Pulp Fiction - D/ Quentin Tarantino (1994)

 The 90s was possibly my favourite decade, given that I spent most of my teen years as well the first half of 20s in it. As to be expected, music from the 90s had stuck with me, and they are still among my favourite - it is possibly the 70s, naturally which could contest it. But given that I've been a reluctant movie fan, I now find myself checking out, what is arguably the single most important movie - what with the pop culture - it is clearly a modern classic. The 155 minute run time is hardly felt. The humour combined with the violence makes a ironical combination, which almost makes it  a statement about the times - that in this day ( well, 27 years back - I guess in the scale of time - it is hardly a difference - although the world has become so closely connected since ), extreme violence, and humour all can sit side by side. American writer Danny Dedillo has supposedly stated  at the beginning of the 90s, that America is the only place with funny violence!

Few things I felt about the movie, I note below, for a look back on a future date. Otherwise  this movie doesn't warrant a separate write up. Am sure that the whole world has watched this, except me.

I loved the stretched conversations between the two hit men - Vincent and Jule. Be it Jule's moment of awakening after their lucky shave,  Mia's purported foot massage, or their continued little fights - with this being my favourite:

Jules Winnfield: Oh, man, I will never forgive your ass for this shit. This is some fucked-up
repugnant shit.

Vincent Vega: Jules, did you ever hear the philosophy that once a man admits that he's wrong that he is immediately forgiven for all wrongdoings? Have you ever heard that?

Jules Winnfield: Get the fuck out my face with that shit! The motherfucker that said that shit never had to pick up itty-bitty pieces of skull on account of your dumb ass.

Vincent's lines are equally witty. He knows that his boss' wife is dangerous grounds, however flirtatious she may sound. He tells himself :

So you're gonna go out there, drink your drink, say "Goodnight, I've had a very lovely evening", go home, jerk off. And that's all you're gonna do. 

and an hour or so later, after Mia just manages to save her life, the parting line to Mia;

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go home and have a heart attack. 

The conversations during dinner, where the "foot message" incident is alluded to, and how Mia cuts her husband's boys as a "sewing circle" too was a fine conversation, since she initially declined the request not to get offended.

  The Butch and Marsellus vengeance ending up as it did, also took my fancy. I guess the question of honour, and Butch deciding that Marsellus doesn't deserve such a low fate, makes the viewer feel good.

Wolf, made an impression from the time he picked up Marsellus call - the coolest operator, smartly dressed, for all the cleaning -that he gets others to do.

Jimmie Dimmick: Wow, you would never think it's the same car!

The Wolf: "Okay, lets not start sucking each other's dick just yet......."

 I thought Tarantino did a decent job as Jimmie.
Capt. Koons ( Christopher Walken) too does justice to his little cameo.

Overall, it was thoroughly rewarding experience watching the movie. after "Once Upon a time in Hollywood", and now doubly convinced that I must watch the rest of the Tarantino movies.

The Seventh Seal - d/Ingmar Bergman (1957)

 “- Antonius Block: Life is a preposterous horror. No man can live faced with Death, knowing  everything's nothingness.
- Death: Most people think neither of death nor nothingness.
- Antonius Block: But one day you stand at the edge of life and face darkness.”

My previous experience with Bergman was with Wild Strawberries, his other film from 1957. This one  (Swedish: Det sjunde inseglet), I have been waiting for a suitable time to sit down to, having heard of its more direct philosophical approach. The three day long weekend, plus a few postponements of events due to the prevailing situation, gave me the chance to watch this movie twice, in two days.

"Is it so cruelly inconceivable to grasp God with the senses? Why should He hide himself in a mist of half-spoken promises and unseen miracles?...What is going to happen to those of us who want to believe but aren't able to?"

The Silence of the Gods is  the major theme in this movie, as Antonius Block, returning to his country , Sweden, after the crusades, ravaged by the plague, fights against the call of Death. Returning from the crusades, he seems to be convinced that it was a not "useful contribution", with which he could leave this life. He plays chess with death, as he awaits a suitable opportunity for his one good deed. He manages to do just that, distracting death just sufficiently, to make an actor husband and wife, Jof and Mia, escape with their one year old boy, after a series of "games" with Death. The stark difference of expressions between Jof and Mia, and Block and his squire, Jons, (played by Gunnar Björnstrand, who also cast as Prof. Borg's son, in Wild Strawberries), to me said so much about how Bergman looked at life during this stage of his life. Mia and Jof appreciate the simple things in life - a song, a dance, the love they have for each other and their son, Michel. Jof has visions, and it is subtly suggested that for those who are living on the moment, have a better chance of  faith, and peace of mind.

Jof and Mia, with their son Michel, enjoying life 'on the moment', undeterred 
by his bruises  in a run-in at the inn

 In contrast Block, searching for answers, is left in the dark till his death. Even 'Death' calls himself, the unknowable. Maybe when Block 'arranged' Jof and his family to escape, death made an allowance to do so - after all he proudly proclaims - "nothing escapes me."

Block's pursuit in search of answers leaves him in endless hopelessness - till his end.

“- Antonius Block: I want knowledge ! Not  faith , not assumptions, but knowledge. I want God to stretch out His hand, uncover His face and speak to me.
- Death: But He remains silent .
- Antonius Block: I call out to Him in the darkness. But it's as if no one was there.
- Death: Perhaps there isn't anyone.”

Block, with his Squire, Jöns, wondering about the 'fate' of a girl
being burned for 'consorting with the devil'

Like how the  the view points of Prof. Borg and his son in Wild Strawberries are countered ( By the way wild strawberries, are being shared and enjoyed between all Josef and his family, and Block and his squire in a rare scene of peace ), appreciation of the time one has in his hands, instead of worrying about unknowable, (as we see Block doing here), is upheld in both the movies. Here, the message is not subtle, and maybe the movie has dated in terms of the directness of  the message that it attempts to present. Yet, the fact that it is the kind of movie that will live in on in one's mind for days, making one toggle the scenes in one's mind, is proof to the fact that this movie is a timeless masterpiece.

Of the cast, Gunnar Björnstrand ( Jöns, squire ) and Nils Poppe (Jof) made the most impression on me. The way that Jöns meets Block's skepticism  with a sardonic response, not only with words, but to each facial expression is a treat to watch. His surmise of the crusades ("Our crusade was such madness that only a real idealist could have thought it up."), captured its wastes in few words as possible.

Rating: *****

Whiplash - d/ Damien Chazelle (2014)

 
First, am not a movie buff - so, am far behind when it comes to movies. I intentionally keep it that way, since a man has only so much time for hobbies. As such, here I am, having watched Whiplash, seven years after its release, trying to come to terms with it, having chats with a dyed in the wool movie buff, who thinks that the movie was stellar, and a Jazz aficionado who's highest praise is - "it has its moments" ( high praise from a snob, if you ask me :) )

Here's the catch - the movie buff is right in a general way. Any great  has sacrificed a lot to reach where he or she is. It can be the bird aka Charlie Parker, Virat Kohli,  John Bonham, or Lionel Messi. I think there would've be instances where they made hard decisions, hurting people around them to various level, in their single most pursuit. I think I can understand that. When Andrew scorns that his cousins only play division III football, whereas he aspires

Becoming the greatest musician of the twentieth century would be anyone’s idea of success,

                    the lines are very clearly drawn. Even when breaking up with Nicole, while admittedly when pushed, his confessional cannot be termed filled with empathy on the reasons for his breakup. I think to anyone who is not an out and out jazz fan, there premise for evaluating this movie is based on the sacrifices that one makes towards greatness - sometimes reaching the levels of fanaticism. For all of them this is a great movie.

Then there are the absolute jazz fans. They can nitpick and show so many cracks, that once shown, cannot be set aside too, at least for me. The Jazz aficionado mentioned, shared this, to stress his point - and yes, there are cracks in the movie - but only when the average dude like me is informed - not otherwise.

I watched Joker recently, and I was not overly impressed, finding it implausible in certain instances. The movie buff friend was at my throat over this. I think this is the very reason I can understand the jazz aficionado. If you think that there are no cracks, this is what my jazz lover friend shared - and I concur, a true jazz loyalist has enough reason, such that he cannot but see the cracks. Thus, the absolutist too is right in a precise way.

This takes us to the general question. Can there be any art which uses some discipline for its artistic use ( license ? ), which the experts in the field will not see the cracks in ? Recently a physician friend of mine found loopholes in a work in forensics - which, the lay reader in me, did not catch. Hence, this is a topic for discussion. Do experts usually find enough to disagree when any discipline is taken as a topic for artistic expression ?

And me ? Not a movie buff, and just a jazz enthusiast who cannot leave his rock leanings, even if threatened at the point of a gun, it remains a great movie. No, the above video hasn't discounted any part of the impression that the movie made on me. 

Genre: Psychological Drama
Rating: ****1/2

The Joker - d/ Todd Phillips (2019)

Quite easily Joaquin Phoenix' as The Joker, is the highlight, in this movie, which can be one's favourite, or otherwise, depending on how much one takes to super-hero influenced  psychological thrillers. For some, who are particular about excesses, the movie can be a mixed bag. Clearly, this is more than an average movie of that type- that I grant. For example, I watched Black Panther for the sake of my kids a few years back, and I was not in awe.  Coming back to The Joker, while conceding it has its highs, the premise that Gotham city has declined to such a state, where "kill the rich" becomes a popular slogan suits a creation from comic roots - this, hung on to me like sore thumb. So while, appreciating the gradual lapse of Arthur Fleck to an insanity, due to being a victim of parental abuse, and due to the apathy of a rotting capitalist system  - ( the symbolic use of garbage not being collected due to a labour strike was good, I felt ) - the "excesses" as it were, including the slot that Arthur gets in Murray's show, didn't impress me. I am afraid that my capacity of treating super-hero/comic creations is at askance here. In fact I disagree about its nomination as the best movie at last year's Oscars. Joaquin's award is another matter.

Having said that, the similarity to "The Taxi Driver" ( I need to watch "King of Comedy), combined with the stellar acting of Joaquin Phoenix makes it a worthy watch. The Taxi Driver himself, Robert de Niro's role could've been filled by any other good actor, I felt - nothing special there.

My Rating: ***1/2

Annie Hall - d/Woodie Allen ( 1977)

 I became aware of the movie, Annie Hall, quite recently, upon seeing a meme in which Alvy Singer ( Woodie), compares existential motifs in Russian literature to mental masturbation, only for his girl, Annie, to cut him in a  witty response. The text of that piece dialogue, the culture, ideology and the humour in it was sufficient, for me to look up on the movie, and today I had the chance to watch it. Given my inclination to favour big award winners, that this was an Academy award winner ( beating the original "Star Wars" back in '77) was added reason enough, not to postpone watching this.

And, it is now one of my favourite movies, ever! It has every thing - The Wit, the humour, the ideological debates, the existential strain  on the main  character - and of course the wit. ( Did I mention, Wit ?) Here's just a few dialogues captured to register my point.

 "Alvy: Here. You look like a very happy couple. Are you?"
The Girl of the couple:"Yeah."
Alvy: "So how do you account for it?"
The Girl of the couple: "Uh... I'm very shallow and empty...and I have no ideas
and nothing interesting to say.
The Guy: " And I'm exactly the same way.
Alvy:  "I see. Well, that's very interesting. So you've managed
to work out something, huh? Well, thanks very much for talking to me."

 

“I feel that life is divided into the horrible and the miserable. That's the two categories. The horrible are like, I don't know, terminal cases, you know, and blind people, crippled. I don't know how they get through life. It's amazing to me. And the miserable is everyone else. So you should be thankful that you're miserable, because that's very lucky, to be miserable.” 

         "In California, they don't throw their garbage away. They make it into TV shows."

Pam: Did you catch Dylan?

Alvy Singer: No, I couldn't make it-- my raccoon had hepatitis.

Pam: You have a raccoon?

Alvy Singer: Few.

 

Alvy Singer: Hey, don't knock masturbation! It's sex with someone I love.

Alvy's Psychiatrist: [Alvy and Annie are seeing their therapists at the same time on a split screen] How often do you sleep together?

Annie's Psychiatrist: Do you have sex often?

Alvy Singer: [lamenting] Hardly ever. Maybe three times a week.

Annie Hall: [annoyed] Constantly. I'd say three times a week.

You know what am sayin' here ? 

And the psychological and the philosophical topics, visited during the 93 minute journey ( albeit, some in passing ) ? It has to be long list, as the neurotic Alvy has a great difficulty enjoying life. Alvy has been visiting a shrink for 15 years. The themes visited in the movie vary from penis envy to interpretation of dreams.

As the movie progresses we realise that Annie Hall is becoming a more complete person, better at expressing herself, a successful singer, and her visits to a psycho-analyst actually helps her - this,  in contrast to the totally confused girl, whom Alvy meets at a tennis game. Alvy appears to have subconsciously invested in Annie, to make her an ideal partner. But the independence that she soon achieves, ensures that she outgrows  her neurotic lover, while Alvy doesn't know to appreciate a good thing.

 I am discovering Woody Allen rather late - but I have an excuse - am not a movie buff - and, I like to keep it that way, to minimise the effect of my ignorance of this area - say, as against a music enthusiast who feels he "must have on CD" the better part of the discographies of  Bowie, Prince, Radiohead, Pink Floyd, Genesis, Depeche Mode, Pearl Jam .... the list goes on - but you do get the drift.  Speaking of artistes - Paul Simon has a role to play - the man Annie leaves Alvy for. It was a treat to see a rather self conscious Simon - a record label man.

I just looked up what are considered the best Woodie Allen movies, and I plan to watch most of them!

I always thought of Philadelphia and Forrest Gump as my all time favourite movies. Now "Annie Hall" joins those two - no doubt about it.

Rating - *****

Parasite - ( d) Bong Joon Ho (2019)

 "Well I woke up this morning
On the wrong side of the bed
And how I got to thinkin'
About all those things you said
About ordinary people
And how they make you sick
And if callin' names kicks back on you
Then I hope this does the trick
'Cause I'm sick of your complainin'
About how many bills
And I'm sick of all your bitchin'
'Bout your poodles and your pills
And I just can't see no humor
About your way of life
And I think I can do more for you
With this here fork and knife
Eat the rich
There's only one thing that they are good for
Eat the rich
Take one bite now - come back for more
Eat the rich
I gotta get this off my chest
Eat the rich"

                        ( Eat the rich - Aerosmith, from "Get a Grip")          

After watching the movie, The Parasite, twice, I read a few reviews as is my wont. One thing that surprised me was a few  review hits from Indian sources - ( i.e. Times of India, Hindustani Times,  besides the usual "Guardian", "NY Times" etc. ) then, I gathered it makes sense . The drastic difference between the levels of the super rich and the extreme poor, would have an effect of this movie in India too ( that is not to say, that the differences are less in most other countries ). But it was a sentence from the NY Times review, that hit me like a thunderbolt, soon after what the movie delivered, a near enough one. (To quote):

Yet they’re not gullible, as Ki-taek believes, but are instead defined by cultivated helplessness, the near-infantilization that money affords. In outsourcing their lives, all the cooking and cleaning and caring for their children, the Parks are as parasitical as their humorously opportunistic interlopers.

The word that took my attention was, "near-infantilization", a cultured helplessness. It is here Bong Joon-ho, suggests to look all sides to note The Parasite.

If am to have a modest effort at deconstruction, I may even venture to suggest that the script is extra critical of Mrs. Park, Yeon-kyo. It suggests that she's not much different to one of the pet poodles, that she keeps. Overall events, suggest that she's hardly a woman in control of her house. Yet, it is not as if she's never traveled "the subway".

While, the Parks are usually nice people - even their servants agree - even while the opportunists live off the gullible, to cross the line is unacceptable. This is what Ki-taek feels the most, and in a moment of sudden fury gets the better of him to take the vengeance off his boss, forgetting his enemy till then. The "smell of the people who travel the subway", as the Parks like to term it, is the final death blow, as it were.

The perfect sound track, the pace of each stage, the montage which show the replacement of Gook Moon-gwang ( the former house keeper), by Chung-sook, the beautiful camera work all combine  to make an almost perfect movie, and one that will work inside the viewer's conscience for a long time to come. The importance of empathy, and the choice of being selectively oblivious being one of bad taste, wouldn't go away for sometime, after this movie. Maybe it shouldn't. No, it shouldn't. Jane Fonda presenting the Oscar for the best movie, terms the nominees as the films which made the most impact. This was sure did.

Rating: *****

 

           

Greyhound - (d) Aaron Schneider (2020)

 It's rare that I watch a movie, if it's based on a book, without reading the book first. That's one of the reasons I lag on movies by quite a bit. But looking up on C.S. Forester's 1955 book, The Good Shepard, I decided that its one novel I will skip. Those who loved the book, appear to be with some naval experience, and the others complained that the naval lingo totally put them off - Course change after course change - mundane activity for the everyday reader. So I took up to watch the movie without no hesitation on missing out on the book.

And the movie ? It was jam packed 90 minutes of action ( maybe it was too short by about 20 minutes to 30 minutes, given the amount of action), with Hanks as the captain on his first crossing of the Atlantic, via the dreaded "Black Pit", facing a pack of U-boats - The Grey Wolf, as it were. As was with The Terminal, The Bridge of Spies, or Sully, Hanks himself with those troubled looks, working at a stretch for 48 hours, till his souls bled, foregoing each meal served him makes the difference making it worth the while for viewer. The other cast has the shortest possible slots to make impressions, and they do somewhat with their continued grave looks, and the occasional look of despair, as to whether the old man can pull it off. 

Hanks plays well the "God fearing" captain, and wrote  the script, and I suspect the novel with so many naval instructions on course changes may have interested him - after all we're talking of a man who collects type writers for a hobby.

All in all, a  good war thriller, if you want to spend 90 minutes of your time in 1942, with no baggage of political correctness, but the travails of the time to. But, for Hanks, just another day in office.

Rating - ***

Collateral Beauty - (d)David Frankel ( 2016)

 Last night, I was planning on watching Fences, but the copy I had, didn't help; and I had to go for an alternative. This was just below that DVD, and I thought, well, Will did a brilliant job with "In the pursuit of Happyness", so why not ? Well, here's why not.

 

The Bad: It's a superficial, crude plot. The manipulation and the contrivances is apparent. And I will not even touch on the political correctness that some of the reviewers have gone on about, for, in real life when much is at stake, that does take a step back. One reviewer has called it a Seasonal weepie, and all for a good reason. A modern day " Christmas Carol", which is saved by the cast to some degree. The scene, when Howard regains control and  talks to his three friends, and how he knows the battles that each of them have been battling, was possibly the most artificial part of the movie to me. It possibly is  the icing in the pudding, which expected a lot of continuous naivety, from its viewers.

The good:  The Cast -  Will Smith really impresses, as does, Helen Mirren, in particular.  Edward Norton, Michael Peña and Kate Winslet does too.

For all the credulity that one is keen to distance from, one cannot deny that the movie has pieces of dialogue that can have its effect.

Rafi to Claire:

"There was this dust dealer up on
187th who gave me Brave New World.
That book turned hours into seconds.
He was my father.
And there was this homeless woman
who lived under
the University Heights bridge.
Her name was Flora.
She was batshit crazy,
but she told me the greatest stories.
She was my mother.
See, Claire,
your children don't have to come from you.
They go through you.
So, I wouldn't consider
the battle with time over just yet."

This one made the most impact on me.

And of the scenes ?  the little phantasmagorical scene where the old woman appears to be "death" (Brigitte) , who had spoken to Madeline at the hospital, had its impression on me.

Given that the movie sold well, despite the negative reviews the movie got from day one, suggests that the world actually is less cynical that most of the reviewers appear to be. 

My Rating - **1/2

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy - (d) Tomas Alfredson ( 2011 )

John Le Carre ගේ Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy මුල් කොට ගෙන බිහි වූ Tomas Alfredson අධ්‍යක්ෂණය කල එනමින් ම වන චිත්‍රපටිය නැරඹුවෙමි. එහි රඟපෑමට Gary Oldman ට හොඳම නළුවා ට හිමි Academy සම්මාන නිර්දේශයක් හිමිවිය. ඇත්තෙන් ම එහි අපූරු රංගනයක නිරත වන්නේ ය.

මේ පොස්ටුව, මා නවකතාවේ හමු වූ ජො'ජ් ස්මයිලි සහ චිත්‍රපටියේ ජෝ'ජ් සමයිලි අතර සබඳතාවක් - හෝ එහි මද බව - පිළිබඳවයි.

නවකතාවේ, ස්මයිලි යනු ආචාරශීලි, මෘදු වදන් ඇති, එහෙත් සියුම් මනසකින් සියල්ල විචක්ෂණව හදරා තීරණ වලට පැමිණෙන්නෙකි. මෑතක නැරඹූ The Spy Who came in from the Cold චිත්‍රපටියේ ජෝ'ජ් ස්මයිලි යනු අප්‍රධාන, නුමුත් වැදගත් කාර්‍යභාරයක් කරනා චරිතයකි. එහෙත් එම චරිතයේ හැඩරුව සහ හැසිරීම, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy නවකතාවේ එන ස්මයිලි හා ගැලපෙන බව සිතුණි.

Tinker Tailor Soldier චිත්‍රපටියේ Gary Oldman හරහා දකින ස්මයිලි, අඩුවෙන් කතා කරන, එහෙත් අර පෙර කී මෘදු ලක්ෂණ ඇත්තෙක්ට වඩා, දක්ෂ බුද්ධි තොරතුරු හා සබැඳි නිලධාරියෙක් බව ඒත්තු යන ආකාර චරිතයකි. නිෂ්ශබ්ද වුව, ඇවැසි විටෙක තම බලය තහවුරු කල හැක්කෙකි. ඔහු අවශ්‍ය විටක, අවශ්‍ය ඍජු වදන් කීමට නොපැකිළෙන්නෙකි.

මේ නිදසුන් පිරීක්සන්න:

BILL HAYDON: I’m not his bloody office boy.

SMILEY: What are you then?

නවකතාවේ, ස්මයිලි මෙවන් අපහාසාත්මක චෝදනා මුඛයෙන් දොඩන්නෙක් නොවෙයි.

MINISTER

That’s... that’s not possible.

SMILEY

Made possible. By you. When he steals our secrets he does it

under the very nose of the Circus, in the house which you

persuaded the treasury to pay for. I’m sure you’ll be able to

take full credit for that.

MINISTER

(Appalled)

Witchcraft’s intelligence is genuine! It’s been gold!

නවකතාවේ ස්මයිලි ඇමති ට අපහාසාත්මක වාග් ප්‍රාහාර එල්ල කරන්නෙකු නොවේ. නවකතාවේ එන ඇමතිවරයා වාග්ප්‍රහාරයට නැඹුරු අයෙක් වන අතර ස්මයිලි තම ස්තාවරය විස්තර කරනුයේ දීර්ඝ වචන මාලාවකිනි

Smiley: “If the mole exists, which I assume is common ground among us . . .” He waited, but no one said it wasn’t. “If the mole exists,” he repeated, “it’s not only the Circus that will double its profits by the American deal. Moscow Centre will, too, because they’ll get from the mole whatever you buy from the Americans.”

In a gesture of frustration, the Minister slapped his hand on Mendel’s table, leaving a moist imprint on the polish.

Minister : “God damn it, I do not understand,” he declared. “That Witchcraft stuff is bloody marvellous! A month ago it was buying us the moon. Now we’re disappearing up our orifices and saying the Russians are cooking it for us. What the hell’s happening?”

Smiley: “Well, I don’t think that’s quite as illogical as it sounds, as a matter of fact. After all, we’ve run the odd Russian network from time to time, and though I say it myself we ran them rather well. We gave them the best material we could afford. Rocketry, war planning.

මා කියන්නට තනන්නේ, නවකතාවේ ස්මයිලි චරිතය සහ, චිත්‍රපටියේ ස්මයිලි චරිතය චරිතලක්ෂණ අතින් දෙකක් බවත් ( එය එකක් වීම අනිවාර්‍ය නොවේ - සහ, Oldman ට නවකතාවේ එන ස්මයිලි චරිතය එලෙස ම රඟපෑම පවා අසීරු වන්නට තිබූ බවකි.

මෙම නවකතාවත්, චිත්‍රපටියත් දෙකම පරිශීලනය කල අයට තේරෙන බවක් සිතේ.

චිත්‍රපටිය පැය දෙක දුවන්නේ ත්‍රාසය රඳවමින්, කාලයට පෙර අවසන් කරලීමට ඇවැසි තරඟයක් මෙනි. ඇත්තෙන්ම පැය දෙක යනවා තේරෙන්නේ ද නැත.

නවකතාවේ අපි දකින්නේ, ස්මයිලි නිදිමරාගෙන පරණ වාර්තා කියවමින්, ප්‍රහේලිකාවක් විසඳන ස්වරූපයකි.

මෙම නිර්මාණ දෙක ම අපූරුය. දෙකේ ම මූලික කතා පුවත එකක් ය. එහෙත් නිසැක වශයෙන් ආත්මීය වශයෙන් වෙනස්කම් වලින් සපිරිය.

( පිළිබිඹු අතරින් අවසානයේ දිස්වෙන කළු-චිත්‍ර රූපයෙන් දිස්වන්නේ The Spy Who Came in from the Cold චිත්‍රපටියේ ජෝ'ජ් ස්මයිලි ට පන පෙවූ Rupert Davis එම චිතපටියේ රඟ පෑ අවස්ථාවකි. අනෙක් පිළිඹිබු සියල්ල Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy චිත්‍රපටියෙනි )

Christopher Robin- (d) Mark Foster (2018)

 The post world war II situation and his job must be really bad, for Christopher Robin to turn up like that, huh ? Not withstanding years of field days as a kid, with a rum set of toys, a beautiful wife and a daughter, Chris has really let the outside world get him down. Maybe it is with the intention of stressing the overall message of the movie - no, in fact I am sure it was. While quite willing not to notice the stitch marks that make up a movie like this - apparently for kids - and their parents too ( they got that part right), stressed, bad parent, Christopher was the most obvious thing about the movie.

Highlight - the usually down Eeyore's sarcasm mingled wit.
"Sure, Sacrifice the Donkey", for instance could match Winslow's point of view, more so than Eeyore's.

Loved: My seven year old, spilling the next scene unable to help himself - before claiming that he will not let on, on the story. "Boring School" has really registered with him, given that he started talking about boring school when Christopher was preparing to go to Boarding school, itself. ( He just watching it for the 34th time - 35th, you say? Ok, 35th time.)

All in all can't say that I didn't enjoy the outing, despite the drab greyness that carried the movie. The one happy scene of the family together stood up so much in contrast, that it was the movie's moment of sunshine.


Maybe am reading too much into the movie.

Rating: ***

Wild Strawberries - Ingmar Bergman

Watched "Wild Strawberries" (1957) as an entry towards watching the works of Ingmar Bergman. While I first heard of him many years ago, through the praising words of the late Tissa Abeysekara, given my natural reluctance to sit and watch a movie, as against reading, I've postponed watching his works by almost a decade.
  

I will only share what I felt about the theme of the movie, given that am not capable of discussing the cinematography, therein.

The reference to coldness and loneliness takes a central theme of the movie. When Prof. Isak Borg visits his mother, she complains of the cold, which he doesn't feel. That cold is symbolic of the characteristic of the old lady, and is present in abundance in the old Prof. too, as his daughter-in-law, Marianne  ( played by the beautiful  Ingrid Thulin ), points out.  Marianne has reason to be complaining, as she had detected that the cold of the mother, and the son, has manifested in to the third generation, via an unhappy marriage of the latter. The conversation between Marianne and her husband, whom she dearly loves, is one that would be almost craved for by those interested in Existentialism and Absurdism.

This soul searching journey happens on a certain day, where the old scholar visits his former University to receive a honorary degree. It is symbolic that however much knowledgeable the old scholar is, his education in life is incomplete, and the road trip that he decides to take on the day of the awarding of the degree, attempts to complete it. He receives it via dreams, a set of hitch hiking youngsters brimming with life - in total contrast to the moods of Marianne and Borg - whom they accommodate in their car, as well as a fighting husband and wife couple.

I've watched this movie twice over the last four days, and I might watch it again, as am now in that phase where all of sudden illumination of each  event, beyond its apparent meaning.

To state the obvious, a brilliant movie that one can revisit many a time, and see inferred meanings and symbols, and thus more meaning with each visit.