Leaving Hogwarts and the Half-Blood Prince

HARRY POTTER AND the half-blood prince

book 2004   movie 2009   first read 2004   first watch 2009

A sixth-in-a-row return to the school of witchcraft and wizardry, where love is in the air and each laugh is followed by a sob.

Au Revoir to Cannes 2014 | Blue Is the Warmest Color

Yesterday was the last day of the 2014 Cannes Film Festival. It was also the day that I saw last year's Palme d'Or winner La Vie d'Adèle, Chapitres 1 et 2 or Blue Is the Warmest Color for the first time.

Do you remember the time when a beautiful, fresh French face made a short but effective appearance in Woody Allen's Midnight in Paris? Back then, it was still questionable whether there was more behind that intriguing smile. Not anymore - last year, Léa Seydoux (the actress behind selfsame smile) was awarded the Palme d'Or along with her director Abdellatif Kechiche and co-star Adèle Exarchopoulos. The two ladies are the only women to have won the award beside Jane Campion. Blue Is the Warmest Color is indeed a very feminine film that explores women in various ways. Firstly, there is the most apparent theme - homosexuality. The films main character, Adèle, finds out that being with men doesn't give her the same sort of satisfaction as being with a woman does. More so, there is one particular woman that Adèle falls head over heels in love with: the artistic and charming, blue-headed Emma. The two spend several years together as Adèle finishes high school and starts studying to be a teacher. Meanwhile, Emma is becoming an acclaimed artist and doesn't have as much time for her girlfriend anymore. After Adèle cheats on Emma with a male colleague, the two break up, leaving Adèle cold and lonely. 

Leaving Hogwarts and the Order of the Phoenix

HARRY POTTER AND the order of the phoenix

book 2003    movie 2007   first read 2003    first watch 2007

A fifth-in-a-row return to the school of wizardry and witchcraft, where I realize the upside of growing up and that Professor Umbridge is really Goebbels.

Leaving Hogwarts and the Goblet of Fire

HARRY POTTER AND the goblet of fire

book 2002     movie 2005     first read 2003?     first watch 2005

A fourth-in-a-row return to the school of wizardry and witchcraft, where I marvel at the fast pace, cleverly constructed plot and the connections to North By Northwest.

ZOOM IN.

Leaving Hogwarts and the Prisoner of Azkaban

HARRY POTTER AND the prisoner of Azkaban

book 1999      movie 2004      first read 2002?     first watch 2004

A third-in-a-row return to the school of wizardry and witchcraft, where I swoon over Alfonso Cuarón's directing style, Daniel Radcliffe's improved acting skills and how Hermione's hair looks from behind.

ZOOM IN.

Also known as "The One Everybody Loves", Prisoner of Azkaban marks the point at which the Harry Potter film adaptions became a force to be reckoned with. Changing out director Chris Columbus, who had approached the previous two films from a traditional "children's movie" perspective, with the darker and more stylized mind of Alfonso Cuarón, stepped up the game quite a bit. It also helps that the three leads have grown into better actors and that their characters are able to develop in a more interesting, nuanced way. Finally, Prisoner of Azkaban connects another two Brilliant Brits to the series with Gary Oldman as Sirius Black and David Thewlis as Professor Lupin.

Blind Spot Fixed: Memento

Memento was easily one of my blind spot films that I was most excited to watch. It's Stevee Taylor's favorite movie of all time, which in itself is worth a thousand reasons I should watch it, and in the top 10 of countless lists floating around the internet - including many an IMDB Top list. In contrary to many other of my blind spots, I actually knew about Memento a long time before I moved to the island of film lovers (as Ryan McNeil - sort of - puts it: the more movies you watch, the more blind spots you never even knew you had, you discover). I owe this knowledge to one of the sides of Indian cinema that I've always been critical of: it's affection for remaking films from other corners of the world (primarily Hollywood blockbusters). So Ghajini, a 2008 Bollywood hit remake of Memento, marked my first encounter with the Memento Mori story. Ironically enough, this movie was also a Hindi-language remake of the 2005 Kollywood (Tamil-language) film of the same name by the same director. At any rate, Ghajini was fairly enjoyable, mainly because of its cinematography and the man who turns iron into gold, Indian superstar Aamir Khan. However, it didn't ignite a burning desire to watch the original Memento in me.

Leaving Hogwarts and the Chamber of Secrets

HARRY POTTER AND the chamber of secrets

book 1998     movie 2002      first read 2005?      first watch 2003?

A return to the school of wizardry and witchcraft, where I pay my accolades to Hermione's last truly geeky year, sleek-hair Malfoy, Ron's first wand and the old Dumbledore.

ZOOM IN.

Once hooked by the magical world of Harry Potter, I never considered actually reading The Chamber of Secrets as preferred to just watching the movie. It was out there, so why not just slip it in the DVD player (easier said than done, but my birthday wasn't far away). I was young, I was stupid. So when I finally did go back and read the book, about two years after watching the film, I was surprised to find so many new aspects of the story in the book. Whether my surprise was caused by the bigger similarity between the first book and its film or whether I was just too inexperienced to know that things do get lost in translation, I'll never know. The scene that left its biggest impression on me then was definitely Sir Nick's ghost party, which I didn't see coming at all. Speaking of that, the ghosts were rather neglected in the Harry Potter films, am I right (Peeves, anyone)? Still, I do love them.

Blind Spot Fixed: Apocalypse Now

Choosing 12 films out of the hundreds of 'must-sees', 'masterpieces' and 'classics' that waited like blank sheets of paper for me to put my stamp of opinion on was a difficult task in itself. The fortunate person I am, the first film I chose proved even more difficulties. The main one: there exist two versions of it, the shorter one being 'only' 153 minutes long. Still, the 200+ minutes 'Redux' (what does that word even mean) cut might be much better than the original one, think of Blade Runner. Luckily, my helpful blogathon host Ryan McNeil immediately responded with the wise recommendation of the shorter cut - apart from the expected 'You're in for a treat', which he knew because everyone except me has seen these films already. In I went then, used to the 90-110 minute features I have stuffed myself with this whole past month. And you know, I've come to realize that watching movies is quite similar to doing sports - you've got to alternate. Now I do ballet, so 'Don't just do the allegro and ignore the adagio' would be my personal interpretation of the lesson that the Apocalypse Now experience taught me. I guess it translates to 'Don't forget to build up your muscles when training for a marathon'. 

Apocalypse Now is not just a long film - it's  a long war film. Happy times. War films need to be long, seems to be the general consensus. I don't think so, actually, I think war films can work perfectly fine with a running time below 2h. But indeed, Apocalypse Now is a movie that needs room to unfold itself in order to build up its eerie and disturbing atmosphere. Surprisingly, the plot isn't that important - nor are its holes. Basically, it's about great actors delivering great performances in an impossible environment, framed in the most fascinating way you can imagine (Oscar nod: deserved). If you really *have* to have a synopsis though; half-crazy Captain Willard (Michael Charlie Martin Sheen) is sent on a secret mission to exterminate Colonel Kurtz's (Marlon Brando) insane reign over a group of insane people near the Cambodian-Vietnamese border. The film currently ranks #1 at the website moviemistakes.com and deservedly so. You can't expect anything else from a cut-down from more than 200h worth of filmed material, filmed in 16 months though. Famous production history? I didn't know S about this film's production history. However, it was one of the most interesting things I read since researching Blade Runner.

Leaving Hogwarts and the Sorcerer's Stone

HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S/ PHILOSOPHER'S STONE
book 1997 movie 2001 first read in 2003? first seen in 2003? 

Sometimes, the most unlikely things turn out to take the most important places in your life, don't they? 
Today, Harry Potter is a synonym for childhood to me - but for a long part of same childhood, it was just 'That boring-looking boys' movie'. It took someone's unsuspecting goodwill to get the book anywhere near me and an intense feeling of boredom for me to wipe the dust off its cover one or two years later. The rest is history. 

When other people turn up James Brown's "I Feel Good", I'll be listening to "Hedwig's Theme". Instead of the Tower Bridge, the highlight of my sightseeing tour in London was Platform 9 3/4. My visit of the Harry Potter Studio Tour in the UK will make out a whole chapter in my self-biography. Basically, I think this is all some kind of mistake and my invitation letter for Hogwarts got lost in the mail. This is why an afresh revisitation of the series seemed like the perfect way to both celebrate and grieve for my leaving/ finishing high school. So the next 8 months, right until my graduation prom in July, I'm going to take a look back at the 7 books and 8 films that make out such a huge part of my girlhood. The title of the series, obviously borrowed from my favourite theme from the soundtrack(s), is not supposed to symbolize any sort of abandon or moving-on from the Harry Potter universe. On the contrary, it signifies the parallels between the world of Harry, Ron and Hermione and my own life. As I'm on my way to end a very important chapter of my life, I once more look to them for inspiration.

How I Learned to Stop Worrying

a HOW I LIVE NOW review

Growing up 21st century's Europe has its perks - technology redefines the limits of communication, consumerism and culture, we can travel without having to do little more than showing our passports and politicians seem busy sustaining peace in our own little world as well as the Middle East. It becomes difficult to differentiate between documentations of the World Wars and movies like Independence Day, both depicting horrible, life-threatening situations and ending on a happy note (more or less). I for one find it incredibly hard to believe that my own grandmother fled (mainly by horse waggon) from what was once Pommern (the eastern part of Germany) to the north, and had to work under more or less slavery-like conditions for the Russians. Hell, I can't even fathom there was once a great wall separating Eastern and Western Germany - that fell only 6 years before I was born! However, once in a while, I am reminded of the actual danger that still surrounds every living creature in this world; the animal-esque war of survival that is hidden beneath health care, unemployment benefits and supermarkets. Watching How I Live Now was one of those experiences that made me realize there is a threat of war in my life and the lives of the people surrounding me, and that our little bubble of peace, equality and freedom of the mind could burst any day. 

Bully - Be Nice or Die

The embarrassing discovery of a misspelling on the banner for this months' LAMB MOTM, whose name I mistook for being "Buddy", could be seen as a foreshadowing of my experience of actually watching this movie. Bully, although only one consonant away from it, is anything but a movie called "Buddy".

Based on a real story and the book written by Jim Schutze, BULLY centers around a group of lazy teenagers that do little less than sleep with each other. One of the kids is Bobby, who treats his "friends" like s*it, especially his childhood best friend Marty. One day, Marty's new girlfriend Lisa decides that the Bully must die. No one disagrees.

If you're searching for a discomforting and unsettling experience, with anything in it that could be described as sick, inhuman, immoral or similar - except cannibalism - you'll hit the jackpot with Bully. It's a story that has a lot of ingredients I love in movies, some I like, and some that make for interesting, challenging watches but I know will upset me in a bad way. The first group (ingredients I love) are the teens and the splash of coming-of-age. In this case however, they don't really come of anything, although they go through some typical coming-of-age phases and actions. There is also the crime element - who doesn't love a good crime story? In this case however, we already know who did what, why and how, so it's more of an insight scoop on the crime. Ingredients I like are the psychologically disturbing elements and character treats, the social commentary/ criticism and Los Angeles setting. But now to get to the core of it all: ingredients I do like but don't enjoy. These are thought-provoking and discomforting in a great way, something I need to experience once in a while but really rather wouldn't sometimes. That's hard drugs, a loooooooot of sex including rape (I'm not prude or anything, The Dreamers is one of my all-time favorite movies, but I don't think anyone would really enjoy the scenes in Bully), teenage pregnancy and prostitution. And we're not talking Pretty Woman prostitution, but the Mysterious Skin/ Christiane F sort of thing. 

So where does all of this leave me with Bully? This is not a movie I enjoyed. It's a movie that made me want to dig a big black hole in the garden and hide in it - either that or surround myself with sunshine, rainbows and innocent little children for a month. I would want to re-watch Bully anywhere in the vicinity of the next, say, 10 years. That being said, I do think it's a great movie, and in that way, it was an enjoyable experience. One that tested and probably crossed my boundaries and made me face some conflicts and perceptions of life that I don't usually consider. It's a well-directed, well-scripted, well-acted movie and I have nothing to complain about it whatsoever. So in the end, I appreciate the fact that this depressing and thought-provoking indie got chosen to be the LAMB Movie of the Month, because I got the chance to watch something I had never heard of and maybe would've never seen otherwise.

BULLY

2001 • USA/ France • English

dir. Larry Clark (1st watch of mine) 

written by David McKenna & Roger Pullis

★ Brad Renfro, Bijou Phillips, Rachel Miner + more (incl. Michael Pitt)

FINAL FRAME: STRAWBERRY

FABULOUS FILMIC FASHION: THE WOMAN IN BLACK

Featuring Matt Smith's favorite suit and no glasses.

Costumes designed by Keith Madden (no one you should know), The Woman in Black is a hauntingly beautiful and slightly scary horror movie based on the novel by Suzanna Hill. It's not a movie that'll creep into your dreams and make you want to not fall asleep, but it holds up for an entertaining and as I said very pretty view. People who thought that there was nobody attractive in the Harry Potter series will have to reconsider their arguments - although admittedly, Daniel Radcliffe is short - as the Victorian suits make the best out of who's wearing them. There's not much variety in the costume department and the characters rarely change clothes, but what we do get to see is certainly worth a mention. Or a post.

The three sisters that are seen at the beginning of the movie wear typical adult clothes as was the tradition at that time (I do know this much about historical fashion). Of course theirs are a bit "cuter" than the real adult dresses, a tad shorter and paired with hair bows. Interestingly, the girls' hair is open instead of braided, which I reckon would be unusual, but perhaps they were just playing and didn't want braids. By the way, I love what Photoshop made me do to this picture.

 

Daniel Radcliffe wears a very posh suit throughout the whole movie, which as I said makes him look more handsome than he usually does look. The upswept sleeves add an interesting contrast to the otherwise very tight and formal wear, so I loved the scenes were he just relaxed and y'know, chilled in that suit. With an axe.

But the suit is definitely most beautiful when complete. I like the way the tie is somehow above the collar - and of course the watch-chain (I think it must be a watch). Very classy. And Daniel Radcliffe definitely is the type for sideburns. The whole outfit also set his character apart from the villagers, who wore more used and practical clothes, so it was part of what defined his character. Perhaps the movie should've been named "The Man in Black". I mean, you seldom ever see The Woman herself, much less than in the TV movie from the 80s. Which, by the way, isn't wort a watch - except in case you can't resist seeing the guy who played Harry Potter's father play the same character the guy who played Harry Potter plays in this movie.

That's that, I hope you all have a wonderful, fashionable weekend and that you're not all too disappointed with my irregular blogging habits at the moment. There's just a lot of other things on my mind and on my schedule. At least I've started watching more movies again. And the secret plan with two of my favourite fellow bloggers is starting to take shape.

[4] The Upcoming Adult Presents: 18 Favourite Picturizations

Every year, one of the most discussed topics in the filmosphere is whether this or that movie lived up to this or that novel - or more rarely, short story or play. 

Most of the time, the general opinions tends to declaring the original "thing" to be the best. And I often agree. But that doesn't mean the movie is bad, and I know a lot of movies that brought something new to its source. A different medium can give a story a whole new perspective, and to know and accept that, I think, is a sign maturity.

1001 Movies: Finishing Kubrick

185 - 187

Slowly, my Kubrick-film-feast is going to an end... Having watched all sixteen feature and short films of the late director, I feel full of knowledge and enlightenment. That doesn't mean I loved or even liked all of his films - but we'll dive further into that matter when I write my big, grand Kubrick Post with a capital P. All you're going to get for now is three short reviews of my last three Kubrick-adventures, one that disappointed me and two that are officially on the list of my favourite Kubrick-opuses.

Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964)

„THE COMPUTERS THAT TAKE THE SITUATION BEYOND HUMAN INTERVENTION HAVE ONLY BECOME MORE CAPABLE. BE AFRAID. BE VERY AFRAID.“

3 Questions about LIFE OF PI

Enviable viewers in Paris

Many people have been looking forward to Life of Pi in 2012, and there were several reasons for them to do so. It's the filmatization of a famous novel that was called "unfilmable" (as was the case with A Clockwork Orange and many others), it marked the return of one of the most acclaimed contemporary film-makers, Ang Lee, whose last success of Brokeback Mountain happened 7 years ago (although I did like Taking Woodstock). And, not to forget, it seemed to fit into one of the most popular genres of the time - that philosophic, "deep" one - while promising to revive a technology-gimmick that has been discussed much lately. 

My primary reason to be excited about Life of Pi was none of these though; it was the Indian factor. Indian background, Indian actors and, as I hoped, Indian soul. All of this despite the fact that Irrfan Khan was again typecast - he's a magnificent actor (although he's offered much more challenging roles in India than in Hollywood), but I'd also like to see someone else for a change. 

Anyhow; I can't say I was disappointed by Life of Pi. After all, what I was hoping for was what I got. Still, I've been asking myself some questions after having watched the film, and this is where I'd like to try and answer them as well as I can.

1001 Movies: Heart-shaped sunglasses, greasy hair and suntanned gladiator's legs

#183, a re-watch and #184

Choosing Kubrick's version of Lolita to celebrate the new year cinematically proved to be a perfectly wonderful choice. Provoking as well, to watch the story of an adult falling in love with a 14-year old in the year I'm going to turn into an adult (expectedly). My journey in 1001+ movies continued with a reunion and revision of my thoughts on one of the most-loved musicals ever (Grease), and yesterday's historic trip to slave revolts in ancient Rome (Spartacus) had me forced to finally write about these three movies (as one of my new year's resolutions was to write about each of the book's movies I'd watch).

Lolita (1962)

„[KUBRICK] MANAGES TO DELIVER A PICTURE EXACTLY AS EROTIC, ABSURD, OBSESSIVE, ERUDITE, AND LOW-COMIC AS THE BOOK.“            

Praise The Hobbit

USA/ New Zealand, 2012

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Directed by Peter Jackson

Written by Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens, Peter Jackson, Guillermo del Toro

★ Too many great people to choose three of them

                

What has not been said about The Hobbit yet, I wonder? 

With all the praise (along with a tiny dash of criticism) wandering around the media and blogosphere, is there at all any way to defend your action of writing a review on this movie? Shouldn't we highlight lesser known arthaus gems that could change the world?

Blood. Music. Robert.

Also read: Blood. Music. Ryan.

France/ Canada/ Portugal/ Italy, 2012

Cosmopolis

Directed and written by David Cronenberg

Based on a novel by Don DeLillo

★ Robert Pattinson, Juliette Binoche, Sarah Gadon

                    

Obviously, Cosmopolis is a film that causes opinions to differ. It is theatric and filled with complex dialogue and ambiguities, and there was a moment where I could have chosen to think, "This is it. I'm out". But I decided not to. Mainly because the introduction sequence was so classy.

Classy is the right word. It describes this film very well. I read that some people found it stylish but in its content too self-indulgent and pretentious, but I don't agree. While watching the movie I considered this opinion, but was immediately captured by the story itself again, deciding I wouldn't jump on either side of the fence before finishing the movie. It's like certain books that you find hard to get through; the dialogue is tiring and confusing, and you just don't "get" what it's supposed to tell you. Then the revelation when you're finished and can't get this work of art out of your mind, you keep dwelling on it, certain scenes and underlying thoughts keep popping up in your head. You realize the works value.

Dystopian City Lights

USA, 2008

City of Ember

Directed by Gil Kenan

Written by Caroline Thompson

★ Saoirse Ronan, Toby Jones, Bill Murray

            

What is it we movie buffs are searching for? I often thought it was the perfect film. But City of Ember makes me think differently. Maybe it's the perfect viewing experience we're searching for instead. The right film at the right time. And in contrary to the perfect film, it is possible to find the perfect viewing experience.

I wanted something new, fantasy-esque, that's easy to get into and understand, but still challenging enough for my mind. Something with good, young actors and beautiful cinematography. And art direction, an interesting art direction with many small details and other perks. A mixture of Harry Potter and The Hunger Games. Kind of. And guess what? I got this!

Two Boys Grow Up

UK/ USA/ France, 2002

About a Boy

Directed by Chris Weitz, Paul Weitz
Written by Peter Hedges, Chris Weitz, Paul Weitz
★ Hugh Grant, Nicholas Hoult, Toni Collette, Rachel Weisz

            

I have the feeling it's not only me who is tired of seeing all these absolutely current-treasure-y super positive reviews on my blog, and that's why today, I'm going to write about a film that I liked.

A film that made me smile almost all the time, but never made me feel, "God, this is awesome!". Perhaps the reason for my reaction is that I had already read the ingenious book by one of my favourite authors, Nick Hornby, and there was no way to top that. Or perhaps it was just... well "just" a good film.

But this is not a bad thing, and actually there's almost nothing bad I can say about About a Boy. It had humour, an interesting narration, a good story (obviously) and a good soundtrack. It was good.

Sometimes I wonder what it is, that makes some movies great, and others good. I thought it might be predictability that would "spoil" a movie, as I already knew most of the plot of this movie (it felt as if only one scene had been changed from the book). But then again, why would people - including me - re-watch films then?

Today I've come to the conclusion that it's sheerly impossible to put a finger on that particular, I don't want to say "x-factor"... let's say, "factor of awesomeness". You can't explain why and how the strawberry explodes, and why it doesn't - all you know is that it does, in some films.