Spike Jonze adalah salah satu sutradara yang jarang kelihatan untuk menelurkan karya atau mungkin saya tidak pernah berkesempatan menyimak film arahan dia. Padahal saya cukup mengenal dia ketika pertama kali dia mendapatkan nominasi Oscar lewat BEING JOHN MALKOVICH. Ketika itu film arahan dia diserempet dominasi film film besar lain memperebutkan nominasi best pictures. Alhasil AMPAS meloloskan The Green Mile walau biar bagaimanapun pemenangnya pasti AMERICAN BEAUTY. Tidak perlu kecewa tidak menyimak seperti apa Being John Malkovich yang menjadi pencapaian tertinggi beliau, saya malah berkesempatan menyimak film Jackass Number Two dan dia duduk sebagai salah satu kreator. Ya ampun film ini memang gokil abis walau sebenarnya saya mual menonton beberapa scene kotornya. Nah lewat WHERE THE WILD THING ARE lah kini dia duduk sebagai sang sutradara. Ketika perebutan Oscar awal tahun lalu film ini lagi lagi tidak berhasil menembus best pictures padahal slot nya sudah ditambah menjadi sepuluh besar.
Where The Wild Things Are bahkan mendapat kritik negative dari beberapa teman saya yang mempertanyakan alur yang ditawarkannya walau mereka tetap mengagumi keunikannya. Untuk itulah dengan waktu mem pending yang memanglah tidak terlalu lama saya berharap sekali pada Where The Wild Things Are mudah mudahan saya suka imajinasi Spike Jonze ini. And here we go..!! Dan saya ber ouwh ouwh.. disepanjang cerita. Oh My lovely God.. this is trully my style movies.. i'ts remains me everything when i was child. Liar, nakal, berjiwa petualang, cengeng, bebas dan lepas. Well you know gimana rasanya waktu menjadi anak kecil dahulu apapun bisa terjadi disana. Apapun bisa menjadi temanmu disana. Tumpukan salju, rimbunan pohon, sprei kamar, EVERYTHING.!!
Max Records yang memperankan karakter Max menghidupkan situasi. Raut wajahnya, gerak geriknya dan juga keliarannya. Where The Wild Things Are diberi latar panggung alam bewarna sephia dan digertak gertak dengan auman serigala dan diiringi dentuman orkestra musik yang adventoures. Kemudian berlayar di samudera lepas dan bertemu dengan makhluk makhluk imajinatif. Mereka bermain main, bercanda kadang berprasangka dan kadang merindukan. Aku tak bisa mengatakan detail alurnya karena bagaimana aspek keliaran itu diconvert kedalam kata kata. Yang paling mungkin memvisualisasikannya adalah cinematografy film ini yang untungnya sangat unik, sangat beda, dan terkadang ingin melesakkan sesak didada yang sangat meluluhkan. Disinilah kita disajikan sebuah rangkuman cerita keseluruhan bahwa hidup itu adalah hidup yang lepas yang sebenarnya tidak hanya milik anak anak namun kita sebagai orang yang mengaku ngaku sudah dewasa. Saya yakin sesungguhnya saya telah kehilangan sesuatu yang jauh lebih berharga terhadap apa saja yang kita bawa ke depan. Kalaupun saya tidak merasa kehilangan paling tidak anda sadar tidak benar benar menempatkannya dengan baik.Walau sebatas interpretasi bahwa hal itulah yang paling kita butuhkan saat ini. Max Record juga membuktikan bakat alaminya sebagai aktor cilik. Seperti Untinca Utaru (The FAll) mereka berdua bisa dikatakan siap menghadapi masa depan yang lebih menantang dalam dunia akting , tidak perduli ada Dakota Fanning, Abigail Breslin dan bahkan Saoirse Ronan kalian semua pasti akan saya jumpai 10 atau 20 tahun mendatang telah menyabet piala Oscar.
Where The Wild Things Are juga tampil dengan gaya kamera yang saya suka. Begitu juga dengan narasinya yang hangat. Maka dengan itu Spike Jonze boleh dibilang berhasil secara keseluruhan menempatkan film ini dalam wadah seperti apa. Sehingga tidak perlu berkecil hati karena orang orang tidak menyukai film ini, memang inilah terjemahan emosionalnya secara keseluruhan. Nah SPIKE JONZE... ''surprising me again" lewat I'm Here ( well dia duduk sebagai penulis naskah) saya akan setia mengikuti perkembangan karya karyamu kedepan. Trully FANTASTIC.
Masih ingatkah dengan Woddy And Friends ? Mainan kesayangan Andy yang selalu menyajikan banyak keharuan dan petualangan. Nah, kita akan segera ber nostalgia dengan mereka kembali setelah sekian lama kisah mereka tidak diangkat ke layar lebar ( terakhir tahun 1999 ketika saya berumur 9 tahun). Terakhir di Toy Story 2 menyajikan kisah yang mengharubiru dan emosional bagaimana sebenarnya sang kreator dengan cerdasnya menempatkan sisi paling memilukan perasaan mainan mainan tersebut (Apalagi kalau teringat lagunya Randy Newman "When She Loved Me").
Walau sesungguhnya saya menyadari bahwa masa kecil saya dulu tidak tumbuh dengan mereka, dan sepertinya boleh disematkan kepada LION KING. Namun sebagai pecinta Animasi, Toy Story dan sekuelnya saya anggap bukanlah barang kadaluwarsa. Toy Story 3 bisa dikatakan sekuel terbaik ditahun 2010 ini karena jelas project sekuel sekuel lain yang hembusan anginnya lebih menggelegar sayangnya tidak mampu berbicara banyak kalau masalah kualitas , apalagi sudah saya cap DIBENCI ( Sex And The City 2 dan The Twilight Saga : ECLIPSE).
Nah, Toy Story 3 menyesuaikan rentang cerita dan waktu. Disini Andy sudah besar dan sudah diterima disalah satu universitas. Semua mainan berdebat soal bagaimanakah nasib mereka, apakah Andy masih mencintai mereka ataukah mereka hanya dianggap sebagai "sampah" saja. Sang Ibu memberi keputusan pada Andy apakah mereka ditaruh digudang atau malah disumbangkan ke panti panti anak. Andy pun hendak memasukkan mereka kedalam gudang, namun ibunya secara tidak sengaja membuang mereka ke tong sampah dipinggir jalan. Disinilah mereka sudah berkeyakinan bahwa Andy tidak membutuhkan mereka lagi padahal Woddy mengetahui pasti bahwa mereka akan disimpan digudang tapi dengan pilihan "berdiam diri disana tanpa ada sang pemilik" padahal mereka kan mainan ? mainan bukan untuk disimpan dan bukan untuk berdiam diri dirak gudang sampai berdebu ?mereka butuh perhatian seorang pemilikdan pemilik tersebut akan berkelanjutan sesuai generasi. Mainan tersebut tidak akan pernah tumbuh seperti halnya manusia. Dan pada arah yang sama sikap kekanak kanakan dulu yang mereka punya bukan berarti akan selamanya demikian yang terperangkap dalam tubuh anak anak. apakah loyalitas membantah takdir tersebut?
Akhirnya mereka dititipkan di panti asuhan SUNNYSIDE . tempat baru yang lebih ramai dengan mainan mainan baru lengkap dengan kehadiran tokoh bad guys yang digarap dengan cukup baik dan punya alasan personal (apalagi ending tokoh jahat tersebut yang paling jenaka). Disini Buzz juga sempat tampil sebagai Buzz versi Spanyol yang lebih romantis. Nah karakter Buzz disini yang menjadi Man Of The Match nya Toy Sotry 3. Every Body Loves Him. Begitu juga dengan Woddy, sang koboy rodeo yang disuarakan oleh aktor senior Tom Hanks. Kita akan sangat menikmati kelucuan karakter ini lengkap dengan 15 menit akhir yang mempermainkan emosi penonton (apalagi saya yang pernah punya pengalaman serupa dengan mainan mainan saya dulu yang dibuang oleh adik saya ) wah total deh nostalgia keindahan masa kecil ku dulu.
Maka "konsepsi" apakah mereka sudah kelewat berjamur dan juga tidak menarik lagi? Statement tersebut akan saya jawab TIDAK dengan lantang. Animasi selalu hadir dengan kejenakaan mereka namun tetap menyemburkan pesan pesan universal. Animasi punya tempat yang paling mengagumkan ketimbang film film pop corn zaman sekarang. Bahkan Cars yang juga karya Pixar yang paling lemah sekalipun tetap saya respon positive mampu menyumbangkan sisi kecemerlangan karya animasi. Silahkan menikmati animasi Toy Story 3 karena itulah yang dinamakan pengalaman ber sinema ketika credit title muncul anda akan meresapi hidup anda lebih dalam bahkan memotivasi anda untuk mencapai kata loyalitas dalam artian yang sesungguhnya.
In The Wanderers, a long neglected series here at Cinema Styles, I discuss actors who never did a lot of leads or many famous supporting roles but stayed busy throughout a long career, taking what parts they were given and never letting foolish pride stand in the way of good, solid work. It's not a series for chronicling the works of A-listers like Gene Hackman, Michael Caine, Sylvia Sidney, Thelma Ritter or Thomas Mitchell. It's for people like Geoffrey Lewis, James Edwards and Diane Baker , the first three actors profiled in the series. And now, finally, a fourth, Robert Forster.
Now it's true, Robert Forster is a little more famous than those three but mainly, or possibly only, because of Jackie Brown, although he was famous to fans of indie cinema, before there was such a thing, for Medium Cool and later, on tv, for his television show Banyon. Before he landed the role of Max Cherry, Bail Bondsman, in Quentin Tarantino's Jackie Brown, Forster accepted any number of roles in low budget action thrillers to keep the paychecks coming in and the acting skills honed. He also took the lead in Disney's The Black Hole, a film that failed to live up to the box-office expectations of the studio and thus didn't contribute to any sort of career boost for Forster. Years later, at the age of 56, he landed the part that would net him his first, and as of this writing, only Oscar nomination, in this case for Best Supporting Actor. The role was for the previously mentioned Jackie Brown and in it, Forster is a revelation.
Sometimes an actor has to go through an entire career before someone finds them a role that's made just for them. In 1997, Forster got that role and even though it wasn't written for him (Elmore Leonard created the character in the original novel upon which it's based, Rum Punch) it seemed written for him and Tarantino may have had him in mind when adapting the screenplay (although I have no proof of that). Seeing Forster play Max Cherry is more like seeing a 56 year old bail bondsman named Max Cherry who bears a striking resemblance to Robert Forster, if that makes any sense. Forster is Cherry, Cherry is Forster.
It's a remarkable performance but you won't find it on many "Greatest Supporting Performaces" lists because there's very little about it that is showy and very little that feels urgent or needlessly energetic. What it does feel like is a tired man who doesn't get excited even at the prospect of walking away with half a million dollars. He's tired of his job and wonders, while sitting on the couch of a man for whom he's laying in wait to stun and drag to the police, if he should just quit. He falls for a woman, Jackie Brown, but is so undemonstrative about it that you wonder if he is emotionally stilted or reliant upon an overly developed defense mechanism of nonchalance. By the end, when the audience may finally get its answer, Max Cherry recedes into a soft-focus blur as Tarantino shows his final respect for this hardened man's privacy.
As noted above, Robert Forster received the nomination for Best Supporting Actor for his performance in Jackie Brown, and in one of the greatest (or perhaps just the most recent) disappointments in the category, he lost to Robin Williams for Good Will Hunting. Words simply fail. Forster has spent his entire career taking what parts he could find and didn't give a damn if you knew or cared that he was capable of delivering greatness. In Jackie Brown he proved it and if that's the only role he ever had it would be enough. Forster remains a wanderer, but one with a performance that ranks with the best the cinema has to offer. Or as Max Cherry might say, "Yup."
I've been at this blogging thing for years now (a little over three) but in the last year I've gone up and down the mood gauge as unemployment has taken my focus away from the movies. Now, this Monday, I start a new job (finally!) and, going into my fourth year here at Cinema Styles, I expect more changes to occur. For one, I won't be on during the day anymore, except on a day off of course, but I don't think that's very much a concern at this point. These days more of us are logging on at night and doing brief check-ins on social networks like Facebook during the day, something I can quickly do on a lunch break. But there are other changes too, changes in how I view movies.
In the last two years my wife and I have become huge fans of the AFI Silver here in Silver Spring and I've gotten to experience so much classic Hollywood and world cinema on the big screen that I don't know how I ever survived without it. It's to the point where I'll make sure a film I haven't seen before, but is playing on, say, TCM, isn't going to be playing at the AFI first. If it is I don't want to blow the first time I ever see it by seeing it on television. But it's more than that.
When I started Cinema Styles it was decidedly a classic Hollywood film blog. That was its primary focus and I tried to keep everything to 1979 and before. Gradually I mentioned some newer films and liked the idea of being a part of the conversation on current cinema. Cinema Styles doesn't have a lot of reviews but now, it seems, those that are here have as much chance as being current (Avatar, Shutter Island) as being classic (Foreign Affair, Easy Living) and that's fine by me. However, the one area I haven't really moved into is documentaries, even though they have quickly become my favorite form of movie to watch (I watch at least two or so a week, sometimes not a narrative film at all). The reason is because I take them all personally (I watch primarily political docs) and don't want to get into a fight over politics on my blog, I really don't. It seems easier to review a narrative film based on its technique without necessarily arguing about the philosophical content of its message. With a documentary, often, the message is the thing. I occasionally review a historical documentary, like the ones I have reviewed on nuclear tests and the Cold War, but that's different. History is more easily argued in a civilized manner because of the benefit of hindsight and a body of established facts from which to work. That being the case, I don't think Cinema Styles will be moving into the direction of documentary reviewing any time soon.
In fact, I don't know what direction it will be moving in, just that it's exciting to be getting back to work and Cinema Styles will have to adapt to a new schedule, that's all. The rants will still be here, In the Land Before CGI will still be here, Opening Credits I Love and even other much longer neglected features, like The Wanderers, will still be here and pop up from time to time. And Unexplained Cinema and The Invisible Edge will still be here too, although I've neglected The Edge for almost two weeks now. And I'll still be here, just at night more than during the day. Wish me luck!
Today, July 16, 2010, marks the 65th anniversary of the beginning of the atomic age. It was on this date, at 5:29 a.m. local time in the desert near Alamogordo, New Mexico, that the United States Army Corps of Engineers under the military supervision of General Leslie R. Groves and scientific supervision of J. Robert Oppenheimer, detonated the first bomb powered by nuclear fission, a bomb code-named, in a moment of breathless military understatement, "the gadget." Ever since that "gadget" successfully detonated and the United States used two more over the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, the atomic age has been one of fascination and revulsion the world over. The new super-energy attainable through the atom quickly went from revulsion in popular culture to sci-fi plot point magnet. And it was those early atomic age sci-fi films that prodded me along to become a bonafide sci-fi fanatic by my early teens. The Japanese were among the first to embrace nuclear energy in a science fiction setting with films like Gojira (Godzilla in its Americanized version) although not the first specifically, as films like War of the Worlds used atomic bombs within the story, if not as a method of creation like Gojira.
In was in that method, using atomic energy as a means of growing a monster, in literal form, that acted as catharsis for the Japanese viewing audience. And that catharsis was brought to them via legendary director Ishiro Honda. If you'd like to read more about the great Japanese sci-fi/fantasy director, you can do no better than these two articles, one by Kimberly Lindbergs at TCM's Movie Morlocks and the other by Mykal Banta of Radiation Cinema. In fact, Radiation Cinema is itself a wonderful resource for all the pop culture of the Atomic Age. Mykal stopped updating it in November but until he starts up again there is plenty to peruse at one's leisure. Also, while not specifically an atomic age article, this post by Richard Harland Smith at Movie Morlocks does touch on many of the same themes and includes some very important post-nuclear movies.
And while these atomic age sci-fi wonders nudged me in the direction of sci-fi, they didn't do anything for my interest in the age itself. That would come from history books, science books and fear of annihilation. Growing up during the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union, nuclear weapons were often at the forefront of conversation. My father had several history books in the house, including The Oppenheimer Case: Security on Trial, 1969, Philip Stern. I read through it, though as a small child I skimmed more than anything else. Still, there it was and of all the books my father had, including an invaluable set of encyclopedias dealing exclusively with American history, it was the one that caught my eye. It wasn't long before I was reading up on nuclear energy, SALT talks and philosophies like M.A.D. (Mutually Assured Destruction). I learned about Leo Szilard, Edward Teller, Enrico Fermi and Ernest Lawrence. I watched On the Beach, Dr. Strangelove and Fail Safe as many times as I could (thank you TBS for running them over and over and over). And when a new movie like The China Syndrome came out, I was the only kid in school who actually wanted to see it.
Then, late in high school, The Day After (d. Nicholas Meyer), with Jason Robards and JoBeth Williams, aired on ABC and it was a sensation. This was 1983 and the Cold War was at the boiling point. I watched the ABC movie with rapt attention and the next day the local news showed up at my high school to get student's reactions. Naturally, they were told by classmates to ask me, which they did. I got a lesson that day in how clever editing can make you look like a complete idiot. The reporter came to me to ask my reaction, thrust the mic in my face and I talked. And talked. And talked. I wouldn't shut up. I went on and on about the difference in conditions and results between Hiroshima and the destruction showed in the movie. I critiqued the footage of multiple bombs going off seemingly within a couple of miles of each other and saying how, given the yield of a thermo-nuclear warhead, the dispersal of heat and dozens of miles of fallout radius, this would be a waste of bombs and, in reality, the dispersal pattern would be much larger. Yes, I was a teenager. And that poor news crew discovered I was very anxious to show off how much I knew about the subject. I also threw in a criticism that not enough people died from radiation burns or sickness and that the movie seemed to focus on one or two characters getting slowly sicker where I felt that point should have been hammered home with much greater force.
After school I excitingly told my father and mother that I was going to be on the news, interviewed about The Day After! Oh my God, it was going to be glorious! The news came on and the three of us gathered round the tv to watch. The reaction to the movie was the lead story! Of course, there was a lot of reaction, from all over the country so the high school students' part was cut to mere seconds. I was a part of that mere seconds. About one second of it. There I was, front and center on the television saying simply, "Not enough people died." Anyone who didn't know me saw an idiot teenager who didn't like the movie because there wasn't enough bloodshed.
Other Cold War movies, like Wargames, were must-see events as well. I saw that one on opening weekend and as far as I'm concerned, it not only holds up but still has one of the best opening sequences to a thriller I've ever seen. However, for me, documentaries became the route to take because, while I enjoyed the thrillers and realistic fictions, it was the real story I wanted and that, in turn, led to my interest in documentaries over all. And while I have viewed many more documentaries on the subject of nuclear war than fiction films, not all have been satisfying. A documentary like The Atomic Cafe is excellent but too concerned at times with ridiculing the era rather than giving a real appreciation for the gravity of what was going on in the world during that time. To this day I meet younger people who have seen The Atomic Cafe and seem to have the impression that the Cold War was this really big silly-fest that went on in the fifties and sixties. It wasn't. It was serious, and frankly, pretty damn scary. I much prefer to direct people towards the documentaries and narrative films on the subject that I have reviewed here, including The Day After Trinity, Day One, Trinity and Beyond and Radio Bikini. Most of the original comments on those reviews are lost forever as I foolishly used Haloscan for comments here for the first year and a half and that system is now off the grid but if you'd like to comment on any of them, please, feel free. My friend Marilyn also has two excellent reviews of movies in this category, I Live in Fear and The House in the Middle, not a review proper but an interview with film preservationist Rick Prelinger that touches on the infamous nuclear civil defense film. Finally, Peter Nellhaus has a review of one of the best films ever made on the subject, Black Rain.
Today's date is a sobering one in human history and one that guided my interest in history and documentary filmmaking. It's a subject I don't think can be taken seriously enough and perhaps that is why, to some degree, I have always been a bit annoyed at criticisms that Fail Safe lost out to Dr. Strangelove because it took itself too seriously. No, it's just that Dr. Strangelove is one of the greatest films ever made but Fail Safe is still, nonetheless, an important and well-made film on the topic. I recommend both highly, as well as the documentaries listed above.
I close out with the trailer I made for the documentary The Day After Trinity two years ago. There was no actual trailer ever made for the film so I made one myself and put it up on YouTube. With nearly 12,000 views and three pages of comments, it's one of my more successful videos. The man at the start of the trailer, reading the letter he wrote to Oppenheimer, is Haakon Chevalier; the man looking distraught in the middle is Robert's brother Frank and the voice you hearing narrating the final part is physicist Freeman Dyson, not a Manhattan Project scientist but an integral part of the documentary, acting as the objective observer for most of it. It would be the documentary I would recommend the most as a start-up for anyone interested in the subject.
Mari kita mulai mengenal terlebih dahulu Tarsem Singh salah satu sutradara berbakat dari negeri India. Pada awalnya saya lebih familiar dengan M Night Shyamalan sebagai salah satu sineas asal negri tersebut yang mampu berbicara ditangga Hollywood. Namun kali ini saya harus mulai memperluas jangkauan saya terhadap profil sineas asia lain yang memang menelurkan karya yang bagus namun kurang dijamah publik. Tarsem Singh memulai karier penyutradaraannya dalam film The Cell pada tahun 2000 kemudian memproduseri The Fall pada tahun 2006 dan terakhir sebagai second unit director pada film percintaan ageless The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button. The Fall adalah film arahan beliau yang belakangan menjadi bahan perbincangan saya. Mengapa film yang begitu memukau ini luput dari jangkauan pengetahuan sinema saya. Mengapa juga film yang mendapat nilai 100 dari Roger Ebert kritikus paling dinanti ini malah tidak mendapat tempat yang istimewah diladang perebutan piala perfilman. Dan mengapa juga pihak Academy Award melewatkan Colin Watkinson sang sinematograper yang mampu menampilkan gambar gambar yang indah nan memukau padahal Austin Film Critics mengakuinya. Semua hal ini saya utarakan bukan semata mata saya menyukai dan mengapresiasi film ini saja namun saya sangat tidak menduga ada film yang jauh dari perkiraan saya. Ada sebuah film yang bahkan meletakkan nilai nilai keeksotisan tari kecak dalam tingkat yang sangat mengagumkan. Siapa juga yang menyangka bahwa setelah menonton film ini kemurnian imajinasi dalam diri saya begitu mengalir sejuk dan serasa dibuai buai eksekusi keindahan.
Sebuah paket penceritaan yang menyajikan gelombang imajinasi artistik seorang pemuda lumpuh dan seorang gadis kecil yang patah tangan. Pria lumpuh itu bernama Roy(Lee Pace), seorang aktor komedian yang didiagnosis tidak memiliki hasrat bertahan hidup lantaran sang kekasih pujaannya direbut orang lain. Ia bertemu Alexandria (Catinca Untaru) disebuah rumah sakit bersetting Los Angeles. Alexandria juga menderita patah tulang akibat kejadian ia terjatuh saat memetik buah jeruk. Alhasil dokter memutuskan agar tangannya diberi gips.
Cerita dimulai ketika Roy menceritakan sebuah epik tentang pembalasan dan cinta kepada Si kecil Alexandria. Diceritakan enam orang karakter dari latar belakang berbeda bersatu dalam misi balas dendam membunuh Gubernur Odious. Mereka antara lain Otta Benga, Charles Darwin, Mistik, Luigi, India dan Bandit bertopeng. Gubernur Odious yang bengis akan segera mengeksekusi saudara Bandit Bertopeng. Alexandria sangat menyukai jalinan karakter tersebut .Namun arah cerita semakin depresif karena Roy ingin mengakhiri misi besar tersebut dengan kegagalan perjuangan keenam karakter tersebut. Kegagalan yang mencerminkan betapa sikap kepasrahan dan keputusasaan berdigdaya merasuki dirinya untuk segera mengakhiri hidup dengan meminum banyak obat obatan diluar dosis yang dianjurkan. Ia dengan sikap lemah tak berdaya mengelabui Alexandria agar mengambil sebotol morphine diruang kapel. Tapi Alexandria dengan lugunya menafsirkan permintaan m-o-r-p-h-i-n-three menjadi sebotol obat morphine dengan tiga butir obat saja, sisanya ia buang kedalam toilet. Sebuah penyelamatan jiwa.. Tidak hanya itu saja Alexandria memberikan Ekaristi kepada Roy walau ia tidak perlu merasa bersalah telah mencurinya dari kapel. Ikatan mereka sangat kuat dalam mempertahankan sisi lemah masing masing. Sisi dimana dalam sebuah eksekusi Odious membunuh Bandit bertopeng Roy malah membunuh Bandit Bertopeng. Namun bagaimana keharubiruan seorang Alexandre untuk meminta pada Roy agar Bandit bertopeng yang ia anggap penjelmaan mendiang ayahnya tidak mati sia sia begitu saja.
The Fall menyajikan lembaran lembaran gambar filosofis didalamnya. Bagaimana saturasi warna yang indah seolah diajak bermain main didalam imajinasi mereka berdua. Bagaimana sebuah gurun berpasir ataupun gurun berbatu dapat dengan cepat bergerak kelokasi tropis dengan bantuan spesial efek yang sederhana. Begitu juga dengan scene dimana karakter Mistik mati dan burung burung keluar dari mulutnya menyiratkan perenungan yang teramat dahsyat dalam pengalaman panjang saya berkelana disebuah sajian bernama sinema. Tak lupa juga dengan konklusi indah dan hangat ketika adegan melompat kesungai si Roy tersebut dipotong dan diedit sampai ke punggung kuda. Bagaimana sebuah keharuan begitu adilnya dalam mengakhiri sebuah roda kepincangan menjadi pembelajaran yang tidak akan lekang oleh waktu apabila kita pelajari.
Dalam urusan akting Catinca Utaru boleh dibilang memiliki masa depan yang cerah apabila ia ingin meroketkan namanya untuk sejajar dengan aktris cilik lain seperti Dakota Fanning dan Abigail Breslin.Malah saya berharap ia lebih banyak mendapat tawaran untuk berakting lagi. Begitu juga dengan Lee Pace yang tidak ada habisnya membuatku heran bagaimana ia bisa berakting senatural ini.
Untuk tambahan saja, didalam credit title dihadirkan negara negara yang diambil lokasi setnya. Ada China,India,Perancis dan sebagainya. Saya kaget pihak produksi memakai Bali didalamnya bukan memakai nama Indonesia. Ini berarti ada sikap skeptis yang sangat besar diluar negri sana dalam mencermati keeksotisan budaya nusantara.mereka menganggap Bali ya Bali, Indonesia ya Indonesia. Walau begitu tetaplah saya sangat berterima kasih ama Tarsem Singh mengambil syuting di Bali. Itulah pelajaran yang paling bisa saya petik kedepannya.
Pernah tidak bermimpi menjadi seorang superhero? Superhero yang saya maksud yakni pembela kebenaran dan keadilan, dipuja khalayak ramai, punya segudang teknologi artifisial ala Bruce Wayne, dan tidak ketinggalan tampil sebagai playboy slengekan yang nangkring di Casino Casino gemerlap.Kick Ass dengan pendekatan era pop-culture menyajikan kisah yang bertolak belakang dengan yang saya sebutkan tadi.
Dave Luweski tampil sebagai remaja yang dalam kacamata saya nothing spesial untuk menjadi sorotan utama dalam cerita ini. Ia beranggapan "mengapa di dunia ini mencintai karakter seorang superhero namun tidak ada satupun yang benar benar berniat menyelami misi tersebut. Mengapa enggak ada superhero yang pernah menanyakan apakah kalian tahu film American Beauty atau apakah kamu penggemar Paris Hilton.
Maka lahirlah KICK ASS sebuah transformasi seorang pelajar dan juga penggagas misi independen dalam menyelamatkan dunia. Berbekal baju yang diterima dari Ebay dan dua buah pentungan , ia memulai misi pertamanya dengan mencoba menyergap dua orang pencoleng mobil (dan ternyata dia berani..).
Malangnya ia terkapar dirumah sakit dan kondisinya sangat mengenaskan. Tapi keberuntungan masih berpihak, Dave Luweski masih bisa melanjutkan misinya paling tidak menyelamatkan seekor kucing terlantar sehingga membawanya ikut dalam perkelahian beberapa orang yang melintas. Dengan begitu orang orang yang berada disekitarnya sontak heboh ada seorang pemuda berkostum aneh yang berani ditendang berdarah darah.Salah seorang bertanya siapa kamu? Dengan wajah meyakinkan ia berkata "Saya KICK ASS".
Cerita terpecah menjadi dua. Bahwa aksi sang Kick Ass menginspirasi dua superhero yang dalam konteks bukan untuk membela kebenaran, namun dalam aksi balas dendam ala dua seri Kill Bill. Big Daddy (Nicholas Cage) dan Hit Girl (Chloe Moretz), mereka memberantas geng Frank D'amico dkk yang sudah tak sabar menangkap Kick Ass. Kepala geng tersebut punya seorang putra yang juga memiliki obsesi serupa untuk menjadi superhero dan ia menamai dirinya RED MIST. Perkenalan Red Mist dengan Kick Ass (walau sesungguhnya ia menjebak Kick Ass) menyadarkan Dave bahwa "seorang superhero itu harusnya bermodal lah dikiit..hihihihi".
Kemudian line cerita akhirnya menyatu mempertemukan aksi balas dendam dan perseteruan geng geng mafia tersebut. Disini karakter yang sangat menonjol adalah Hit Girl. Bagaimana sang sutradara menempatkan karakter Hitgirl yang nyatanya adalah anak gadis "menikam" orang dewasa dalam suatu sajian yang wah walaupun sesungguhnya ada sisi kemirisan didalamnya.
Pada akhirnya saya harus mengatakan kalau film ini gagal dalam konteks keseluruhan gagasan cerita. Kick Ass adalah seorang penggagas "seorang superhero tanpa bantuan teknologi sama sekali " namun pada akhirnya ia malah menyelesaikan pertarungan dengan sebuah bazoka ( ahh kok jadi Rambo banget) juga bagaimana karakter Hit Girl yang unik malah meneggelamkan "rasa keingintahuan penonton siapa itu Kick Ass yang saya coba untuk diidolakan."
Tapi sebagai hidangan penghibur summer movie tahun ini yang rada rada menjenuhkan, Kick Ass sudah lebih dari cukup untuk sebuah hiburan. Lain kali sang sutradara seharusnya tidak meramaikan banyak karakter karena pada akhirnya ketidakmampuan menggali karakter utama berujung pada "tenggelamnya" garis besar memperkenalkan si tokoh sentral. Saya malah tertarik dengan kelanjutan kisah Hit Girl ( Moretz malah dirumorkan digala Oscar..)
This is the logo that will appear before my short films in the future, whenever they get finished that is. Unexplained Cinema, the title, doubles for both my production company, such as it is, and my alternate cinema blog. As for the logo film, I animated it from several old public domain photos that I stitched together (for instance, the seated man and the abandoned building interior are two separate photos put together). The idea is that we see the outside of the abandoned building first, as we hear the click of the projector turn on and rev up, lighting up its surroundings, and then go inside to see the man seated on a makeshift bench, waiting for the film to start. Then, of course, it dissolves to the logo.
As for Unexplained Cinema, the blog, I think it's time for another sea change. What that change will be I don't know for sure just yet, but hopefully, it's coming soon.
Recently I've been thinking more and more about what makes a film great? It must be more that acting, editing, cinematography, writing, scoring or any other part that when added to the sum makes up more than the whole. If it were quantifiable in technical terms then Gus Van Sant's Psycho would be as equally celebrated as Hitchcock's and it isn't, nor should it be. More than that what makes a film great to one may not make it great to another. After years online, writing about movies and discussing them in comment sections, I'm still surprised sometimes when we don't all agree on the goodness, badness or ugliness of a particular movie, as if somehow we should all know the exact markers of a great or bad film and simply check them off to know with which kind of film we're dealing.
Much of this thinking process was sped along by my friend Bill Ryan's recent post on Mulholland Dr, written and directed by David Lynch and released in 2001. That's a film I know is great but I don't know for sure if I could tell you why. In fact, for much of the film the cinematography is rather pedestrian by these eyes, doing very little of interest with interiors for example. The editing, scoring and writing are all perfectly good in an almost purposely unremarkable way. And yet, I know that this is a great movie. Not just a good one, a great one. How do I know? I don't know. But I do know when I know.
For me, I often have moments when I know a movie is great and for Mulholland Dr it's when Rebekah Del Rio takes the stage at the Club Silencio, a full hour and 49 minutes into the movie, and performs "Crying" ("Llorando") in Spanish. Why does that moment signal the turn for me? I have no idea, I just know that it does. The entire Club Silencio sequence has a quiet beauty for me that very few movies achieve and when Del Rio is on stage I can feel an emotional pull that feels real but seems inexplicable. And how many movies, really, how many, can keep you interested and even deeply involved for almost two hours and then, THEN(!), at the time when most movies would be winding down, ramp everything up to a fever pitch that makes you, the viewer, feel like you've just been given a shot of adrenalin directly into the heart?
That's what Mulholland Dr does to me but there are so many movies that give me that "great" moment. Here are just five from a list of hundreds:
The Bridge on the River Kwai: This moment's a bit obvious and clearly intended to be a "comes the dawn" moment for the viewer but still it ropes me in every time. It's the moment just before the intermission when Colonel Nicholson is informed that the wood they're using has been known to last for 600 years and his eyes widen as he whispers in amazement, "600 years?" He's gone and now you know it. It chills me every time and takes the movie from excellent to great.
Dodsworth: Some movies hold out until the very last second and Dodsworth is one of them. I find the whole movie terrific but it's that moment, that scene on the ocean liner, almost at the very end of the movie that does it for me, that transforms it from good relationship drama to great relationship drama. [SPOILER]In the penultimate scene, as Dodsworth (Walter Huston) is on board, returning to the states with his wife (Ruth Chatterton) even though he's in love with another woman (Mary Astor) and this is 1936 and you know, just know, that this is how the production code dictates it must end, suddenly Dodsworth stands up, essentially says, "To hell with this and you and all your phoniness" and leaves to go to Mary Astor. What an ending. [END SPOILER]
The Earrings of Madame de...: The movie's initial set-up plays like a farce. Earrings are sold, re-bought by the husband, given to mistresses, lost in casinos and so on until our lovely lead, the Comtesse Louise, played by Danielle Darrieux, meets and falls in love with the Baron Fabrizio Donati, played by Vittorio De Sica. And then they dance, and dance, and dance. And when that dance scene happens, that takes us through the opening whispers of their love, as they dance until the band stops playing, that's when it becomes great.
The Third Man: Another obvious moment but still, I can't deny it. It occurs when Holly (Joseph Cotten) is stumbling drunk into the street from Anna's (Alida Valli) apartment and spies none other than Harry Lime (Orson Welles) in the doorway across the street. The same Harry Lime that, up to now, was supposed to be dead.
Stroszek: I highlighted this sequence a while back at Unexplained Cinema and it remains for me the greatest moment in the whole movie but, also, the moment that tips the movie over the edge from fascinating and bizarre study to greatness. Bruno Stroszek (Bruno S.) stands motionless as his home abandons him and exits stage left (house right).
I could keep going and, in fact, so many scenes in movies that are celebrated in movies are celebrated for the very fact that they often are the moment the movie transcends expected standards and moves into the area of greatness ("We're going to need a bigger boat" from Jaws being an easy example) but it's more interesting when, as in Mulholland Dr., you're not really sure why a moment takes you to the next level, it just does and when it happens, it can be exhilirating.
