The Blonde Bond

As I recall...

What a miracle it was, that after all these while, in the midst of my indubitably hectic schedule, I managed to grab hold of a seat in the cinema to actually cherish the cinematic feeling of watching the latest Bond flick, Casino Royale.

From the words of mouth and the reviews of critics, and not forgetting my ever-dependable sis-in-law, Casino Royale is said to be different from the normal formulaic nature of the 007 Spy Series previously handed over to cinema fans on a golden plate. This time around, they said James Bond is brasher, more masculine and macho, and merciless to the point of making Pierce Brosnan looked like a sissy.

From the opening sequence, I must say, those words were sneeringly true.

Bond was no usual Bond. This is a Bond whom we have yet to grow accustom to for he was still at his infancy, a spy but not quite a "00-kind" of spy. In order for him to attain the license to kill (and to thrill), he had to accomplish the penultimate requirement of “slaughtering” 2 assignments. In the opening sequence, we get to see the two, in a fleetingly gritty fashion.

Bond was no usual Bond. This is a Blonde Bond, no typical black, prim and proper hair. This is a crew cut version of what we used to come to know of a debonair and dashing super sleuth, with an irresistible English accent, fortunately still intact.

Bond was no usual Bond. He is this time a heartless killer, gruesome and frighteningly brutal when it comes to slicing and dicing his opponents - blowing up Embassies, bashing up dozens of henchmen along the way, doing his own stunts without much help from any typical and usual Bond Gadgets and Gizmos. This time, Bond decides to kill off his opponents largely with his bare hands.

Casino Royale blasts us with a difference in approach and style. Just like any other franchises e.g. Superman, Batman, producers are heading for the roots or the basics nowadays. Batman Series went back to the fore with Batman Begins, while Superman decided to Return to where it all started. Same goes here. James Bond in Casino Royale is a Bond who has no need for technical wizardries (hence Q was not included in the original line up), could not be bothered whether the Lemon Dry Martini is shaken or stirred, and underneath that ruthless demeanor, has a soft spot for a charmingly beautiful lady, played overwhelmingly and deliciously tasteful by Eva Green.

The producers must have had a stronger-than-Brosnan (and obviously Moore) personality in mind. Hence, the reason why Daniel Craig (of "Munich" and "Road to Perdition" fame) was chosen for the role. And by gosh, he fits the role like a glove.

And though I sincerely felt that no one could overtake Sean Connery as the ultimate Bond ever, after all he made the character his with his also rugged and smoldering demeanor, Daniel Craig to me came distinctively a close second.

The World In The Eyes Of Fink... Barton Fink

For the year 2008, I plan to review all the movies that I have been wanting to watch but couldn't for reasons whatsoever... Hence, I kicked off the indomitable plan with "Barton Fink" - the 4th movie to be co-produced, co-written and co-directed by the Coen Brothers i.e. Ethan & Joel Coen.

They have just won the Best Picture Award at the Oscars recently for their latest feature film "No country For Old Men", and it's only fair that they should be the subject of my new venture.

Looking back in retrospect, just like any of their other movies, the title of this movie itself sounds catchy and original. Now, who in the world would have thought of such a title in the first place? Barton Fink? Is he Jewish or what? Judging by the character played by the ever-so-reliable John Turturro (in his best form ever), Fink could easily be recognised as a Jewish lad. These siblings from Minnesotta really knew their stuff...

"Barton Fink" is essentially a story about a new Writer struggling to make an impact in Hollywood. Having had a one hit wonder in Broadway, Fink was summoned to Hollywood by a giant (in every sense of the word) Movie Producer a.k.a. Movie Mogul, Jack Lipnick (played by the Oscar nominated Michael Lerner). He was at first reluctant, but he had ambitions that would dare him to take up the challenge.

It pretty much sums up The Coen Brother's background themselves, having had the opportunity to appear on the Big Screen with "Blood Simple" and moved on with Arty-Farty and not too commercially successful flicks. It's like they are raging their own war against the Hollywood Studios who often dictate what sort of movie they should be making.

In this movie, Fink was asked to produce a 'Wrestling' picture for Wallace Beery - the most popular actor of the time. Set in the early 1940's / 1950's, the Art Direction and the Cinematography by Roger Deakins (the Coen Brother's most faithful collaborator) were luscious and beautiful - carefully setting the mode, the mood and the tone of the movie, which started off with an awful lot of promise and ended up with a rather dark, sinister tale of human morality and quiet ambiguity.

Fink, who was struck with a 'Writer's Block' syndrome, in an effort to overcome his chronic depression, managed to attain the assistance and support of his 'mysterious and over-friendly' neighbour, Charlie Meadows (John Goodman, in one of his utmost convinving fashion), a sexy and generous Personal Assistant to a famous Writer, Audrey (played with much needed angst and sensuousness by Judy Davis), and Fink's highly adored but eternally drunk Writer, W.P. Mayhew (played by the almost unrecognizanle John Mahoney).

Throw in a couple of odd characters, played by oddball, zany character actors like Steve Buscemi, Tony Shalhoub and Jon Polito, what we have here is a totally unpredictable tale of clever 'whodunnit' and artistic featurette in the highest order.

I enjoyed watching "Raising Arizona" and I thought "Fargo" was a much better movie than "The English Patient". I have respect for these 2 brothers and the kind of film they made over the years. And after 20 years in Hollywood, finally they deserve all the recognitions they got for "No Country For Old Men".

But "Barton Fink" is where they gained they first few recognitions in Hollywood and overseas. It garnered 3 Oscar nominations, and won Best Picture, Best Director for Joel Coen and Best Actor for John Turturro at the Cannes Film Festival. Deakins, the cinematographer, himself got a few nods and Awards from several Film Critic Societies.

It's the kind of film that warrants your attention and glues you to your seat while you savour the deliciously written script.

Cheers to the Coens!

Recap - A Storyteller at Her Best...

I seldom have the opportunity or the so called luxury of watching a movie at the cinema. It is often either Astro, VCD or DVD. If you don’t believe me, ask my wife. She’ll vouch for it 100%.

But, a few months ago, and if I could still remember exactly, it was on a Saturday, March 10, 2007 - I was inclined to run away from home with my wife, leaving my 3 year old boy with the Maid, and took a sneak peek of the latest Yasmin Ahmad flick, Mukhsin at the GSC Hall, One Utama.

We were late. So late that the movie was supposed to start at 8.45 pm and we were still at the lines queuing for tickets at almost 9.00 pm. We thought that it would be over and my 2nd option was The Bridge to Terabithia. Luckily enough for me, and I knew for sure that the movie will not start until 15 minutes later, we got two tickets for ourselves and ran all the way to Cinema Hall 9. We got one of the best middle seats in the Hall and the movie was just about to begin, as Adibah Noor was singing the Keronchong together with the Kampung fellas at the Serambi.

Mukhsin, after all the hype in the news and on TV, was a must-see movie for me, as I am an unofficial movie, retro music and soccer fanatic (not that many would know about it). And to tell you the truth, as I’ve seen many movies up till now, Mukhsin is definitely one of the Top 10 Malay movies of recent times.

The storyline was so simple and sweet that when I left the hall, I was left with a little smile on my face.

When I first saw Yasmin's debut effort, Rabun, I felt it was a bit too self-eccentric. A good movie but a bit personal. Sepet was the one that really raised the bar for me. She came up with a story telling method that was non-conventional yet it had an appeal to mainstream moviegoers. It did not do too well in the Box Office but it alerted so many people about the emergence of this great storyteller in the midst of the resurgence of Malay Movies. Gubra came next but it felt a little too much compared to Sepet. Two different and intricate little stories to be told within a movie can sometimes be a tad too much. Yet her trademark wit and cynicism were there in abundance.

What took me for a ride in Mukhsin was the fact that her dialogues were very straightforward and applicable to our current ears. Not too melodramatic like most Malay movies, not too "sempoi" either but just nice. Her character build-ups were also impressive as it builds upon you and leaves you with a strong sense of empathy towards the characters, especially the two main leads Mukhsin and Orked. And the two kids were so good in their roles that we were taken in by surprise when it was announced that it was their feature debut.

Just like in her previous movies, Yasmin crafted wonderful supporting characters, and above all the character actors that came in and out of Mukhsin, Adibah Noor and Rozie Rashid shone the brightest. Rozie was so impressive in Gubra that when she downplayed her role here in Mukhsin, we can immediately relate to her. That's how good she is - a truly remarkable and underrated actress.

Sharifah Aleya may not be able to emote or express her feelings like Ida Nerina but she did quite okay. And the guy who played the "Abah" was funny most of the times. A Harith clone but not quite Harith.

Above all, I just love the simplicity, the magic and the chemistry that Mukhsin exudes in abundance. The feel is totally "arty-farty", worthy of it's accolades overseas. And when the Keronchong Tune was re-rendered at the end of the movie, efforlessly sung by Yasmin's parents and later on joined by the whole crew, it was a fitting end to a complete trilogy.

Yasmin is indeed a true wonder in Malay Cinema...

SUMOLAH vs. SPIDERMAN

First and foremost, I must congratulate Ahmad Idham and David Teo for breaking the the Sembilu 2 barrier and become the highest grossing Malay film ever after more than 12 years. It was a long wait, and indeed if it were ever to happen, one could only expect that such a feat could only be emulated if not broken by our Super Duper Successful Producer, David Teo. His Metrowealth Movies are success stories of their own - sometimes daring, bold, although never to Critics' flavour or interest, the bottom line is David knows WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT.

Knowing and understanding what people or audience want is what Moviemaking is all about. After all Moviemaking is a Business, a thriving Business, and Business is all about money making merriment. Hence, the success of cinematic movies nowadays could only be through Marketing, Marketing and more Marketing.

Which is why Sumolah, no matter how good the Critics praise about the movie (and the spirit of Malaysian-ness that it brings along with it) and after a long hype, still could not gather enough steam to topple the barrage of on-going Summer Blockbusters that kept on bursting into the local cinemas including the current flavour Spiderman 3.

We all know what Spiderman 3 is all about. We've seen the first two episodes, hence audience flock to see the movie out of curiosity and loyalty towards the prequels. We love watching Tobey Maguire in the red-blue outfit, and we adore Kirsten Dunst's portrayal of the ever-so-sweet Mary Jane Watson. And we can't wait to see who could top Willem Dafoe or Alfred Molina when it comes to battling our Friendly Neighbourhood.

Afdlin Shauki on the other hand created a lot of buzz with his promotions via an aggressive tele-communications' campaign, and we were seriously looking forward to see what this "huge fella" could conjure after his earlier successful stints via his provocative and funny (in a very Malaysian way) Buli Series and Baik Punya Cilok. They were all money spinners. Afdlin, at one time, could do no wrong. With Sumolah, it looked as though it could be his Cash Cow.

But guess what? Moviemaking is so strange. Sometimes a darn good movie can't seem to find an audience in a huge market (e.g. Crash, Letters from Iwojima, Pan's Labyrinth), and sometimes a so-so movie but with a darn great marketing could blow the top of the Box Office Charts like nobody's business (Hint: The Pirates of the Caribbean Sequels).

That is just a fact we can't deny. And as a movie maker, no matter how difficult for him to fathom, Afdlin may just have to be strong and have faith in the system. He may not be rewarded with the cash, but who knows along the way, he may be awarded with some merits.

But then again, isn't movie about money making...???

What's the fuzz about FFM19?

Eli Benjamin once said, "you have to have VISION, GUT & PASSION".

I had to agree with that. And I reckon Yasmin Ahmad is a firm practitioner of the above three. Which is why her movies, apart from being very personal in their views of the world, represent her vision of what should transpire in our society, clearly demonstrating her chutzpah and fortitude in breaking the norms of Malay Moviemaking, and above all, showing to the world how wonderfully talented and passionate she is in doing what she loves best - telling stories.

The fact that she had won the Best Picture award two years in a row (in the Malaysian Film Festival) proved not just my points, but also the fact that other people are weighting her movies far and above her counterparts.

Last year, "they" quarreled over Sepet and Puteri Gunung Ledang - obviously one was produced with the most limited of budget and the other superseding the standard financial outlays. And of course, one was clearly stronger in substance and the other immaculate in style. And the winner was of course ... Sepet.

It reminded me of the year when A Beautiful Mind beat The Lord of The Rings to the podium, or earlier when Driving Miss Daisy became the best film. It was when the juries decided that a small film could deliver better messages compared to a bigger blockbuster. There's nothing wrong with that.

And again, this year, when Gubra was announced as the winner again (making Yasmin one of the rare winners to repeat her victory twice in a row - the other luminaries include Dato' Rahim Razali when he won for Matinya Seorang Patriot and Tsu-Feh Sofiah), "they" once again mumbled and complained.

Frankly, and personally, no other films deserve to win that night. The closest nominee was Pontianak Harum Sundal Malam 2 (PHSM 2) and Gol & Gincu. While Pontianak was technically superior, Gol & Gincu was too light hearted, albeit a well made film with wonderful story telling and deft scriptwriting.

Probably, "they" were referring more to Amani's acceptance speech. That might have convoluted "their" minds and caused a little scar to Gubra's perfect pitch. No one should argue the fact that Amani deserved her trophy but she was deemed too brave or gutsy in her speech delivery. That have caused a lot of uneasiness especially among the elder crowd.

But the rest of the awards - no qualms. Afdlin, Hans and Sazzy were probably the best options in their categories. And Shuhaimi Baba as Best Director, was in lieu of her technical achievement in producing PHSM 2. And when they announced Baik Punya Cilok as the winner of the Best Story category, I felt that it was very encouraging to see that the current juries are running away from the typical run-of-the-mill manner of voting.

It proves again my point - there is nothing wrong in being bold and courageous. You just have to appeal to the public and do it not just in style but with a lot of substance.

X Men with no X

One great accomplishment by Bryan Singer (apart from the awesome "The Usual Suspects") was that he was able to convince all of us that Mutants too have feelings just like us; that Patrick Stewart & Ian McKellen were perfect as Professor X & Magneto respectively; & Wolverine was a much more interesting character & far more charismatic than Cyclops & Storm combined ... and that he achieved them all in ONE FILM - The X-Men.

He continued to perform even better with X-Men 2 with far more engaging characters like the Night Crawler and with deeper thoughts & stronger character development. In a nutshell, Singer left us wanting more of X-Men & that was why X-Men 3 was so hugely anticipated & broke box office records in its first week of release in the US alone.

One small thing that the producers forgot to take note was that Singer's handiwork was a tough act to follow, and whoever gets the arduous task to emulate Singer's feat would have to either equal if not better the first two installments. That task was left for Brett Ratner to fill ... and to be fair, he did quite a reasonable job, albeit not up to full expectation (especially to ardent followers).

Where Singer was rather meticulous and tidy about details and character development in the first two features, Ratner was rather brash in his artwork and approach, that when I left the movie hall, I felt very little connection with the characters, apart from the fact that I already knew them in the first two installments. I was of course excited about the third - hoping to see more mutants being introduced. And of course, hoping that there would be a probable glimpse of the 4th installment.

I was slightly taken aback by the treatment. The story and the camerawork were rather patchy and inconsistent. Perhaps, the only emotionally charged moment was when Prof. Xavier suffered a fatal doom in his encounter with Jean Grey. Hence, all that has been built over the two great episodes were left unmatched as the third series appeared somewhat lame and plausibly forgettable at times.

Which is quite a waste considering the strong foundation that it was built upon - a series full of promises and more exciting characters e.g. Beast (played by gasp... Kelsey Grammer!!!).

Singer justified himself with "Superman Returns". But Ratner, coming from the success of the action-comedy "Rush Hour 1 & 2", was no match for Singer.

How I wish it was Christopher Nolan who had taken over from Singer when he left... geez, what a wishful thinking!

Diva Con Dice

The book is better than the movie ... The book is better than the movie ... The book is better than the movie ... but hey, I have not read the book ??? How bout that ???

Some points on the movie: -

1. What's with Tom Hanks' hairdo? Just like in the "Epic Movie" - 'So lame, the hair of Tom'. Could someone else fair better? Probably. But Hanks was certainly not in his usual element.

2. Audrey Tautou is gorgeous, as always. But this is no Amelie.

3. For someone who has yet to read the book, a lot of questions remain unanswered.

4. The puzzles and the clues are somewhat satisfying and exciting.

5. Ian Mckellen as Sir Leigh Tibbing, together with Paul Bettany as the loyal Silas, gave the two best perfomances in the film.

6. But since I have not read the book, personally I felt that the story, the plot and the clues were cleverly adapted and captured into the film. Kudos to Ron Howard, the Director for courageously attempting to cover a risky ground. And hats off to Akiva Goldsman for cleverly bringing out only the relevant details from an immensely difficult source. I must admit that it's obviously hard to capture within a couple of hours almost every single relevant detail from a comprehensive material. (The Lord Of The Rings trilogy were quite exceptional in that sense).

7. Rather satisfying for a non reader. But as a great admirer of Tom Hanks, his performance was not quite up to my expectations.

Poseidon is no Titanic

Cinema is a director's medium.

Under the hands of a new or non-established director, Poseidon could have easily come off as a no-brainer, waste-of-time effort, or a lame excuse to return to the waters cum action movie. But, under the skillful craftsmanship of the experienced Wolfgang Petersen, Poseidon was rather passable, albeit with a lot of loopholes, which could have inevitably led to the "sinking" of the ship, in box office terms literally.

No tight script, not much character development, no Leo, no Clooney, but for a summer-oriented flick, still watchable.

For those who crave for a typical action-packed / adventure motion, the movie is definitely easy-to-chew. But for those who are searching for a little bit more depth in a fiction, just wait till Autumn or Winter - that's the time where the likes of "Crash" of "Brokeback Mountain" would appear.

The good news is, if you're a fan of Kurt Russell, he is still the reliable fella you'd want to be with if you are trapped in a certain kind of misfortune or disaster or anything (another plus point is that Mia Maestro who played one of the victims, Elena, was quite a dish). But the not so good news is that none of these characters are given much needed screen time to allow you to sympathize with their plight or quest for survival.

Right from the word go, Petersen leaves you with no time to dabble with the characters. The movie just walks straight into the night the ocean decided to rip the liner apart. A lot of lives were taken along the ride, and a lot of money must have been spent to make the disaster look real and effective on screen. Somehow, in that aspect, I put my hats off to Petersen & his Special Effects Crew for succesfully creating the much needed tensified scenes above & under the water.

At certain points of the movie, you could be sucked into the water as long as the characters are plunged into it. Now that was effective use of special effects.

However, take example of Titanic or Perfect Storm to a lesser extent - they move you in certain ways (emotionally and sensibly), and to me, that is more lasting than a complete blown out of CGI Effects.

Any movies for that matter, the special effects should enhance the texture & style of the movie, not being the main focus, in order for it to have a lasting impression on one's mind. Audience, in general felt for Titanic because at the crux of the sinking of a great ship lies a quenching tale of 2 souls in love but bounded by the differences of stratas in society.

But, then again, in the midst of summer madness, sometimes style does prevail over substance ...

Simplicity to begin with ...

Sometimes, there is no need to embark on a journey in a grandiose or pompous manner ... Life, instead, should be continued, expressed and articulated in a simple behaviour ...

That is what life is all about (of course within my short sheltered frame) - SIMPLICITY.