Lourdes- Is there a God?

Lourdes is a hard film to get right, a paralysed women giving a miracle awakening at the hands of the almighty himself. Lourdes is a miracle to watch a story of a young paralysed women Christine, a prisoner of her own paralysis trapped in her dormant condition with the realisation that all she can hope to do is move her head. She tells a priest that she feels angry, almost constantly asking "Why me, why was i giving this illness?". The priest replies "Why do you think that people who can use their legs are happy".

The director Jessica Haunser (Hotel) never pulls away from the issues at hand. Lourdes is a themely rich and ambiguous tale, like Of God's and Men, of Religious debate. Haunser never Verge's towards something we have seen before, every night Christine is put to bed by the volunteers and every night they pray for her but Christine never takes part in praying for her own miracle. But Christine isn't looking for a miracle really, more recognition than to walk again.

She is taken to the baths everyday, she touches rocks of a mountain face, all in the hope that she will be "blessed" with a miracle. In my mind (out of context of the film) a miracle has something else behind it than the will of the almighty himself and taken that this is fiction allows us to think of Lourdes as something else. A film that isn't about wanting a miracle but what happens when one happens, by god or not. Christine is miraculously through the night cured of her disease and the recognition she wants is handed to her with a mixed reception. Some are overjoyed that she can walk, while others show a back hand to her new found freedom asking "why her". Well God works in mysterious and God is free is one reply.

With that in mind Lourdes works in mysterious ways. Hourdes never goes for the obvious. In one crucial scene the "pilgrims" go to one of the many services in Lourdes, held by one of the hundreds of priests and the director leaves the camera hanging never focusing on anyone apart from the effect, the effect that the priest has on everyone and in turn the effect that religion has on everyone. It empowers the hopeless, the stubborn and later mystifies the curious.

But the crucial reason to love Lourdes is down to Christine played by Sylvie Testud. I loved her character, she is hopeful in the bleakest of situations, fights to be heard and stands up for herself, one of the volunteers has a conversation with another about the night before and Christine is pulled over and they steer clear of the topic talking about how lovely the service was,even talking down to her .Is Christine an attention seeker? A little bit yes, A narcissist/egotists? never, by the end you'll be convinced that a "miracle" can happen There's one line by the end,actually the last one i believe where Christine is having a dance "i feel happy" and by that point so do we.

LOW DOWN
Lourdes is as quietly empowering and as it is funny. Lourdes is handsomely acted and Thematically rich, with a performance that won't escape you by Sylvie Testud.

*** 1/2 out of ****

TRON:LEGACY-The force is weak with this one

Summer has come home early it would seem with Tron Legacy, a futuristic sleek film 28 years after the original was released. This was the one everyone was waiting for, the game changer to make avatar look like an outdated effect, the one 3D film to make you say "money well spent", but yet Tron Legacy is an tantalising tease one to marvel at effects but to throw away right after seeing with a nasty headache.

We pick up the action 28 years after Sam Flynn (Gareth Hedlund), a rebellious 20 something who has nothing to say and wants nothing to do with his fathers company, giving him the biggest share in the company after his fathers disappearance. But after an opening sequence of daring stunts, Sam is thrust ed back to the old arcade "FLYNN'S". Walking in, switching on a light and the games begin. Sam eventually finds the the back entrance, a cob webbed spiral of stairs and locks. The door is open, the laser is set and we enter the Grid.

This is where it starts and not a minute to late, The grid is a world to behold on first viewing. Sam is forwarded to "The Game's" a futuristic version of an outdated Laser tag. Like Sam we don't really now what is happening, thrown into the world of Tron Legacy we see the camera move up, 360 spirals and sideways movements. It's a Dark neon lit world with deeply depressing colours and futuristic beholdment, evoking more of the same range as Blade Runner (the final,final cut). But even with it's no hold barred approach to show of it's budget Tron legacy comes of as Avatars lesser known cousin lacking the complications in it's plot or even a story that is worth telling. Tron is a feast for the senses but never the imagination.

James Cameron's AVATAR was passion project of epic fantasy proportion's, Tron Legacy comes of as Hollywood running out of ideas. Where Tron works can all be found in it's budget, using a burst of colours to lighten up the dark place, this is most useful in one rather thrilling light cycle battle ( I'll admit I'm still a teen, any sort of Battle will do me fine). But that's just it though, where Avatar-no matter how simple- was hyped up as the most expensive film ever made, it had a story to tell relying on a good old fashioned tale to allow Cameron to empower us with his imagination. Tron then comes off as colder and less visionary than it thinks.

The Dude is back though that will get anyone excited for sure "stop messing with my zen man". Man is the one thing that gets repeated over and over with Jeff bridges. . The one thing that drew the team back though was the capture control and through this CLUO is born an alternative and younger Bridges to create the perfect system. Even with my love of Sci-fi , i would pull out the old man card-it's nonsense?. Legacy is bogged down in the same way Air bender was bogged down by Exposition. One minute it's kids fantasy, Flynn escapes, something about a grid and the sun being beautiful and with not one but two Jeff Bridges. Is it petty to think that the film can only not work because of it's story. Tron is distinctively simple, treading familiar waters of overly long special effects adventures (the rec cent star wars, the very last outing for the matrix) Tron is big on power but little of it works dramatically and on a different note the 3D is pathetic with the disclosure saying that it is mostly in 2D. All the 3D does is make Tron even darker.

Gareth Hedlund, possibly comes off as wrong choice for a lead. He has none of the spark with dramatic range to allow us to feel for his character. In the climactic scene Jeff bridges sacrifices himself, this will be the last time Sam will see his father and we see not even a sense of emotion. But the catastrophe continues with Michael Sheen's "Zeus" camping it up to dizzying heights, Daft punk play over the top and all we get is another performance by Michale sheen which promises to show that he may go down the path of Nicholas Cage.


But should we care, the norm of Blockbusters are defined by emotionless expressions and throwaway entertainment but here is the crucial difference with Tron Legacy, a "movie" which relys heavily on the Borrowed cliches of not it's first outing but of all the other movie's that exceeded Tron. Legacy is of colours Blue,Red,White and black and at that Tron becomes incredibly dull. Tron Legacy could have been a sight to behold but with it being short on ideas, it comes of as a spectacle of effects and nothing more.

LOW DOWN
Speed racer 2.0 a spectacle of effects and the dude wearing the gown again. Tron at times is inventive but frustrates with it's familiarity and at that Tron came off as the rushed video game tied in with the film. The only way tron can be sighted is in visuals and that just about shows all of it's wounds and weaknesses.

** out ****

The films of 2010

2010 is the topic in question and to many we take it on the shoulder, a disappointing year of mindless escapism and a mediocre summer entertainment but to this blogger, there were still some surprises and gems to be found.

Top 10 films of the Year



10- Exit through the gift shop
A bizarrely complex documentary about the exploration of the underground street art scene. Exit through the gift shop creates the most entertaining and best "is it fake" documentary of the year.



9-Somewhere
The critics will always be harsh,but Sofia has created something that goes everywhere. A deliberately slow, meditative film about possibly nothing but saying nothing can say a hell of allot more than you might think.


8-Restrepo
Restrepo is that rare breed of War films let alone documentaries. The hard end exterior of the solider shatters when Restrepo is shot and killed. Off the wall and possibly off the record Restrepo is a document of the other side of soldiers. The power of imagery has never been so powerful. Restrepo remains the most important film of 2010.




7-Kick Ass
Only the hardest of cynics (or The Daily Mail) could not be entertained by Matthew Vaughn's deconstruction of the comic Book film. With it's escalating action, pitch perfect humour and down right enjoyment, promising to have one of the all time superhero sidekicks and the birth of new fanatic cult. Kick ass was a breath of fresh air and if you don't like it you know what Hit Girl can do.



6-The Road
Possibly the exact opposite to the Cronenberg film's Vigo has been attached to for over the last few years, The road was a fully realised compelling trip of emotions, leaving behind the norm of apocalyptic wasteland films and creating one of the bleakest movies about discovery ever.




5-No one knows about persian cats
How fun, Incredibly fun. No one knows about Persian cats is this years big surprise. It's strange to even say i remember the film, a juke box filled with new wave punk rock,an insightful trip into a world we don't know and like a rock concert it's all in the moment. What could have been an overly long history lesson turned into a completely satisfying and irresistible youth trip.




4- Of Gods and Men
The most unexpected entry into any ones top 10 list is a late entry from France. A group of monks are possibly imprisoned by terrorist in their own town. Of Gods and men is a gripping tale of religious debate, questioning the faiths of the monks has never been so entertaining since doubt. Gloriously empowering and all together brave, even surprisingly funny. Look out for a bowl of chips.




3-City of life and Death
Hard to take and hard to watch but City of life and Death is on the grand scale to compete with the all time great war films. Tough were the soldiers of world two and horrible were their enemies and that is what makes City of life and death incredibly powerful and all the more rewarding, A film where the images and actions of the people makes City of life and death one of the finest war films ever made.




2-Dogtooth
Perhaps one for the dark side in all of us, this excellent Greek mystery/ satire/comedy is possibly a fully realised piece of fiction but a film that is hard to shake. A gripping tale of parental control and domination is verging on the tale of childhood and control that Innocence (2004) pulled off but pulls you in with it's dark humour and shocking realisation. Grips, shocks and does everything to make me say "Dogtooth is Dogtooth" and that may be the highest comment i can give a film this year. A bit of warning though before watching, see the trailer first,it will help.




1-Winters Bone
Destined to be much snubbed come awards season, the excellent neo-relistic indie and Sundance hit and winner is a compelling film ranking at the top of 2010. Ree dolly is the main reason to keep your attention in Winters Bone, no matter what she is a force to be reckoned with, A women so tough it may make you believe that (Jenifer Lawrence) actually came from the Ozarks. But the story isn't an Ozark tale but of Ree a women on her way to find her father, a meth cooker jumping bail and no matter what she will find the truth. More empowering than any story this year, Winter's bone can work as a brilliantly executed thriller and fine one at that but then can also work as an intimate portrayal of a character wrapped in a community. She can't bring on anyone one else for help "just causes witnesses". A rich, detailed drama about many things. A caring family member, the tale of right and wrong and the antagonist responses of people who you once knew. A surprisingly truthful film about the human state wrapped in an excellent thriller but never stuck in an excellent thriller. Winters Bone tops my poll for the film of the year and Jenifer Lawrence is a talent to watch.

Spread- Like a virgin for the very first time

Aston Kutcher spreads like a virus, catching people with his cheap tricks. These people are mostly rich well to do women who have enough time on their hands to pamper him with clothes, their money and even their affection. This would seem as an exact opposite to somewhere - a movie about the nothingness of life and of the bubble that doesn't just surround celebrities but us- well Spread is built around the seediness of it's shallow protagonist. He's all about looks, money and any way where he has to do little work.

Aston kutcher plays player Nikki,a playboy who went to LA with his dashing good looks, easy going attitude and mindset of Bikini wearing women, no stop partying and a place that would be like van haling video "and you know what most of it came true". He meets Samantha or maybe he meets Samantha's house. She's a high flying business women with nothing left to give apart from her body to Nikki, unless you count the car, clothes, money and all expenses payed bachelor pad of Samantha's which he continues to "crash in"

But then he meets the girl of his dreams, a waitress who he can't woo with his simple tricks and charms. Spread now at this point could have turned into a routine Hollywood affair, guy tries endless tricks, gets the girl happy ending and to some extent it is; the writer Jason dean heck gives little room for originality with the film coming off as the indie film that tried but honourably failed. Honourably?.The film is well intended with Kutcher being a likable lead for the film even though lacking in substance,can work on it's own breezy charm but yet he has the charm but none of the sophistication. But saying that ,Nikki does (eventually) begin to reflect on his past.

You watch the film and it gives out some punches and regularly misses but the ones that do hit may not be affecting but they are relevant: "Your just a whore" "Those good looks will run out". That's more Aston Kutcher and less Nikki perhaps, telling us that there may not be anything left after the charm of a young hip teen actor wears off. Maybe that seems a little desperate but as far as "celebrities comedies" go this one is smarter and partly more funny than most of the Hollywood norm.

LOW DOWN
it works at what it works at. A sex comedy that isn't demeaning of it's female leads and isn't overly gratuitous. A big mess with good intentions that works mostly down to the viewer and it's charmful leads. An above average Romantic comedy.

** 1/2 out of ****

Somewhere: Daddy please come home

The first time i saw Sofia Coppola's Somewhere i was in a state of delirium, never truly understanding what was going on. Confused by her overuse of held on shot's and never understanding her idea of retreading over familiar ground. Maybe it was down to the sound equipment not working as well as it should. The whole point here is, well exactly that we got the point. But that was only my first attempt (maybe it was seen as a chore by now) but the second time i couldn't look away. Somewhere is possibly like it's opening shot long winded, overly long and showboating the lifestyle of the rich and famous but take it for something else far more quiet and moving and you have Sofia Coppola's question and answer film, perfectly balancing the lifestyle of our (possibly shallow) movie star and the steps that he takes to start over a relationship with his daughter Cleo.

The similarities with lost in Translation are unavoidable, for the first twenty minutes we are treated to Johnnie Marcos (Stephen Dorff) routine life. Movie after movie after movie, hotel after hotel. This time Tokyo is replaced with the Chateau Marmont, Bill Murray is replaced by Stephen Dorff and Elle fanning is the lost Scarlet Johansson. It would be easy to knock off Somewhere, the bubble that surrounds movie stars is once again explored, the theme of alienation is even more prevalent. But what has happened is something more pleasing. Sofia has given us her autobiography.

Johnnie Marco is Stephen Dorff, his relationship with Cleo (Elle Fanning) is his upwards climb towards his part in Somewhere. He's a changed man, no longer searching for what he thought he needed and relishes in the little things.Johnny is disconnected from everyone one around him, even wondering "Who is Johnny Marco". Perhaps or maybe it is Sofia who is completely at the reigns of Somewhere, a movie of forward maturity and intimacy that is often funny and deeply intimate. J

The film could be a way of exploring a past in which Sofia had (she was the victim of scrutiny for The Godfather part 3; she obviously had to hide in hotels until it all blew over). So does that make the film Self indulgent or True. To some and possibly many this will be a overly long, preposterous slice of self indulgent "art" but to some, there's something magical about a film that can hold your attention with possibly nothing happening or maybe allot is happening. Life is not made up of high glossed situations, chases and fantasies, it's of a world where people no matter how famous you can't hide from what needs to be done and that we all have flaws.

The film won the Golden lion at this years Venice film festival, which could mean the film has a lot to answer for. But the real power (possibly not always dramatic power) is the father-daughter relationship. Cleo is introduced to us as a caring 11 year old who See's her father as more of a brother than a father. She's wise for her age but is still vulnerable, understanding the emotions that can be stirred up with a movie life-style. Elle fanning is terrific possibly even at a young age eclipsing her older sister Dakota. But the magic comes down to a natural bond between the two of them, with Stephen Dorff encapsulating what it's like to be a star at the chateau Marmont with the one thing that makes his life special, that odd appearance from Cleo.

The film is often funny, in the same vein as the minimalist style of Lost on Translation. But it isn't as repetitive as you would think, the humour even adds to the development of the characters. Johnnie looks at paid for room service strippers with a child like obsession but eventually falls asleep. Seem familiar. We then see him being, as fathers do, to an ice skating routine which he only slowly gains interest in to finally learn that Cleo had been doing it for three years. Johnnie has missed out and so starts the father and daughter bonding. Johnnie by the end won't be the person he is told to be and learns that his dream needs some rethinking; he has, plenty sitting in a mask, quietly reflecting in his alienation the ways of his life, it's as if he is struggling to break free out of the mask, out of his celebrity lifestyle; parties he is unaware of, mindless sex and the ever prevalent feeling of the movie life not needing him anymore. The character may start shallow but the turning point of walking away from your past and starting a fresh changes Marco.

The film may verge on the pretentious but the film is brought back with truly profound moments. We are amused and chuckling one minute to dancing strippers and by the end we are relating to a little girls sadness of not knowing what is going to happen to next.

Sofia knows she’s revisiting familiar territory (a familiar story and even though excellent, a familiar soundtrack), there is possibly nothing new here but it's the story of Somewhere's my life isn't complete story that completes Somewhere, even transforming it into something else completely and like most of her films it can be translated (sorry) in different ways. By the turning point of the film (which is too long) we are finally able to take this Hollywood idol seriously and understand him. Sofia has balanced the film perfectly; smart, funny with boasting amounts of sadness. Melancholically cute I would say. Daddy would be proud.

LOW DOWN
It may be Lost in translation 2.0 but Sofia has created a deliberately Moody, medative film about the nothingness of celebrities and our own with a firm grasp on the unquestionable connection between father and daughter. An assured Mini Triumph

*** 1/2 out of ****

Monsters

Low Fi is maybe a better term for Gareth Edwards Sci Fi extravaganza Monsters in which director/writer/producer/Fx to go guy Gareth Edwards triumphs over budget and possible experience to create one of the most hyped up films of the year, to actually justify it's stirring hype from fans at SXSW and even down to local attractions at the EIFF.

Monsters starts out with it's titular title and runs with it's two leads Samantha (Whitney Able)a young attractive girl on her way home and Andrew (Scott McNairy)a photographer who works for Samantha's father who, with his hand on his heart poignantly justifies why he's here " you know what you father gives for a picture for a dead carcass $50,000 you know what he gives for a happy child ... nothing" and with this in mind our two hipster leads, with perfectly groomed hair and with only their shirts on their back to protect them, they set out on their journey to get home through the infected Zone and beyond to one heart breaking final shot.

Gareth Edwards places the film Six years after an alien attack pointing out "That if Cloverfield was like 9/11 then this is like Afghanistan". It's that where the film works, engrossing you into it's dilapidated land of Mexico. Gareth Edwards film has been typed up as low budgeter Sci-Fi film that goes leaps and bounds over its financial limitations to have ingeniously inspired effects but the film has something far more ingenious up its sleeve. Why has the film been picked up by Vertigo films and why are mainstream cinemas pushing the film forward for the masses to see instead of leaving it to the independent cinemas. Answer: Because it's effective and in my mind more effective than that of Cloverfield and District 9.

The strange thing about Monsters is it contains very few be that it was down to budgetary restraints or not the fact that the film contains very few monsters works in its favour. The story of monsters become's a stark piece of realism interweaving themes love, road trip discovery and America all with faded out indie style. The leads (who are now married in real life) work off each other with the script being highly improvised adding to the realism nature of the story. Of course I am sure that there was a faint outline for the script, but the fact that there chemistry is real, makes them seem real not characters from a monster movie.

The dialogue in the film verges on the deadpan "did you know that dolphins are mammals" but the script makes an impossible challenge seem possible. He went out to make a monster movie and instead came back with drama that works as a moving portrayal of two lost souls finding each other and maybe in real life that’s what happened but the brilliance behind monsters is it's not a monster movie. Of course there are political inclinations to the film trying to get to the border of America, the money system(5'000 for a ticket) and perhaps the discrimination that they face but even though we may think that the film verges on becoming pretentious and turning into a documentary (kids lie in the roads, people fighting a never ending war -I don't know if I have heard that on before)but the message even though exploited feels alarmingly real (who are the monsters ala Cronenberg) so Edwards can get points for moving me in that way.

So critics have been praising Edwards, film festivals up and down the country all praising Edwards for his half a million dollar budget and the wisdom to create those giant creepy crawlies. But Gareth Edwards as stated he has created "Afghanistan" and in that way has actually created a new breed of film-making. Taking the old, bringing in the geeky fan boy culture and creating what they think is the new and what they believe is right. Monster’s is an ingenious twist on the norm: a love letter to all things unconventional, inspiring and all things character driven. Monster’s is not the norm. Monster’s isn't really about monsters. Monster’s is set in the world of which we have come used to, through the eyes of our protagonist (perhaps).

Indeed it can be argued that monsters isn't about the menacing threat of something that isn't real but impending doom and metaphorical or maybe lets just take it as being plain awesome. Whatever you take it as, like contemporary’s (possibly now the godfathers) Godard and Videodrome’s very own Cronenberg it's a new form of filmmaking, a new wave form. New wave Sci-Fi is born which is open to interpretation.

Of course many will go in expecting District 9 and many will come out disappointed. But the few who do will come out with complete admiration, not only for inspiration from Edwards but because we have a new breed of talent something that rarely gets said. But the good doctor summed up the film Let the right one in perfectly "it's a movie about children that just so happens to involve vampires" well it an be said the same for Monsters a movie that is about two people finding their own connection with one and other that just so happens to involve monsters (even though the monsters do add to the film). But go in expecting something else entirely and you will come out with a lump in your throat, your hearts racing (it's is still thrilling with its danger) and your palms sweating. He went away with little money, a camera, a sometimes a six man crew and two leads and came back with Monsters, something completely different indeed.

*** 1/2 out of ****

We are what we are

Cannibals have always had the back hand when it comes to films (cannibal holocaust is one that springs to mind)and in society,frowned upon for their revolting habits and strange addictions for human flesh. But the new film we are what we are tries to change all that, showing the cannibals as blood thirsty monsters, wait a minute did i say change.

We are what we are comes from first time Mexican director Jorge Michel Grau (who stated that he never really wanted to make a horror film). Set in a modern poverty ridden Mexico the film starts off with the death of an ill fated father,falling to his death with a serious case of indigestion. With the news hitting the family of the death of their father, the only thing on their mind is who will be able to put the food on the table. The catch though is they are used to a certain kind of meat, the taste of human flesh.

We are what we are with it's serialised soundtrack shadowing towards unsettling and unflinching set piece's is a confident if not underwhelming horror film. Compared with the likes of Let the right one in for the way it represents it's monsters, the film in actual fact should be compared more closely to this years disturbing family drama Dogtooth. The film centres around the three children primarily and like dogtooth is to do with an adolescent control over your young ones protecting them from what they see as danger but what we see as the norm, for example there mother believes that there is nothing wrong with their habit and detests her sons for picking up whores for dinner.

Yet We are what we are with it's forceful opening credits is more of a strong political and satirical take on going social problems in Mexico. Bodies are left at the side of the road and no one takes notice, cops are bribed by hookers but not with money but with children. It's this unflinching realism that works as it's true horror. The film is layered with an art-house aesthetic, more in tune with the style of this year's White material but layered with a strange but never forceful sense of humour, allowing these killing machines to have a strange comic undertone. The brothers talk for a while and bluntly one suggests "let's go and get a hooker". it's that simple dialogue and youthful naivety that allows the film to be simply and oddly funny But the simplistic nature of the film is also it's downfall. Last year we had the excellent Sin Nombre treading the fine line between unlikely friendships and being a social message to the world of the state of it's country but it was a riveting tale. We are what we are treads similar waters as Sin Nombre if not blatantly copying them and with the film bluntly and simply repeating them it add's to no new profound insight into a different society that we haven't seen before not penetrating deep enough.

We are what we are's strength and most interesting element is in it's title.Treat us for what we are but the film never really allows us to understand there problem or even humanise them finding the humane in the inhumane. The public don't sympathise and nor do we.

There are break out scenes my personal favourite being at the market and one of the brothers breaks out in violence it's that spontaneous horror for what these characters can do that makes the film even more in close touch with Dogtooth. That unexplainable, somewhat ambiguous act which is where the film starts is what i wanted more of.Instead the film focuses on becoming a horror film leaving behind the strong political message that it started of with never fully exploring these theme to it's full potential.

Ultimately We are what we are rewards us with less than it promises only matching the visual level of a different kind of horror film near the end which by the end is all to late. It underwhelms in it's ambition but throughout there is an uneasy feeling throughout for good or for bad no matter how much it feels that there is a even better horror film trying to creep to the surface.

** out of ****

Agora

Now in these desperate times i would all to happily skip Agora. A movie which involves the rivalry of two religions with an added amount of philosphy. On paper that sounds like a remedy to put me to sleep but this movie fanatic doesn't give up on films no matter how different or subsequnety boring they may be. The main reasson this film turn me off before i even decided to see it was a huge religious theme. Now i won't be discrimitive to other peoples religions but to me a movie that is trying to move me or even possibly change my own ideas usin religion won't work as my view stands. It's all been bollocks form day one.



But our main character Hypatia is a non beliver (refreshing) and her only worship is philosphy. By the end of the movie you may not be able to sum up the film, but for me this was an often exciting film and one that was not very moving but was fascinating and tense which is hard for me come to grips with as well as i said to me most of it's doomed idea.



Agora centeres around the character of Hypatia (Rachel Wiesz) a philospher whos only dream is to understand the planet and all her galaxies but there is war interuppting her studies A war between christians and her peoles reliion forcing them to convert to christianity. The movie then turns to a more pressing matter a love triangle, a student of Hypatias has giving his heart ot her and a slave turned warrior has a similar feeling. It's only when we learn of the true intensions of the people that we learn the fait of Hypatia.





What was surprising to me about Agora was how immersed i was in the story and how fascinated i was by the rivalrys between rival religions, Hypatia love intrests and friendships and in the end how exciting the movie turned out to be. From the grand scope of things the film has an impressive eye for detail not leaving out any historical fact unnoticed. Also a winning performance by Rachel Wiesz helped the film sometimes get through some often dragged out areas as she was always the character that i felt for (especially at the end) and was intrigued to know about her. At this moment i wish she was my teacher.





The movie is far from being the historical sand epic it wants to be. From the heavy handed message about the practises of god and to the dialogue for that matter it all feel more than a little bit forced. There has also been a problem for me, not just with this film but with alot of films that alot of the actors look out of place and over play the parts tothe max. Take oscar issacs character. When he declares his love for Hypatia you will won't to look away form the screen to just stop yourself induring the embaressment. By the end the film had lost me with it's interweving storylines of love, religion and philosphy but i can over look all of that as Hypatia, the heart and point of the film is at the center of film and if you have been reading you know that she is the best part.





Somw will take Agora for what it is, a sand and sword epc with religious morals. Thats what it is. Some will over complicate the film calling it genius and a tiumph. That it is not. and others will take it as nothing and be bored ( thers always iron man 2). Agora shouls read on it's poster, live action history lesson but one that is fascinating and exciting with battle scens included. Now thats what Agora is.

3.5/5

Cold Souls

Paul giamatti plays Paul giamatti in Cold Souls a Kaufman esque comedy drama to do with the actor losing his ways questioning things such as life,it's meaning and all round subjects which are better handed with director/Slash writer Charlie Kaufman.

So when he learns of a new treatment which will lift him out of his pit of misery he jumps on the band waggon and has his soul removed. Once all is done he won't worry, he will fell lighter and more complete and will be able to make love to his wife again but things go wrong when it doesn't work out so brilliantly for him. His soul is then stolen and he then goes on a journey which takes him around the world from Russia to new york where we find that not all is what it seems.

So what is Cold Souls.It's a funny sometimes eye opening and thought provoking account of world which is much like our own which has a problem in finding it's own voice. It goes from being a funny sometimes eye opening account of something which has been hit home in other movies(Like in last years District 9). We have views on the corrupt part of the world of Cold souls, soul trafficking, the consequences of removing your soul etc which like in last years District 9 we had views on a Government which wouldn't take control and the consequences which insue.

There seems to be allot to like in Cold Souls especially for me, a movie(in the Sc-Fi genre) which is original and terrifically funny with some insight into a world which already inhabit. That's a thumbs up for me. So why does Cold souls fell underwhelming and lacking.

If you can remember back to 1999 there once was this thing called originality and to fill that space a man named Charlie Kaufmen came along and wrote Being John Malkovich. This film has that same feel to it. Yes the story's are different but they have the same quirky feel as if they are trying to proof something new. I guess you could call it show boating. But unbelievably Cold Souls is saved by a winning performance from Paul Giamatti who is terrifically cast as the guy who doesn't know whats up and every scene he is in he is Hilarious especially in my personal favourite scene which involves him just holding a rabbit. I won't say anything else but trust me you will laugh.

Also the movie has an ingenious premise which goes along with a genius script. From the world that has been created to the fact that they are talking about trafficking souls. What isn't welcome is the drama.Yes i understand you need the drama or the would be rather little reason to care but the entire film has an uneven spread of drama which takes you away from what makes the film work in the first place Paul Giamatti unpredictable performance. So when it goes down a formulaic and sometimes mainstream route it dampens the experience.

In the end the movie may leave you questioning ideas or it may just leave with a ridiculously big grin on your face. Which ever way you look at it Cold Souls is saved by a terrific idea,which is executed well and by Paul Giamattis unbelievably good performance.This one won't leave you cold.

3.5/5