18 - Paprika (2006)

Back. The annual aniversary occasion seemed like a good moment to try a comeback, although I don't estimate frequent entries for the upcoming months. During this one year break I've watched some movies, not so many as back in the early blog days, but there were some titles good enough for this occasion:

• "Conclave" - probably the best movie as "full package" seen over last year
• "Mickey 17" - very underrated
• "Straume" - just in case somebody thinks a movie can't work without having dialogue in it
• "Bugonia" - the Lanthimos/Stone tandem still works, new episode, sufficiently different from the previous to counter some criticism on increasing monotony in the collaboration
• "La sociedad de la nieve" - hard to watch, but it's worth it
• "The Brutalist" - a bit too long, but it's worth it
• "Anora" - good, but slips towards guilty pleasure
• "Companion" - was expecting a guilty pleasure, but good
• "Alien: Romulus" - surprisingly good, above Fincher and Jeunet's iterations, below Scott and Cameron, practically the best comeback of the series since '86
• "Wallace and Gromit: Vengeance Most Fowl" - "The Curse of the Were-Rabbit" of 20 years ago is probably more funny (damn, I'm old), but this gets close to it
• "The Accountant 2" - not as good as the first one, but still sufficiently original to move out from the classic action pattern

and there are others too. However, I picked something older for today's entry, "Paprika", probably not as good as many of the above. However, it's the last I watched, and by a strange multi-layered coincidence it really got to me. Among its layers there's a metaphor of cinema as a "reality escape" equivalent to dreams = got synced well with a blog revival.

The movie is the last anime of the 4 produced by Satoshi Kon during his short time span in this world. I've heard about these, but not being very into the genre I kept ignoring them. Until three days ago, since when I've seen the current one in split pieces. Initially, it didn't catch me enough to see it to the end, but still, finally reaching its end after a second break, I understood why I didn't give up. Let's get a bit into the subject: in a not so far future, DC Mini, a new device invented in a research institute permits connecting to a person's dreams. The action revolves among several characters, mostly the employees of the respective institute, among whom a psychiatrist takes advantage of the device to interact with her patients, via an alter ego: Paprika, and in particular with one patient, a policeman plagued with isomnia and haunted by recurrent dreams. The story gets complicated when the DC Mini prototype gets stolen, and as consequence an increasing number of victims starts popping up, manifesting a strange behavior, where the dream dominates the reality. Further, the action revolves against investigating the theft, but more details would result in spoilers, so let's stop here with the story.

"Paprika" has a literary basis, and it's often referenced as an inspiration source for "Inception". I wouldn't say that is more present there than P.K. Dick's "Ubiq". Indeed, there is a common theme of "dream access", which is central in "Paprika", but we have a different story, with a completely different meaning. A story for which its development convinced me that chaotically nuanced surrealism it's not something specific for Hayao Miyazaki + Studio Ghibli in Japanese animes, because we have plenty of it here too. And that's the minus, which at some point makes the movie slightly entangled and hard to follow, not being clear anymore what happens in reality and what in the dream world. Still, finally we get that meaning I was referring to above.

On the plus side, the movie excels technically, at least for an anime. We have scenes that include volumetric nuances to enhance the perspective, a game of lights, and others, very nicely worked out. The editing helps enhancing the impact. We have a soundtrack which cannot get unnoticed, even just for a track that maintains the impression of a chaotic dream with a bunch of harmonic overlaps, where if we extract just the melodic line on a single track, what results is constrastingly calm (see the keys variant below, even though it's with an active reverb/sustain + a high pitch).

That's what the end of the movie gives you. An impression of getting through a rollercoaster, but leaving enough to you to extract whatever metaphor you want from the dream :) = sufficiently complex to interpret by desire. From a balance between live your life vs. regrets to... but I said, no spoilers ;)

Rating: 4 out of 5 ( for the anniversary occasion, otherwise I would've got stuck to 3.5, too much metaphor can be tiring :) )

PS: And still, spoilers :P press play by choice - although that's probably the most obvious metaphor (pretty much what I wrote above):

A Passage to India (1984)

I'm not done with the '80s, and since I still don't have anything new that seems better, I'm back to that period. Or, you could also say that "karma strikes back" after my last entry against the new eligibility criteria for best picture Oscar. Because one of the nominations of more than 35 years ago, "A Passage to India", actually passes all the new requirements, and I can't deny it's the best movie I've seen this year by now. Not that it would change in any way my previous opinion, on the contrary... If something deserves to get there, this is proof that it can do it without adding restrictions.

The last movie of David Lean is based on a book that tracks two British women's visit in the colonial India, a mother of a local judge together with her future daughter-in-law. The first part of the movie doesn't tell you much of where it's heading. Besides the discrimination shown by the white minority in charge towards the local people, plus the boiling conflict that stems of this, which seem to play a role in the movie's resolution, the rest looks like a background soft romance from a Woody Allen movie, but bland and humourless. At some point, Aziz, a local physician, admirer of the British civilization, gets into the story, and following a series of events he finds himself in the position of a local guide for two women. Embarassed by his own house, to avoid their visit, he proposes a trip he's paying for himself, to some caves, one of the touristic objectives in the area, asking also a teacher, pretty much the only Englishman that doesn't seem to dislike Indians, to join them. Well, if the movie doesn't do much to keep you watching up to this part, from here on it starts to deliver... What? I won't spoil it.

In its first half, "A Passage to India" seems to be part of the same age as "Lawrence of Arabia" - if there's something that might annoy you is the feeling that the production year is sometime in the '60s, not in the '80s. There are plenty of typical elements, from a cinematography rich in close-ups, with long transitions to the actors who tend to overact from time to time, and the initially slow development, which gets close to become boring at some point. Probably there's nothing intentional about it, after all that's David Lean's movie school, but it somehow makes what's following in the second part to look a bit surreal. In this '60s movie setting, which is typically quite pragmatic and clear, we're getting some discrete parts of reflection over life of so much depth that it somehow either can surprise the viewer if he manages to decrypt these, or it might leave you in a dense confusion. In any case, Nolan can take lessons about "hidden meanings" from here. I'm not saying more than that it mixes very nicely the ideas of karma, life and the Hindi conception on reincarcation, all over a background of racial conflict, where it gives equal credit for what "too far" would mean for both sides. Just to conclude in perfect balance, good as a lesson also for the current times, maybe even more than for 1984.

Rating: 4 out of 5

Slow West (2015)

"Slow West" is something hard to describe. In the end it's probably what it seems to be, a western. But a very particular type of western. I don't actually have another example to compare to. I was thinking to say that if Terry Gilliam would've done a western probably the result would've been something like "Slow West", but ...

But "Slow West" is still a bit .. let's say more "settled", or "to the point" than the average in Terry Gilliam's movies. What we have close to Gilliam is a fine nuance of surreal that persists for pretty much all the movie, and which is the best part of it. The subject: a young Scotsman travels to California to find his girlfriend who ran away from Europe, is just a pretext for an initiation road trip, short and ended, in my opinion .. (light spoiler) too "classic" for a western. Probably that's what missing in "Slow West" to transform it completely in an "anti-western": the ending that switches towards the normal standards.

I didn't hear about John Maclean (director and screenwriter) until "Slow West", but I hope I will again. I guess I know after all how to call the result. It's a Terry Gilliam mixed with John Michael McDonagh ("The Guard", "Calvary"). Maybe more of the latter. It's a movie that definitely deserves your time if you're open to something that's not mainstream, even if it's only for one or two memorable scenes. Pitty that the one in which "His heart was in the wrong place", wasn't what I was expecting after the rest of the movie :) You'll get it when you'll get there ;) Maybe ...

Rating: 4+ out of 5 (almost perfect)

Beyond the Black Rainbow (2010)

It took me four days to watch "Beyond the Black Rainbow". And not because it's split in four parts or has four hours. It's just an excellent sleeping pill replacement, despite the apparent promises of a tensed subject with nightmare potential. Well ... it actually might have nightmare potential (for who's brain is rested enough to make a difference), but tension .. zero. I'm not going to give details on the "action". The movie develops very very slowly like a "poor man's David Lynch" film. I decided to write this short entry for just one reason. Actually, two ... cinematography & sound. The visuals and the audio are excellent. Probably the frame composition was the main reason that kept me (sort of) awake. And the score complements perfectly the time setting, which is somewhere in the '70s (= we have again a lot of synth use a la John Carpenter as in "It Follows"). Unfortunately, after days with waking at 8:00 and failed attempts to go to bed at 2:00 I wasn't able to observe more than the technical side. If there is more ... Which felt missing. So ...

Rating: 2 out of 5

Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead (1990)

"That we find out the cause of this effect, or rather say, the cause of this defect. For this effect defective, comes by cause: Thus it remains, and the remainder thus." ... I think I got old, or I'm too tired, or both. To which I can add that I've never been too much into Shakespeare or into lines in iambic pentameter as the intro above (although they have their charm here and there). Enough premises not to be able probably to fully appreciate "Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead". Even though it's not exactly Shakespeare, but a bit more close to present = Tom Stoppard. Maybe it's better to start with a more clear description of who bears the exotic names in the title. Shall we begin, therefore ...

The movie is the adaptation of a theater play, directed by the play's author named above. The subject is centered on the ephemeral existence of two secondary characters from "Hamlet": Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. In the original Shakespearean version, the two in the title are sort of .. Hamlet's buddies let's say, but under the influence of the usurper king of Denmark. Who asks them to observe and report on the mad prince. There's also a follow up on that, but I would spoil too much from the movie, which naturally intersects with the original play. More important is that in Shakespeare's version Rosencrantz and Guildenstern don't have much action space given (if my memory is not completely failing). Concise, what we have here is an absurd comedy. Which gives us a story of their own, or otherwise said, builds up on the idea: where and what are doing Rosencrantz and Guildenstern when they're not present on the stage. Which ranges from absurd philosophy, existential theories, discovering the hamburger, the gravity or a perpetuum mobile .. and others, coming back into the original subject in the parts where they have a role to play. A role that isn't though very clear for them, getting so confused that they don't even know anymore who's Rosencrantz and who's Guildenstern. I don't remember "Hamlet" very well, but at least the current movie puts them in a more neutral light than a negative one. Sort of like the improper persons placed by who can influence them at the supposedly proper place.

In case Tom Stoppard doesn't sound very known, he's the screenwriter of "Shakespeare in Love". But as a better reference for what we have here he also co-authored the script of Terry Gilliam's "Brazil". Which for me was easier to grasp. Here we have a bit too much depth in the comic absurdity, or at least I don't have the patience anymore to unwrap all the hidden threads that are supposed to be there between the lines. Normally I appreciate this kind of stuff, but this script is too dense and becomes exhausting to follow. Plus that, I repeat myself, you have to like Shakespeare. On the good side, since I've mentioned Gilliam, I can positively notice the nuance of surrealism (although clearly isn't at the same level as "Brazil"). But the best part of the movie are are the excellent roles made by Gary Oldman and Tim Roth. Which makes me think that the play in a theater, where the acting has a much bigger impact, can be better appreciated than on film. And that shall be all for now ...

Rating: 3 out of 5

The Lone Ranger (2013)

I don't even know where to start. I could do it with the five negative reviews I've read to find out why the bashing for this movie, asking myself if it's sabotage against Disney's superproductions that try something else than what already worked with the public (= pirates series and reboot to pirates series), or is just pure dumbness and flock behavior from the critics. Getting more into this would transform though this entry in one directly attacking others, by taking line by line what's written here and there and proving how shallow or hypocrite it is, and the result would be probably extremely boring and won't make any justice for "The Lone Ranger".

Don't take it the wrong way. If I'm looking at my entries, is most often the case that I'm in the line with the ranking on pretty much every site. So, it's not a general opinion, but I see that I'm stumbling more and more often on cases (as "Gravity" recently) when I'm actually astonished by how consistently is either appreciated or bashed a movie which is clearly far from the pole of value where the "experts" placed it. Ok, I'm outraged, I assume it's already clear :) .. Let me try to say something more useful for the de facto subject of the current entry ... First, this is not a movie to be taken as a standard western. Gore Verbinski's option for "Lone Ranger" is so "westernish" in the classic sense as it's "Rango" to "quote" from the same director's CV. It's clear from the first minutes that this movie doesn't take itself seriously, even more that's actually trying at least a bit some irony or satire on the genre. And it's probably sufficiently stylish and discrete to be completely missed by who was waiting a product that mandatory should've been a mix between John Ford and Sergio Leone and nothing else.

The story is simple. I don't want to give too much. The Lone Ranger, a pacifist attorney disappointed by the helpless attempts to enforce justice by the book in the wild west, and .. let's say his pal, Tonto, an indian who's a bit "gone" in this version, have some score to settle with a series of bad guys, more bad guys and very bad guys. That's one of the major issues of the movie by some. If there is more than a villain, already the critics' neurons start to get confused. Even worse, if the bad guys are gradually introduced instead of having a simple long fight from start to end with a precise target, it's already too much story (although honestly, you have to be naive not to get from start who's the mastermind, but well, those neurons ...). Yup, the movie is long. It has two hours and a half. And yes, the story is short. But wow, there is a story, not just some 10 minutes long explosions linked by dumb scripted lines a la Michael Bay. Ok, we have some secondary threads which are a bit more than necessary, but they still connect somehow with the story. The script is, again, quite discrete in some nuances, with a dark to grim tone here and there to tell you that "life in the wild west was wild indeed", and some surreal scenes thrown from time to time (very nicely integrated, but that's more a matter of taste). All these aren't doing anything else than underlining again, clearly, for who has eyes to see, that what's given to the viewer is a story, a fairytale, not a western.

Technically, the movie is superb. I hope I'm not mistaking and there's a version I don't know about, but what I've seen is the perfect example that you can live without 3D (I'm wondering if this is one of the hidden reasons for which it took the bashing, but I already start to feel that I'm generating a conspiracy theory). The camera work is above everything I've seen in a movie with some solid action since long ago. I don't even know what other comparable example to give. The scenes are shot in such a way that, in 2D, to give you an intense feeling of movement in space. I'm not even getting into filters and light, but that's something I'm used with from Verbinski since I've seen "The Ring". I don't know though how much is his touch or the cinematographer's, Bojan Bazelli. Getting to the audio area, I'm trying to convince myself lately that Hans Zimmer starts to get overrated for the last scores he did, but apparently I'm again wrong. It's indeed a soundtrack that reuses stuff, with clear influences from Morricone, and of course an arrangement for the Wilhelm Tell overture, but it fits so well the scenes where it's played that I can't say anything bad about it.

To give an example of another movie that gets slightly closer as feeling, probably the best one is "The Mask of Zorro" from '98 with Banderas. Not that much because it's another masked hero, but more for the comical element and the deviation from the standard western. Something else .. it's the type of movie that you should take as an exit from the real life, and enjoy the story as much as you can = a reason for I really don't see a problem with the length. It's not a story to put your mind at work, but also not one to make you roll your eyes at each overly dumb line you hear, or to give you ideas to check your watch for timing the action scenes because you're anyway bored of them and that's the best option you have. It is though a story witty and nice enough to keep you there. Maybe it's not "Star Wars", "Indiana Jones", "Back to the Future" or "Neverending Story". Neither "Prince of Persia" or "John Carter" didn't get there, but I hope that Disney will keep releasing such critic failures, even though it ends up losing money with them. Because besides these, the surprising exception "Pacific Rim", and obviously "Star Trek", I don't remember any other blockbuster in the last years to leave me at the end with the same feeling of "my brain got trapped in a story for the last hours, and it was nice ;)".

Rating: 5 out of 5 (to make some justice that I let myself influenced by the rating and I didn't see the movie in cinema, and it deserves that)