Film Reviews
by: Jordan Vetro
Blood Diamond
Blood Diamond tells the story of Solomon Vandy, a man from Sierra Leone (Africa) whose village is attached by rebel soldiers in 1999. He is taken to a rebel camp to work to find conflict diamonds which can be shipped to America and sold to love struck honeymooners who choose to stay clueless to the fact that their pretty little bobbles come with a price. In the mine he discovers a large, pink diamond, and hides it. He is seen by a rebel leader doing so, who does not have a chance to take it when the mine is attacked by the government. Solomon is thrown in prison, along with Mr. Archer (Leonardo DiCaprio) a white, South African diamond smuggler who overhears of Vandy’s find and sees it as his ticket out of Africa. The two are thrown together in a lopsided deal (family for diamond profit) which leads to tears and bloodshed, war and pain.
Blood Diamonds is meant to inspire its writers, like a controversial news article or a historical biography on a dictator. It is powerful and compelling and ends with the listing of facts which compel its watchers and make them feel a great deal of love for those who suffered at the hands of our fanciful desires. I was touched by the story and characters, and greatly respected each member of the cast and crew. They most certainly accomplished everything they set out to do with Blood Diamond.
Be warned, the film is painfully real, and borders on gruesome, and real characters at times use real language. But it is none-the-less an amazing film and I highly recommend it.
Children of Men
In 2008, mankind is robbed of it’s greatest miracle. We stop having children. By 2020, the world is in shambles, lost to terrorists, and rebels who have lost all hope for humanity. The only country that seems to be holding up on any level is Great Britain, which struggles with thousands of refugees from the surrounding world, seeking sanctuary in a country that is itself being ripped to shreds by violence and injustice. In the midst of this mayhem, a middle-class man (Clive Owen) struggling to get by without focusing on the world around him, which is enough to make a clown depressed, is asked by an ex-girlfriend (Julie-Anne Moore) now the head of a major terrorist group, to help a young girl get to the coast, to the ‘Human Project’: a group of minds devoted to saving humanity. The purpose of all of this is to preserve the first unborn child the world has seen in decades, and allow for the safe delivery of a child that may save mankind.
Children of Men is both shocking and disturbing. I’ve always felt there are few things more capable of making a person feel down than a bleak look at humanity’s future, and this is perhaps one of the bleakest ever portrayed. Based on a novel, which immediately implies the film will most likely contain a level of depth and story which will certainly interest the inclined, Children of Men is thought provoking and challenging. Don’t expect to be as provoked by such a film as this as one would at a film like Blood Diamond or The Constant Gardner which challenge us to see our problems. Expect to be depressed, because such a film implies there is very little to nill that we can do at this point. Be careful of a dangerous rating for terrible language (imagine the amount of profanity which would accommodate a cold hearted atheist who thought the entire world would be rot in a century) and some dreaded violence. The film is well made, though perhaps somewhat fanciful, it is quite inspiring, and certainly doesn’t allow for a great deal of disinterest in the audience. However, I would warn you to stay away if you don’t wish to think deeply, or become socially depressed; you may spend the entire motion picture sending text messages.
The Good Shepherd
The Good Shepherd which marks what I believe is the directorial debut of Robert DiNero, tells the story of some of the world’s first CIA agents, and the life which they lead. The film stars Matt Damon and Angelina Jolie, and here I must warn you. I spent the first half of the film behind three or four fifteen year old girls who I believe came because they believed such names would allow for a film shallow enough to accommodate their tastes. Much of their time in the theater was spent on their cellphones (which, being prohibited by movie theaters, sends a message to a film director that is much like bringing a jukebox to the opera). They were not so much of a bother the second half, considering they were no longer in the theater. As a spy filck, the film holds little to no excitement or classic two-dimensional characterization that makes us so fond of James Bond or Ethan Hunt. However, as a political film, presenting a commentary on the post-war paranoia and the eccentric men who lost the love of their families and much of the time that was spent by others living out the American dream so that they could go play spy.
The film is stylistically very much like the films of the 50s. It has lots of diologue and character development and is very dull if one doesn’t choose to invest their time in the characters. For one who enjoys a very personal story, or old epics like Lawrence of Arabia or Citizen Kane the film will most like be enjoyed. The film contains sexual themes which (although they are not random and generally have purpose in the storyline) one must consider before seeing the film, and the brief violence that does see its way into the storyline is, if anything, disturbing. So with a cautious eye, and a reminder that this is not a film for lovers of spy flicks and celebrities, the Good Shepherd is a film that doesn’t come around often.
A Night at the Museum
A Night at the Museum lovingly revives a classic fairy tale idea that is meant not only to spur the imagination, but the intellect. The film tells the story of a New York man, (Ben Stiller) a failed inventor and entrepreneur, (who cannot see why ‘The Clapper’ should have caused the failure of his idea ‘The Snapper’) who wants very much to impress his son, currently living with his mother and her finance. Driven by a need for money and a steady job, which will be good for both him and his son, he takes a security position a the New York’s Museum of Natural History, on the graveyard shift. His first night seems quite dull, until at sundown, mayhem ensues as he realizes that everything in the museum comes to life.
This is a family film, and should generally cause no disturbance to any of its watchers. Although it toys with some basic ideas of magic, it should bear no offense. It should very much appeal to lovers of a warm-hearted family story. And if the names Dick Van Dyke, and Mickey Rooney (legends of old Hollywood) mean anything to you, the film should allow for some pleasant reminiscence. I liked A Night at the Museum, though many accused it of being too shallow, and containing poor acting on the part of actors who usually pull off better performances. I personally saw it as too happy and at times even too witty to toss aside.
Casino Royale
007 is back… for the beginning. Casino Royale is somewhat of an apology for some of the more recent Bond films, which were driven more by shotty, over budgeted action scenes which lacked every bit of the charisma which made James Bond so amazing. (I mean honestly, James Bond is good, but since when was he such a good surfer?) The most recent addition to the Bond saga goes back to the beginning to ask how Bond became who he is/was. Daniel Craig, the new, and very blond, James Bond plays a somewhat different character than we have seen before, though every actor seems to bring their own flair to the character (except Timothy Dalton; here we may collectively shudder).
The film is story driven and character driven, to an extent rarely seen before. Again I point out that this seems somewhat like a compensation for the recent, most shallow installments to the series. It is so new and different that a Bond lover exits the theater wondering exactly what they have seen, and must figure that out before they can even consider whether or not they enjoyed it. Personally, I enjoyed it, and I think the 22nd installment, which is already in motion, will be even better, now that this new Bond has been established.
The storyline revolves around a high-stakes poker game that the Casino Royale in Monte Carlo, which the newly promoted 007 (pest poker player in MI6) is entered into, in hopes of catching a major arms dealer who is also entered. He is paired with a calm but cold MI6 accountant (Eva Green) who is unlike any Bond-girl ever seen, and some dangerous allies.
I liked Casino Royale. Be warned and fear the elements of most Bond films that make them less suitable for younger audiences, and expect a very new Bond, one whom I believe has a long and healthy future in the franchise.
The Pursuit of Happyness
Will Smith plays a poor man in San Francisco trying to sell over-priced, luxury X-Ray machines which he thought were revolutionary until he realized how few hospitals actually wanted one. He is struggling to support his son, along with his wife, who works at a laundromat. His life is tumbling down the drain until he hears of an internship for a position which he believes he could fill; that of a stock broker. What follows is a powerful story of a father and son (played by the son of Will Smith) and the struggles a man trying to provide for those he loves.
Pursuit of Happyness is not the most inspirational film I have ever seen. And the trouble with inspirational films is that they almost need to become the most inspirational film anyone has ever seen to be recognized as excellent. The film is very good, and gained Will Smith a Golden Globe nomination, and if one enjoys a film that causes great warmth at the cost of great pain, feel free to purchase a ticket. I enjoyed the film, not more or less than films like it, but I did enjoy it. It is a good story, a true story (which, for films like this, makes the story much better) and a very well told-story.
