Pages

Powered by Blogger.
Showing posts with label Halle Berry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Halle Berry. Show all posts

310. Cloud Atlas

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

310. (14 Dec) Cloud Atlas (2012, Tom Tykwer, Andy Wachowski & Lana Wachowski) 33



Ambitious, to be sure, but fundamentally obvious in its themes and hackish in execution. From painfully inconsistent make-up effects to the flat, run-of-the-mill visual effects, even the supposedly stunning look of Cloud Atlas is a letdown. (Jim Sturgess in Asianface is the most obvious mistake, but little of the make-up genuinely works.) There are still human moments that are quite moving in this sprawling, choppy drama. Ben Whishaw's quite good as a tortured gay pianist, but his screentime is limited compared to Tom Hanks, who seems to be attempting to win a different Razzie for each new character he tries on. Hanks' futuristic scenes with Halle Berry (with faux-English involving nonsensical phrases like "true true") are the worst. Were this an appropriate length, it might have made a good Mystery Science Theater 3000.

CLOUD ATLAS

Monday, October 22, 2012

CLOUD ATLAS
Written and Directed by Andy Wachowski, Lana Wachowski and Tom Tykwer
Starring Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Jim Broadbent, Hugh Grant, Hugo Weaving, Jim Sturgess, Ben Wishaw, Xun Zhou and Susan Sarandon.

Vyvyan Ayrs: What is a critic other than one who reads quickly, arrogantly but never wisely?

I must be missing the deeper meaning in CLOUD ATLAS, a film so massive in scope that it required three of the most visually innovative directors working today to tackle it properly. I watched six separate stories span centuries and unfold in spectacular fashion before my eyes, and understood pretty early on into its gargantuan 164 minute running time, that all of these stories, although seemingly completely unrelated, were in fact all connected. I’m sure there has to be so much more symbolically going on underneath all the heavy handed imagery and crushing weight of all the prosthetics used in this film, but if there was, it never surfaced to the movie I was watching. CLOUD ATLAS is surprisingly engaging, and at times extremely satisfying, but it insists you invest in it with every fiber of your being at all times, so it can also be exhausting to get through. And by the time I reached the end of this epic journey, I did not find the revelations to be all that worth the effort.

Where to begin when talking about a story that is meant to demonstrate that all stories are connected throughout time? Honestly, I don’t know and thinking about it is making my head hurt. This is my job though so I must attempt this, no matter how convoluted the directorial team, made up of the Wachowski siblings and Tom Tykwer, try to make it for me. A man (Jim Sturgess) takes a stand against slavery and is unknowingly poisoned while on a ship at sea, circa 1850. Another man (Ben Wishaw) writes a sextet that no one will ever hear in 1931. A woman (Halle Berry) tries to take down a nuclear company up to no good in the 70’s. An older gentlemen (Jim Broadbent, the film’s shining star) is tricked into a nursing home prematurely in present day. A genetically engineered woman, known as a fabricant (Xun Zhou), serves food and wonders if there is anything more to life in a dystopian near future (in what I found to be the most compelling of the stories). And finally an old man (Tom Hanks) tells a campfire story in the far away future about when he was young and what it was like to live just after humanity fell. All of this is tied together by the suggestion that each of these stories contains a character that once lived in another time, in another one of these stories.


From what I hear, the book which CLOUD ATLAS was based upon, written by David Mitchell, is even more dense. From what I hear, it also does a better job at showing how cyclical all of our history and connectedness truly is. Having not read it, I cannot confirm this, but a novel does provide a better foundation with which to base this elaborate and ambitious undertaking. The visual adaptation here is more a spectacle than an emotional or meaningful exchange. Even the interconnectedness of it all has to be spelled out to us by having all the actors play several different parts (with varied results). While the three directors are all on the same page visually, seamlessly jumping back and forth between the Wachowski’s future and Tykwer’s past and present, they are all amiss when it comes to tying together the actual feelings that humanize us all throughout time. When they are in the moment, they often get it right, but CLOUD ATLAS, isn’t about just one moment; it is about them all and this is just too big a picture to behold all at once.


The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 2001

Friday, July 1, 2011

2001


So the much anticipated ranking is:

Judi Dench gives an unspectacular but great performance as Iris Murdoch. Although this is definitely not her best work, there's nothing wrong about it. I liked it very much and I was quite moved occasionally, it's just that I feel that the part didn't require a talent like Dench's. As I said, there are no serious problems, I still feel slightly disappointed.

This is a great performance. Although it lacks real depth or emotion, the wrapping is still beautiful and wonderful. If I look at that, I am fascinated. However, if I look inside, I can't find much there. She sings, she dances, she dies but forgets to create a truly deep and layered character. Still, very good job.

All in all, this gal, Renée Zellweger is really great as Bridget Jones, this crazy, pathetic and loveable spinster. This is not Sex and the City style "acting", she's truly great as Bridget and she gives a heart-warming portrayal of this lovely character. No wonder that she was nominated for an Oscar.

Sissy Spacek is just amazing as Ruth Fowler and she shows how much tension her grief causes in her life. Her performance is not huge, she doesn't sing, she doesn't dance, she doesn't die, we just see her being totally fantastic and unbelievable. This is an incredibly haunting and unforgettable peformance. Those small movements of hers, the outbursts, the tears. Everything is so real and haunting.

There's nothing more appropriate word to describe Halle Berry's performance in Monster's Ball than mindblowing. She's saw raw and so incredible as Leticia Musgorve and she shows Leticia's inner demons so amazingly. She's unbelievably effective and although I might understand why some don't like her, I think that she's just fantastic and shows the mood swings and breakdowns of Leticia incredibly. Brutally raw, amazing work.

So I can proudly announce
the winner is...
Halle Berry
in
Monster's Ball
Oh my Goooood! XD

Final thoughts: A really great year, in my humble opinion. It's WAY better than some say. All of the performances seemed very interesting to me. Two of them didn't impress me that much and they were leaning towards 3,5 but my leninent heart stepped in. I'm always much stricter when I get a weak year (1975, but I don't want to remember). Renée was just fantastic as Bridget Jones and I loved her. Halle's win was a really worthy one and I am happy that it became an even more special one for her. Sissy is always brilliant and I feel sooooooooo bad about not choosing her. But I would feel even worse if I didn't pick Halle. It's possible that once I'll change my mind, not now. If I could, I would make this one a tie.

Omissions: 
  • Nicole Kidman in The Others 
  • Audrey Tautou in Amelie

The ranking of the reviewed years:

  1. 1944
  2. 1969
  3. 1974
  4. 1989
  5. 2001
  6. 1959
  7. 2006
  8. 1978
  9. 2010
  10. 1996
  11. 1964
  12. 1939
  13. 1977
  14. 1997
  15. 2009
  16. 1980
  17. 1941
  18. 1972
  19. 1963
  20. 1966
  21. 1973
  22. 1983
  23. 1986
  24. 1937
  25. 1990
  26. 1954
  27. 1958
  28. 1948
  29. 2002
  30. 1957
  31. 1940
  32. 1998
  33. 1975
About the next year: I don't have any idea. I'll be away next week, so I'll take my time. :) You'll know it next Saturday. :) Make some suggestions, I might like some of the ideas. :)

Note: I've just found the perfect year but I'll say nothing for sure, yet. :)

What do you think? Any thoughts on your mind?

Halle Berry in Monster's Ball

Wednesday, June 29, 2011

Halle Berry made history when she became the first African American actress to receive the Best Actress Oscar in 2001 for playing Leticia Musgorve, a bitter, grief-stricken woman in the independant movie, Monster's Ball. I guess if I had been an Oscar nerd back then, I wouldn't have predicted Berry to win the Oscar. Not until the SAG awards, at least. That was the only major award that she won (Sissy Spacek won the majority of the critics' awards and she was followed by Nicole). I guess the award that she won at the Berlin Film Festival didn't matter that much Oscar-wise. Still, she won in a surprise and made history. Nowadays many people make fun of her speech but I can understand her feelings.

Monster's Ball is a fantastic, thought-provoking and really devastating movie. It's such a complex and fascinating experience, one that you never forget once you see it. You can love it or loathe it but you can't deny that it's a special movie. I think it definitely deserved a Best Picture nomination, more than most (or all) of the nominees that year. Same for Billy Bob Thornton. He gave (probably) the performance of his lifetime and he's so great as the repressed guy. I also would have voted for this movie in the Best Original Screenplay category.

Halle Berry is another example of an underrated actress. She's an actress who would deserve much better roles and yet she has to do things like Catwoman. I guess her brilliant looks are serious drawbacks in terms of her career. I guess she was really lucky with Monster's Ball. After actresses like Angela Bassett and Vanessa Williams turned the part down, I guess the role of Leticia was played by the right actress, eventually.

I'll explain this later but I'm saying this right now, in short: Halle Berry is incredible as Leticia Musgrove. I mean, I know that it's not very popular to say such things about her, she's really Amazing. Yes, Amazing with capital A. I guess the biggest haters of this performance cannot really identify with this character or (thank God) they haven't felt what Leticia felt in Monster's Ball. I'm just telling the story once again: Leticia is a broken-down woman whose son dies quickly after her husband and the kid's father is executed. Leticia find comfort on the side of a racist cop and a special relationship is born between them.

Many say that Berry's performance in Monster's Ball consists of two performances: one of them is loud, over-the-top acted and the other one is a silent, more subtle one. I'm saying right here that it's the biggest piece of garbage that I've ever heard. What one can see in Halle's work is the mood-swings of a devastated woman who's overwhelmed by the emotions and she cannot control herself. Even before the deaths, Leticia is exhausted. Halle's amazing in the scene where Leticia sees her husband for the last time. I was just thinking "poor woman". There's so much pain and suffering inside and (at least for me), it's always really disturbing to see the mental breakdown of a person. Again, it's the mood swings when she beats up her obese child crazily.

And after a while, it's just fascinating to see her infamous "Make me feel good!" scene. Before having sex, Leticia breaks down to an almost total stranger. Halle shows all the pain of this character mindblowingly. All those overwhelming emotions make it a very disturbing and heart-breaking scenes. Halle doesn't exaggerate the drunken state of Leticia. Halle's acting in that scene is just perfect. Once, I had a 0,00001% similar experience with booze and it's just unbelievable how well Halle portrayed that awkward and overemotional state. It was fantastic.

Still, it would be really hard to pick my favorite scene of this performance because choosing between the previously mentioned sequence and the one where she's humiliated by her boyfriend's racist father is just impossible. That's and example of Halle's calm and subtle acting and it's such a harrowing, unforgettable and brutally realistic scene. Halle showed so many sides of Leticia's humiliation. She's cornered and it's really painful to see her.

Halle's chemistry with Billy Bob Thornton (if we can talk about such a thing) is just brilliant. I saw them like lonely birds in winter who are holding onto each other so that they are not cold. It was just fascinating to see them relying on each other. They were mutually supportive and we can feel the special bondage between them. I really cannot decide if it was really love. Maybe. But I guess that's not important. And that becomes obvious in another brilliant scene where Leticia realises the horrible and devastating truth about Hank, his boyfriend. Halle is so damn effective and brilliant there. Her acting there is the definition of mindblowing.

Really, there's no more appropriate word to describe Halle Berry's performance in Monster's Ball than mindblowing. She's saw raw and so incredible as Leticia Musgorve and she shows Leticia's inner demons so amazingly. She's unbelievably effective and although I might understand why some don't like her, I think that she's just fantastic and shows the mood swings and breakdowns of Leticia incredibly. Brutally raw, amazing work.

What do you think?

The Next Year

Sunday, June 26, 2011

2001


So the nominees were:
  • Halle Berry in Monster's Ball
  • Judi Dench in Iris
  • Nicole Kidman in Moulin Rouge!
  • Sissy Spacek in In the Bedroom
  • Renée Zellweger in Bridget Jones's Diary
A requested year and a great one, I think. Any normal, usual year would be a relief after 1975.

What do you think? What's your ranking? What do you predict for my ranking?

Two Perfectly Awful Movies

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

I will watch my future wife, Halle Berry, in anything, but I found her latest, “Perfect Stranger” a particular chore to sit through. Oh, she’s just fine in it, as is co-star Bruce Willis, but they are let down by the script at every opportunity.

The script to “Perfect Stranger” is a good example for why so few thrillers work today. Its plot is so contrived that it leaves the audience shaking its head in collective wonderment. Interesting characters, crackling dialogue and twists that evolve naturally from the story are no longer enough. Now scripts like “Perfect Stranger” boast plot machinations that would take a small country to carry off. Screenwriters need to learn that a satisfying story well told is much more satisfying than double and triple plot twists that stand on its head everything that’s gone before and that couldn’t possibly take place in the real world.

Add to this a tepid score that’s the aural equivalent of white wallpaper (why even bother?) and another grating performance by the creepy actor Giovanni Ribisi and you have a bad movie masquerading as an even worse thriller.

“Hot Fuzz” garnered extremely positive reviews when it opened last month. To that, I can only say, “Huh?”

“Hot Fuzz” is suppose to be an affectionate take-off on big-budget action movies produced by the likes of Jerry Bruckheimer. Since I consider the majority of Mr. Bruckheimer’s resume to represent everything that’s wrong in contemporary Hollywood cinema (i.e. “Bad Boys 2” which is referenced here), I did not feel particularly charitable towards “Hot Fuzz”.

One of the noisiest movies I’ve seen in awhile, “Hot Fuzz” comes loaded with all those irritating sound effects that mar movies today. A director can’t just cut to the next scene, it needs to be accompanied by a rapid camera movement accompanied by loud “whooshing” sounds at decibel levels normally reserved for sonic booms. This is repeated ad nausem throughout. If this is a parody of big budget action movies, it doesn’t work as this technique is, unfortunately, now commonplace in all types of movies big and small. It’s not clever the first time it’s done and wears out its welcome by the seventh and eighth, ninth, etc. times.

The sound recording struck me as particularly muddy as a lot of the actors tended to mumble their words, but the obnoxious rock soundtrack came through loud and clear, unfortunately.

At 121 minutes, it wears out its welcome by about 30 minutes. There are some funny bits here and there (the bit with a fugitive swan is priceless), but they are lost amongst the never ending noise.

One pleasant surprise: the actor playing the village parson looked familiar, but I could not place him. Reading the end credits, I saw it was Paul Freeman. Ah yes, the actor who played the rival French archaeologist in “Raiders of the Lost Ark.” Now THAT’S an action movie. It was good to see him again.
 

Blogger news

Blogroll

Most Reading