Pan's Labyrinth

NOTE: I realize Pan's Labyrinth released over a year ago, but I have not been able to officially review it until now.

"The world is a cruel place." -- Carmen

This movie is a different sort of fantasy movie and its definitely not one for the kids. AS the posters read, it's a fantasy tale for adults as it is a dark tale of a child who is surrounded by such a horrific reality, she escapes to a fantasy world where she has the potential of becoming a princess: any young girl's dream.

So how horrific is her reality? Young Ofelia (the child) is forced to live with her stepfather Captain Vidal, a man who can bash in young man's face with a glass bottle without a second thought. A man who will kill anyone who crosses him, even his closest of friends. A man whose only weakness is his pride. He would make a great dictator. It's a very bleak reality and Ofelia is expected to behave as she is instructed and be a good little girl.

However, there is this whole other world she wants to explore, guided by fairies, where she meets creatures like The Faun and the Pale Man. This is where the movie truly stands out. The designs and costumes for these two creatures are stunning and stand as a true testament to the classic filmmaking techniques of yesteryear. The Faun itself is a combination of costume, prosthetics and stilts to pull off the movement and feel of the creature. The Pale Man was truly a creepy beast, almost zombie-like.

In this world, Ofelia is given three tasks by The Faun to complete by the time the full moon rises. While not in the world, she has to cope with her pregnant, and very sick mother, and the demands of the very strict and controlling Captain Vidal. Whenever the real world become to much for Ofelia to handle, she runs off to the fantasy world to complete another task.

The basic plot is simple to understand, but its the many little details that truly make this the fantasy movie to watch (if you haven't by now). Nothing is set in stone, and the one question that remains in your mind by the end is by far one of the most discussed topics of this movie: Is the fantasy world Ofelia visits real, or is it all in her imagination? Since both world's are so well portrayed, and the fantasy world is so well integrated amongst the real world, both sides of the debate are valid views of the movie.

So here's my challenge to you: Watch Pan's Labyrinth and join the debate. Which side will you choose?

Final rating: 9.0 out of 10

Perspectives: Cloverfield

In just under two week's time, Cloverfield will make its way into theatres. It is the next big monster movie shot entirely as if it were a collection of videos taken from people's cell phones and video cameras or news reports, etc. So expect a lot of shaky camera movements. The big question is, what is this monster destroying New York? Some people have been saying Cloverfield is basically "Godzilla in New York", but somehow, I doubt that. In fact, I wouldn't even be surprised if the monster is never actually shown, which would enrage many, but would work best. That way, the inrtigue of what the thing is will not be destroyed. It would be more fun to interpret the movie the way one wants by only showing slight glimpses of the creature and not the entire creature itself. Then the people can think what they want.

The real question, the business question, is will Cloverfield live up the self-generated hype? It does look very promising, but I've seen movies in the past that had spectacular trailers and the movie was a lemon (Spider-man 3). I know of movies that have used their advertising to create a hype that it could not live up to (Snakes On A Plane). Will Cloverfield be one of those movies that out-hyped itself? Or will it truly deliver on what it promises in the trailer? It can go both ways.

With all the hype (yes, the 'H' word again) Cloverfield has garnered, it will perform well financially. But financial success does not mean the same as film success. If a movie makes more money than it costs to make, it is a financial success. A film success is much harder to achieve. It has to achieve financial success, then it has to be a quality film, and still is exciting even after repeated viewings.

This brings me back to the monster. The way the monster is handled will be the life or death of Cloverfield. Those who are excited for this film are wanting to know one thing: what is this monster? If the monster is completely and utterly revealed, which could very much happen, that would kill all the intrigue created in the trailers. Then it is simply a question of will these people get out of New York alive? A much less intriguing situation, but still can be quite intense...once again depending on the nature of the monster. However, if they choose to let the monster remain a mystery, the intrigue will not be destroyed and will leave it to the interpretation of the viewers. When it comes to repeated viewings, the first option will not offer any new insight as you already know what the monster is, and who will survive. The second option, leaving the monster shrouded in mystery, would make the repeated viewings still just as interesting, assuming the clue dropping as to what the monster truly is done right. If done right, on the second, possibly third viewings, the viewer may notice new information about the monster they didn't notice before and thereby change their hypothesis, making the subsequent viewings just as interesting as the first. However, leaving the monster a mystery will outrage many.

So, to me, Cloverfield's success comes down to which poison the producers chose: show the monster, or leave it in the fog. My question to you...which would you prefer?

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street

"The years, no doubt, have changed me!" -- Sweeney Todd

Let's start this, the inaugural review, off with a little snippet of me; I'm not a fan of musicals. It's the "Yay! Let's sing now!" attitude of many of them, like Hairspray, or the somehow popular High School Musical. However, despite my dislike of musicals, I do still enjoy classics like The Sound of Music (odd, I know) which is why I still watch them from time to time, in hopes of finding another of similar, if not better quality.

And I think I found one and it lies within the blood-drenched film of Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street. It is true that 85% of the dialogue is sung, but it never falls into the "Yay! Let's sing now!" category. The songs don't even come across as songs since they integrate themselves so well into the story and really help to elevate the emotional power of the movie.

It's the story that truly captivates as it is not a story you would relate to a musical. Benjamin Barker is sent away on a trumped up charge for life by Judge Turpin, a judge who plans to have his way with Barker's wife. When Barker returns fifteen years later, he has adopted the persona of Sweeney Todd and begins to plot his revenge alongside the eccentric Mrs Lovett. The idea of a barber who slits the throats of his customers is already disturbing as is, but just to make things more twisted, Mrs Lovett bakes the bodies of Sweeney Todd's former customers into her meat pies, which quickly become a sensation.

Johnny Depp plays the revenge-crazed Sweeney Todd and once again does so very well. From Todd's most tender moments when he's caressing his razor blades to the most intense kill, Depp is able to convey the character of Sweeney Todd with grace. He even surprises when it comes to singing. This is the first movie where it is Depp himself singing, and does it fairly well. Is it the best singing? No. Though it is perfect for the performance. As for Sweeney Todd's accomplice, Mrs Lovett, Helena Bonham Carter does her usual creepy routine, but, once again, does it brilliantly. She has been typecast into these kinds of roles, but it suits her and she does it well so there's no sense in arguing the point. The true stroke of casting genius was casting Alan Rickman as the twisted Judge Turpin and Timothy Spall as Beadle Bamford (it's like a Harry Potter reunion tour!). Alan Rickman (aka Snape) is by far my favourite Judge Turpin. The way he speaks, the way he carries himself, the way he punishes those who cross him really come across as a more subdued kind of evil, which Alan Rickman is very good at. Timothy Spall (aka Peter Pettigrew) is the weirdest, most rat-like, and brilliant interpretation of Beadle Bamford, the Judge's sidekick, I have seen. Spall has nailed his performance right down to the gestures and the way he extends his vicious cane.

And with Tim Burton at the helm, you know the movie will be a visual treat. He once again hits his mark with the dark, bleak, silent movie feel. The very grey colour palette of the sets really make the whole location slightly unnerving, if the premise of throat slitting isn't enough. And with the slitting of throats comes blood, and lots of it. This is easily the bloodiest movie I have seen since Grindhouse. Yes, a musical is bloodier than any horror movie. But don't fret, the blood is so red, and so wonderfully over the top, the blood is almost poetic and really adds the film, instead of just having blood for blood's sake (like Grindhouse). The blood spills and sprays without mercy, and is topped off by a more disturbing crunching of the bodies as the fall, head-first, down a chute and colliding with the floor of the bakehouse two storeys below.

From the first astounding note of the theatre shaking organ to the last blood-soaked frame, Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street not only entertains, but surpasses every movie released this year in terms of greatness. The acting, the cinematography, the sheer power of the musical numbers all come together and make a dark, and very outstanding package. This movie definitely gets my vote for movie of the year.

Final Rating: 9.7 out of 10