daniel Day Lewis' performance as Abraham Lincoln. The enclosed scenes were suffocating, and even the solemn and sombre moment of Lincoln trotting through a dead-strewn wide open battlefield (with the exception of the opening scene) gets choked by the PG13 rating.

The performance is phenomenal but it's a little more difficult to judge Daniel Day Lewis' impersonation as Abarham Lincoln because unlike the more recent impersonations by Meryl Streep in The Iron Lady, and Michelle Yeoh in The Lady; both of which are based on still-living icons with plenty of video footage to reference from, history scholars and public opinion haven't been able to agree on the pitch of the revered President's voice. But his characterization as a loner, a slight oddball, a less fiery persona than you would imagine for someone clothed in immense power, not always a great orator but a fatherly deliverer of parables, and having frailties that are all too human is why Daniel Day Lewis' performance is the only one that could elevate the myth of why he was called Honest Abe. But while getting caught in the political debate, there are probably more memorable moments involving the other players - and every player is a star here - of the 13th Amendment than the total number of scenes with Lincoln in it.

Yes, wars are fought and won in a room filled with gentlemen.

If War Horse didn't win Best Picture for being too manipulative, Lincoln didn't win it for me because it's just wasn't manipulative enough, and trust me, I wanted to be manipulated, especially by the everlasting combinations of Spielberg's direction, with the precise cinematography of Janusz Kaminski and the heart-stirring orchestrations of John Williams. But none of that seemed to work. Not even the eventual death of the president or his final speech caused a quiver. A faltering courage against utmost respect probably caused more harm than binding up the wounds of this film. 

It was hard to appreciate Lincoln in the end. But then again, this is probably mainly due to a lack of a firm grasp on the historical context on my part, and what I'm seeing is an advanced class of American history that can only be  felt by someone who could recite the Gettysburg Address from heart. 

FilmBah Watches: Cloud Atlas

When the first trailer for Cloud Atlas was released, it was touted as one of the biggest mindfuckery of images and scenes ever put together that still doesn't quite explain the movie, despite being one of the longest trailers running at more than 6 minutes. After watching the trailer, it was hard not to agree and it was even harder not to be excited that the bottled lightning of the Wachowski siblings, since their mind-blowing CG rainbow The Matrix, could be prepared to strike twice.

Although Cloud Atlas was released a month earlier than Life of Pi, it was the latter adaptation that eventually made it to Malaysian screens first. Why I mention this is because both of these were adapted from supposedly 'unfilmable' books. Having a poor reading habit of books that tend to be made into blockbusters (because I'm just too busy with films), I don't truly know what made these books 'unfilmable', but I would presume it was partly because they had something so profound to say, that was difficult to convey and translate it to film language. In the hands of Ang Lee, Life of Pi was probably successful of doing that to some extent, so it was to be seen whether the Wachowski siblings and their third co-director Tom Tykwer were up to the task.

A task that is more ambitious than what is achieved.

Damn if I knew why this scene was cut by the Censorship Board

Cloud Atlas is mishmash of six separate stories, told intermittently between flashbacks and flash-forwards, than span from as early as the time of slavery in the 18th century to as far as a post-apocalyptic future, where the actions of a few central characters in their respective time periods have a cause-effect relation to the events in their futures. A young and uprising lawyer leaving for home from the New World as he comes to terms with slavery; a gay musician who is determined to compose his greatest work with the greatest composer of his time as he corresponds with his lover in London; a journalist who uncovers a hidden danger of a nuclear reactor in the 70s; an elderly publisher conned into being a resident of an elderly home in the 21st century; a genetic clone breaking free from commercial servitude and promised with false freedom in the futuristic city of Neo Seoul; and a fearful villager who is haunted by demons and threatened by cannibalistic raiders, helps an outsider to find hope to build a new home in a devastated planet after a major apocalyptic event.

There is a great mix of the science and the spiritual here, as some universal laws such as karma and reincarnation are at work here, as these character meet with situations to test their moral dilemmas against the all too human evils that are repeated throughout the various time periods.

Technically, this movie is a marvel. Aside from the top notch CG backgrounds and productionssets, the use of prosthesis, make-up, and undoubtedly copious amounts of CG, to put the main cast into several shells is a remarkable feat in itself. It allowed the ensemble cast to showcase their range. Despite the misses when you could tell the same actor playing as the menacing assassin in one time period is the same actor playing the bullying nurse in another, the added guessing game was fun until the final reveal is pulled on who played who in the six interrelated stories.

But the greatest technical feat performed in this movie is the editing. Cloud Atlas is not only a class act of how cause and effect works in narrative structure, but takes it to another level with masterful editing of jumping between the time periods in a linear stretch, maintaining a consistent pace across all six interwoven tales, while hitting the high and lows of emotions as you would from a single linear story. Sure, it was confusing at first but this is Pulp Fiction and Memento on a larger scale. This should be Alexander Berner's most prolific work to date of well-planned editing and how he could weave such a complex web of intricate stories almost so effortlessly.

Though I'll never know what made them decide to do that thing with the eyes.

But underlying all that technical brilliance, not much can be said of its supposed spiritual content. The substance of this movie doesn't transcend above its grand style, due to a weak connection between the timelines, that are joined more out of convenience than in-depth correlation. Yes, there are plenty of references among the timelines to each other, but that doesn't work as much as referencing a great movie to make yours great. It was difficult for me at times to grasp how the event in one past could have any major impact in the future. At best it barely bridges the effect of one past to be the cause of a future. At worst, it was convoluted and makes you believe in coincidences more, rather than some universal force at work.

The decision by the directors to have the characters belong to a single strain, rather than random strangers brought together by fate, diminishes their development to be more than just shadows of their past or future selves, which turns them into an awful lot of buffer for the profound message that our actions is infectious to others to be delivered; a message that only gets sent by the very end in a tired scene only because we've heard the same hammering throughout the 3 hour long journey. Time and focus were spent too much on getting the technicalities right, that it had hollowed out its deeper potential to be thought-provoking, once you see past the surface connections. It does sound a little ironic to say that its focus on the science of movie making, killed its spirituality. 

Personally, just like with Life of Pi, Cloud Atlas is more of a technical exercise for filmmakers to show that they now have the technology and techniques to accept the challenge of more 'unfilmmable' books, but the finesse and interpretation of these source materials to send home its emotional impact is not found here. Nevertheless, I'd imagine Cloud Atlas to be one that gets better from repeated viewings, so at least this means that it would age well in any collection.

FilmBah Watches: The Hobbit An Unexpected Journey

The Lord of the Rings trilogy can be said to be one of the most defining cinematic event in the lifetime of some audiences. It was the Star Wars for a generation and for something that has such a place in the hearts, it is not hard to see how nostalgia could be mistaken for anticipation with the arrival of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.

Almost a decade since the conclusion of the trilogy with Return of the King, Peter Jackson has followed the path of George Lucas to bring back fantasy fans back to Middle Earth with a prequel by adapting the child-friendly The Hobbit, to remind us of the glorious yesteryear when fantasy movies was awakening to a new golden age.

And to glorious yesteryear, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey takes us through again.

As the first in the two-part-later-turned-trilogy adaptation of The Hobbit by Tolkien, An Unexpected Journey begins on the 110th birthday of Bilbo Baggins as we saw in The Fellowship of the Ring, just moments before Frodo runs off for the memorable opening scene about the punctuality of wizards. Instead of making a passing mention about the book that Bilbo was writing in The Fellowship, it becomes the framing device that takes us 60 years back in time when a younger Bilbo Baggins meets a wandering Gandalf on a fine morning.

This leads to the introduction of the exiled dwarves of Erebor and their prince Thorin Oakenshield, who have lost their mountain home in a brilliant exposition of gold, fire and betrayal. According to the portents, it is time for the dwarves to reclaim their kingdom from Smaug the dragon, and Gandalf has advised them to bring along the home-loving and reluctant halfling if they were to complete their quest.

From then on, it's almost like we've been given a tour back to the wonderful fantasy world of Middle Earth, its lore, the landscapes and the mildly tuned scores of Howard Shore that we have made synonymous with The Shire, the elves and the long road ahead. The focus on the dwarves bring new material to the fray, but waves of nostalgia would surely wash over those who meet old friends like Saruman the White, Galadriel, Lord Elrond, hacked orcs, and of course, Gollum, even though they are shown with different sides. However, such reminders does seem overladen at times, for instance when you begin recognising landscapes where pinnacle events would take place in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, which feels that we are taken more of a trip down the memory lane, than developing us to embrace The Hobbit trilogy.

Yeah, I missed you too, even though you totally deserved to melt in the fires of Mt. Doom for pulling an Evander Hollyfield on Frodo

In terms of the narrative, it does feel that Peter Jackson is intending to pad out a trilogy but I have no knowledge about the appendix material of the original novel to see if they were added as new scenes in An Unexpected Journey after Jackson decided to add a third film in the midst of production. Certain scenes read as though they only took several pages to get over with, but Jackson is fully intent of translating them into dozens of minutes of footage to drag out An Unexpected Journey to end 15 minutes short to a magical 3 hours. Still, it is not something that would have an effect on the experience in the theater; only a concern on whether we would be shortchanged by the time There And Back Again is released.

However, An Unexpected Journey is not just a window to look back at old times, but a door for new ways on how viewers would watch a movie again. I'm happy to report that my personal experience with the HFR (48fps) was eye-opening and dispelled my hidden fears that it would be a gimmick no less. The smoothness and clarity may have been distracting at first, but I soon adapted to the fluidity of the camera movements that give a more livid presence to the events that were unfolding. I will even add that the HFR was actually a boon to the 3D and this is probably the ointment to sooth the forced strain on the eyes as the 3D projection seem to blend well into the background by the added sharpness and clarity from the higher framerate. This is a possible winning combination that will make me be more inclined to 3D screenings and a point filmmakers will have to consider, if exhibitors needed a legitimate justification for the added ticket prices.

Thank god none of them were like Boromir.

It's hard to say anything bad about An Unexpected Journey to give an impression that it was not a flawless masterpiece, so I will attribute the negative side of this guilt trip to this one kid who was in the viewing when I was watching it with a couple of schoolmates who were with me when the first trilogy was first released in cinemas back in 2001...

FUCK YOU, KID! Not only you could not appreciate the fantasy tropes from your loud and incessant questions (You seriously thought the dwarves were a nightmare when they left Bag End?), you punctured the epic moment when Gandalf saves the dwarves from the goblins with your reaction by loudly saying 'd4 H3ll?' when everyone was in silent awe.

The Hell? Really, kid? Gandalf saves the dwarves and that's all you thought? The same Gandalf who saved The Fellowship from the fiery wrath of The Balrog in the Mines of Moria with his most quoted phrase? Seriously?

Oh, that's right. Maybe you weren't even BORN yet. So that's why you thought it was unawesome. You should rue the day you were born because all you have for the most defining movie event in your childhood now is a saga about an emo bitch who never listens to her parents, gets fucked by a vampire who belongs to a whole species that doesn't have the balls for a final showdown because they shat glittering bricks from a vision by a girl.

'D4 h3ll' indeed. I pity your childhood.