Frida

At the end of the day, we can endure much more than we think we can.

Frida is a beautiful, inspiring movie about the amazing Frida Kahlo and her struggles through life. Not only it gets you to understand her art much better but it's also a story about life and suffering told beautifully. The screenplay is very good, it doesn't have the feeling that most biopics have, like they're rushing to the end and don't really know the person they're talking about. This feels like fiction, because Frida Kahlo feels like a person, she has flaws, a convincing personality, she's not just a victim, and some moments of her life matter more than others. Her reactions have a reason, not like you're supposed to think that, as she's a genius, she's a bit mad. The other characters have a realistic feeling about them too, and Diego Riviera is fascinating. The dialogs are quotable and there are some inspiring lines.

The acting is very good by all the cast, but Salma Hayek has the most powerful acting and outacts everyone. She looks a lot like Frida Kahlo, but there's a lot more to her performance. She creates an impetuous, sensual, intelligent, able to enjoy life character, someone that suffers but endures everything. You can't take your eyes off her, her performance is just magnetic. She never overacts, and the most emotional scenes are beautifully done and really touching. Alfred Molina gives Diego Rivera an edgy charm and has a good body language, acting subtely and he has a great chemistry with Salma Hayek even if I think she's more responsible for this than him. Geoffrey Rush is great, he creates an humble, intelligent thoughtful character perfectly. Valerie Golino is very good playing a lost, drunk, sad woman and has very expressive eyes. Diego Luna and Edward Norton are very believable and make the most out of their small parts.

The direction is excellent. Julie Taymor gives her movie originality, having perfect control over every aspect of the mvoie. Not just the camera angles are beautiful and able to express ideas, feeling and thoughts greatly, but the music and the part of the movie in which it is placed is perfect. Besides it sounds beautiful and has a great rythm. The color of the movie is well chosen and makes it look exotic, warm and envolving with all the red, yellow and bright colors, contrasting with the dark themes aborded but giving you a sense of South America. The editing is often good, but some scenes last too much. It's a matter of seconds, but it can give those scenes an awkward feeling. Overall a great movie I recommend.

Happy Feet

We've got personality with a capital Y. Why? Because we're HOT!

This is another movie about pinguins, those lovely, cute, sweet-looking animals. It has gorgeous images, some of the best, most amazing animation I've ever seen. It's a joy to look at and a very enjoyable movie. The story is nice and you can relate to the pinguins and feel some empathy towards them. Some of the subplots are very good: the love story is beautiful, the coming-of-age is deliciously innocent, the family/society rejection subplot is intelligent but sometimes a bit forced and the «macho» pinguins subplot is laugh-out-loud funny. The worst subplot was the ecological one, it just tries too hard to pass its message. The dialogs are often very funny and intelligent, with a lot of jokes young kids won't get. The pace of the movie is mostly addequate and keeps you entertained, but it gets a bit to slow and forced in the end, which I didn't like.

The cinematography and the animaton are beautiful. They create gorgeous images, with a wonderful dimension, cute, lovely pinguins, and the humans are the most realistic I've ever seen. The water and the ice lok real as do all the other animals. The angles are amazing, they make the images even better. The music sounds great and has beautiful lyrics. Nicole Kidman, Brittany Murphy and Robin Wiliams are good singers especially Kidman, who has the most cristaline, pure voice that fits the part. Overall, it's a fun movie, good to look at but lacking a great story.

Crash (2005)

You think you know who you are. You have no idea.

I have no idea in why this won Best Picture and had so many great reviews. Here, every character is either racist or a victim of racism, and if he/she is a racist it's because there's a reason, some sort of trauma in his past. Every character is one-dimensional and learns a lesson in the end. The dialogs sound fake, and the ONLY theme is racism, racism, racism. That even makes it less realist because people tend to speak about several subjects. Paul Haggis seems to think people will only onderstand the message if he repeats it all the time. All with me "Racism is bad, racism is bad, racism is bad". Now repeat this 500 times and you'll have a good part of this movie done. Even if obviously this is an important message, you don't need it to be thrown into your face. The stories come together in unnatural way, using to many coincidences, making it look false and predictable after some time. The changes some of the characters go through in the end are ridicolous and there's no reason for the to happen. Even if this is not a boring movie, it tries too hard to get you to feel something. If the characters had been better this would have been possibly a good movie. I'm not saying all were bad; a few had a certain dimension and their struggles were touching.

The acting is the best thing about this movie. All the actors are very talented and make the most out of ther parts. Don Cheadle, Matt Dillon, Michael Peña, Thandie Newton, Terrence Howard aand Sandra Bullock (during the first part of the movie) were very god. The worst perfomance was by Ludacris, who just seemed too self-conscious and fake to me.

Paul haggis direction is lame.I know he lacks experience, but I think this movie needed a raw, realistic style, not the emotionally manipulative shots used. Al the slow moving scenes, the bad use of sound and the still camera in angles that lack interest are useless.

The technicals are good. The editing is simple and common in this type of movie, not original but well executed. The music is well chosen and beautiful. The photography, even if sometimes it should have been dirtier loking, creates some images with the right mood. Overall, this is NOT a great movie or even worthwile, but it has a bunch of good performances and a good message, even if badly transmited.

The Conversation

I'm not afraid of death. I'm afraid of murder.

This is a brilliant study on obsessive and paranoid behavior and the effect technology has in our lifes and society in general. It's about a surveilance expert, Harry Caul, who has a crisis of conscience when he susects that a couple he is spying on will be murdered. This had happened before and he feels very guilty about it. But can he really know what's happening, or did he lose something with the capture of the sound? Or is his mind playing tricks on him?

This has a briliant screenplay. The leading character is fascinating, and the pther characters are seen by his distorced eyes in a frightening way. The dialogs, especially the conversation the title mentions, are mind blowing, meaningful and hold clues to what's going to happen. The pace of the movie is just right and it keeps you guessing and on the edge of your seat. The story is interesting, reflective and intelligent, and all the touchy subjects the movie talks about are aborded with sensibility, even if sometimes they can make you feel uncomfortable. You get to a point in which you don't know what's reality and what isn't, making this thought provoking. It's simply a great screenplay.

The acting is all at least above average. Gene Hackman gives his tortured, paranoid, character complexity and sincerity. He disappears into his part and you believe everything he does. He gives the character vulnerability and his acting is one of the main things that made me see the story by his point of view. Frederick Forrest and Cindy Williams do a good job in creating dream-like characters in just one scene, and Cindy Williams has an amazing delivery of her lines. John Cazale makes his character likeable and has a convincing chemistry with Hackman. Harrison Ford makes a good impression in playing the bad guy, with his soft spokenways and strong eye expression that contrast.

The direction is amazing. Francis Ford Coppola not only gets great performances from the casting, but he choses meaningful camera angles, giving his movie an unique feeling, and gets the best work from the crew. The angles he choses suggest an invisible presence, peeking into Harry Caul's life. They can be truly claustrophobic and make you know the characters' feelings. They give you a sense of space and time the way it's experienced by Caul.

The technicals are all great. The sound plays a huge part in this movie, and it's intelligently manipulated. It connects with the images during the conversation itself in an original fashion, in a different rythm, volume and tone than reality, showing us Harry's point of view and how what we hear is not always what is there. The cinematography, with all the dark, dirty colors works in showing us Harry's trip to a personal hell and the sudden flashes of red-the hotel scene-are shocking and used hauntingly. The editing gives the movie its exciting, but reflective pace. I really recommend this. It's thought provoking, technically brilliant and haunting.

Night On Earth

Don't blind people usually weardark glasses?
Do they? I've never seen a blind person.

This is a truly amazing movie which I love. It has five different stories, each on a different city, with very different people, but al in a taxi. All the people are very different, with different background, ambitions, culture and personality, but in the end, so similar. I loved every part of it, some of them are very funny, others touching, depressing, heartbreaking, enjoyable or simply beautiful. They are all wonderful portraits of the city in which they happen. They don't show touristic locations, but how the cities really are and how people behave and think. Every story is well told, with great pace, amazing, believable dialogues and realistic characters that you get to know very well in little time. They work both together and alone. They're all great and I can't choose my favorite.

In the first segment, a young tomboy taxi driver meets a wealthy talent seeker, who wants to cast her in a movie. In New York, an afro american meets an immigrant, his cab driver, lost in the city. In Paris, a blind girl takes a ride with an irritable cab driver from the Ivory Coast and they talk about life and blindness. In Rome, a cab driver picks up a priest and starts confessing, and in Helsinki a miserable driver picks up three drunks and they speak about the most depressing things that ever happened to them.

The direction is amazing in al its simplicity. The camera angles are steady, usually focusing no the actors and allowing you to concentrate on the dialogs.But there are some that show the city, the cars passing, the buildings, lovers in the middle of the night, junkies, etc, and these have ususual quality.

The acting is great by everyone. Winona Ryder, frequently criticized, is in my opininon very funny and totally different from her other roles. I really enjoyed her acting. Gena Rowlands plays her "opposite" in a nice, underacting way. Armin Mueller-Stahl is very touching and expressive (the moment he says he was a clown is very beautiful), with an amazing use of his eyes. Giancarlo Esposito and Jennifer Perez are fun to watch, too. Béatrice Dalle is incredibly charismatic and believable as a blind young woman, and Isaach De Bankolé is good. Roberto Benigni is about as hilarious as you can get, in his one man show. His speech is obviously very funny, but Benigni makes it mind blowing. Some will hate it, though I couldn't stop laughing. Matti Pellonpää delivers his speech in a dramatic, depressive way but without overacting.

The cinematography and the music are beautiful, make this movie feel nostalgic and help linking the segments. This is a very original, worthwile movie.

Chinatown

Forget it, Jake,. It's Chinatown.

This is a noir mistery, with a dark, haunting story, great acting and a brilliant direction. Its ambience is just perfect. In this story, every character has complicated issues thgat can't be solved, a troubled past and sins they can't atone for. It's all very dark and misterious, and it gets you in the edge of your seat. The political part of the mistery keeps you guessing and it's incredibly competent, but the character development and their personal issues are even better.

The screenplay is mind-blowing. All of its subplots are perfectly developed and are understood just at the right time, they keep you guessing. The characters are all believable and interesting: Gittes (Jack Nicholson) and his obsession, Evelyn (Faye Dunaway) trying to get her life back together and, Noah Cross, the personification of evil, have a convincing, elaborated relationship with each other. They are all, in a way or another, trying to atone but in Chinatown there's no redemption. The dialogs have a lot of meaning and are thought provocking. Some show the hypocrisy of people and others just their weakness, always ina tense, disguised way. There are a bunch of quotable lines too. The ending is surprising but well done and very fitting. The themes are spoke of with maturity and sensibility.

The acting is great. Jack Nicholson, Faye Dunaway and John Huston have a very believable, amazing chemisrty between them, they seem to be always messing with the other's mind, trying to mistake him and convince him. All this is noticed just by a gaze, a movement or a blink. It's very subtle, but it makes the performances outstanding. Jack Nicholson creates a haunted character, strong but human. Faye Dunaway makes her character remarkably vulnerable and sad, even if at the same time a bit of a femme fatale. John Huston is evil, in his two scenes he's just perfect. All the secondary actors are talented and they make this movie better.

I highly enjoy Polanski's way of shooting, all the angles and camera movements he tends to use. He does a great job once again. The movie never gets tiring and some of the shots are breathtaking. They are a beautiful homage to older noir movies, even if still have their originality.

The music is haunting and it gives a movie a touch of originality. The editing pays homage to the noir movies from the 40's, showing the many layers of the story slowly and there's not one minute tat shouldn't be there. The cinematography, glossy but dirty, with an harsh, dark lighting creates the right ambience. Just brilliant and unmissable.

To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee

Shoot all the bluejays you want, if you can hit' em, but remember it's a sin to kill a mockingbird.

This is considered a literary masterpiece, and I found it very good. It's about racism in a small town during the 30's, and it's seen by the eyes of a young girl, Scout. The story is told in an old-fashioned, traditional, comforting way, and the pont of view is truly great. It captures the feeling of childhood and all the kids are realistic, not annoying little brats. The adults are all believable and interesting, especially Aticus. His advice is wise, it never sound forced and you have to like him and respect him. The building social and racial tension are well written, as is the kids' life, with all the everyday routines, small mysteries and adventures. All the attitudes peaople have and their irracionality ar just greatly portrayed. The writing is beautiful and simple, but full of remarkable sentences and quite lyrical. This book is general culture, and it's really beautiful. From the innocent Boo Radley mystery to the thought provocking trial goes a long way, but Lee is able of creating fascinating characters and a really thought provocking story.

The DaVinci Code

As long as there as been one true God, there has been killing in his name.

The DaVinci Code, the bestseller that sold as much as possible. This movie works...as a comedy. (Almost) everything is wrong on this, with the exception of Ian McKellen and some of the supporting cast. Come on, the book was a fun, exciting, light read, with a good sense of pace and a lot of interesting puzzles to solve. Not perfection or anything, but nice.

The movie just sucks. The screnplay has no sense of pace and it fails to keep you interested or making you feel anything by the characters. It just provokes a total detachment , and you can't avoid to feel all the story is ridicolous. The dialogs are clichéd and even if I didn't read the book (I didn't remember it very well, anyway) I would have been able to guess what was gonna happen next. All the flashbacks are useless and badly written, the emotional scenes lack any sort of meaning and all in all, this movie can't even entertain decently.

The direction is really, really awful. Ron Howard uses all the clichéd shots on the most clichéd order. He seems to think he's doing a brilliant job, with all the flashbacks done in a degradé way, so very kitsch, melodramatic and funny (that was not the objective). He fails to make this movie consistent or interesting, he isn't even OK.

The acting was the best thing about the movie, even if not too good. Tom Hanks is automatic and severely underused, you'd never say this is the same guy that delivered such an amazing performance in Forrest Gump and The Terminal. The same can be said for Audrey Tautou who was so amazing in Amélie. Paul Bettany, Alfred Molina and Jean Reno are underused and can't even develop their characters. Ian McKellen is the standout. He uses such a funny irony, wittycism and cynism in this character that he just becomes a joy to watch and the only thing worthy on this.

The music is very annoying, It's always trying to make scenes exciting, but it doesn't. It just manages to sound overplayed and too loud. The editing is terrible; the movie lacks a decent pace and the scenes come and go in a meaningless, boring order and the transitions are amateur. The cinematography is sappy, with the colour used in an obvious way. It's meant to be very touching and beautiful, but it isn't. Overall, a movie that should be avoided by everyone. Recomend this to your worst enemies. I pity them.

Chicago

You wanted advice? Well here it is...straight from me to you...keep your paws off my underwear.

I watched this movie with low hopes, since admittedly I don't like musicals (Moulin Rouge and Romance & Cigarettes are the exceptions). This isn't bad, it's just fluff with everyone dancing and a happy ending. The story is fine, the directing is pretty good, the acting in worth watching, the wardrobe, cinematography and sets are all OK, and the editing is mediocre.

Even if the story is clichéd and very moralistic, it's entertaining. The characters aren't really well written, but they're well played and so it's not too noticable. The dialogs and relationships between the characters are very predictable. It lacks meaning and it seems like it has nothing to say, it just wants entertain a bit.

The actors all work effectively, but the clichéd characters don't help. Renee Zellweger looks a bit unconfortable while dancing, but she can express the contradictions, feelings and transformations of her character quite well. Catherine Zeta Jones isn't half as sexy as her character is meant to be, but she uses her eyes, body and voice in an interesting, sometimes funny way. Richard Gere can be annoying but charming and John C Reilly has the most likeable, touching character, even if awfully stereotyped. Queen Latifah nomination for Best Supporting Actress is a total joke, she did nothing worth seeing.

The main problem I have with this is that question that always comes to my mind when watching a musical: "Why the heck is everyone dancing all of sudden?". As the movie didn't absorb me, I just found it ridicolous. Still, I admit these were good choreographies, even if too theatre like. This feels like a stage play, not like a film, so the adaptation isn't realy good. The lyrics and the dances go from very good to laughable.

The directiong is good but... well, let's just say it's classic and without brilliance or originaity. The colors of the movie, glamorous and fluffy, fit the rest of it and accentuate the glamour. The editing is far from good, I can't see how it won the Oscar. Everyone just seems to start dancing out of no where, without any type of real connection. The sets are too much like stage play ones but the wardrobe is fitting. This didn't deserve Best Pic, far fromit, it's just an OK movie.

Manhattan

I think people should mate for life, like pigeons or catholics.

Manhattan might just be one of the best movies ever. Its style, themes and humor are obviously similar to other Allen movies, but this one has a touch of class and beauty that makes it quite unique. It talks about a group of new york intellectuals: Isaac (Woody Allen), a man on his 40's dating a 17 year old girl, Tracy (Mariel Hemingway), and lusting for Mary (Diane Keaton), who's his best friend's lover. At the same time, he's trying to come to terms with his lesbian ex-wife, Jill (Meryl Streep). The story keeps you hooked, and the realistic, very flawed characters are interesting. The dialogs have a lot of wit and intelligence, as in all Woody movies, but there's something else: some of the scenes with Mariel Hermingway are heartbreaking, and a lot of others are dramatic and sad. The storyline and the characters are some of the best ever, the nostalgic mood and the insignificance of these lifes are just beautiful.

The acting is simply great, and all the actors have a good chemistry between them. Woody Allen plays himself, but damn well, Diane Keaton is funny and good, too, but Mery Streep and especially Mariel Hemingway steal the show. MerylStreep plays a totally different character, I had never seen her like this before. She has the funniest delivery of lines, the best way of disappearing into her character ands showing all type of emotions. Mariel Hemingway transmits beauty, innocence and love in a pure, believable way. Her character is the most likeable and she makes the most out of that.

The gorgeous cinematography helps making this movie great and gives it its ambience and mood. The simple way Allen shoots the movie, with wide shots that capture a moment, a feeling, an emotion subtly, lets it breathe. It shows you New York with a lot of beauty and obviously Allen's love comes across. The editing is simple but effective, and there's not one second of the movie that shouldn't be there. Simply brilliant.

How To Be Good by Nick Hornby

Sometimes we have to be judged by our one-offs.

Wonderfully funny, enjoyable and intelligent, these are some of the adjectives that best describe this book. I had never read anything by Nick Hornby, but I had watched two movies based on his books, High Fidelity and About a Boy, which I enjoyed. The best thing on How To Be Good is its originality and freshness. A subject almost no one else has written about- how would a truly good person get along in the 21st century?, a witty, funy voice, and thought provoking questions make this truly great. The beginning isn't that good, but the witty remarks start and the characters are slowly, smartly developed. Then all the story changes, and that's when things get interesting. Katie, who's unhappily married to the cynical David, sees all her life changing when her husband meets GoodNews, a spiritual healer that makes David wanna change the world. It sounds pretty dumb, but all the dillemas the characters face, the empathy you feel for them make this worthy. I highly recommend this to anyone looking for a nice, original, witty and still sweet book.

The Last King of Scotland by Giles Foden

This is a dark drama about a young scottish doctor in Uganda during Idi Amin's brutal regime, and the relationship he has with this dictator. This is a slow paced book, and the leading characters are well developed and have depth. This book is filled with descriptions, and all of them have a beautiful feeling of Africa and can be breathtaking. Idi Amin's personality is fascinating and contradictory, one of the most evil villains I've ever read. Nicholas Garrigan, the doctor, suffers an amazing, even if realistic, change during the book. The supporting characters aren't really good; Sara and Marina are clichéd and the later should have been cut from the story. The ending could have been better, but the fascinating leading characters, the beautiful, sometimes horrifying descriptions and the exotic feeling of this book make it worthy if you're looking for a character study or descriptive thriller. This is a good, even if flawed, first book.

Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore

Tucson's the weird capital of the world...WEIRD.

One of Martin Scorsese's early movies, Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore is very good. It's shot in a raw, gritty, realistic way, and that's the best part of the movie. But there are a lot of other things to enjoy in this hidden gem: the performances, the music, the inspiring storyline and believable characters, the editing and the message and esquisiteness of this. The begginning is perfect. You see a young girl singing, next to her house, and everything's so dreamy. Then, you're introduced to Alice's life in a really well done way. As the story develops, the characters become more consistent and you can't avoid to like them. The dialogs are always realistic and meaningful.

The direction, as I said, is amazing. The hand held camera makes it realistic and gritty, and the dusty look of this movie makes this even better. The other great part of the direction is the femininist message. It works so well, without being forced, and at the same time it can show several beautiful relationships. The shooting is really well done, adapting to the scenes. It makes them often funny beautiful, touching or violent.

The actors are all very good. Even if sometimes I felt Ellen Burstyn was a bit hysterical, that's a part of the character. All her emotions come out in a gret way. This is a brilliant leading performance. Her character isn't slim, particulary pretty or anything; she's just a normal woman trying to work her life out. Kris Kristofferson gives his character wiseness and beautiful feelings, at the same time he underacts in a good way. Alfred Luter was very natural and funny as Alice's young son. I think everyone knows kids like him. Harvey Keitel was very frighening in his part, but a bit clichéd. I don't think this is his fault, though. Billy Green Bush is OK in his small part and Jodie Foster is very funny and charismatic in her small role. Diane Ladd is very funny and great to watch.

With all the great scenes, the beautiful photography, stunning direction, great acting and touching message, this is a very good movie.

Little Children by Tom Perrota

I didn't find this book very good. There's a feeling- like you're peeking and seeing things you shouldn't- that makes it interesting. But the storyline is very banal and too American Beauty-ish, and it's so negative and exagerated. Perrota sems not to know what he wants to do; some characters apeear and disappear all of sudden and the ending is confused and a real let down to me. The characters are too clichéd, we've all seen them before and they are too banal, they never reach an approprate intensity so it's hard to fel fascinated by them. The writing is good, as is Perrota's dark humor and satyrical view of life in suburbs, and there are some great scenes. I found one of the characters to be very original, but the way he acts sometimes really doesn't fit in the rest of the story. This is not a bad book, but I don't really recommend it either.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind

This means something. This is important.

This movie is usually considered one of Spielberg's best, and I have to agree on some aspects. The direction and shots are breathtaking, the use of light is brilliant, but some of the conflicts should have been more developed. The screenplay is mostly good, but not the best thing abou tthe movie. The three storylines balance each other. My favorite was the one with the little kid, and my least favorite the one with Richard Dreyfuss playing Roy. I think the characters mostly lacked a background, which made them less believable. The dialogs are very often clichéd, but they can sound cute. The pace is amazing; the stories take time, and all the pieces come together in the amazing ending, as if it was a circle closing itself slowly.

The storyline with the mother (Melinda Dillon) and the young son was brillaint and remarkable. This is the one where you can most easilly realte to the desperation and confusion of the mom, so the characters are really well written. It's the one with more suspense and it's pretty gripping, too. The story of Roy, his obsession and his family is not so good. I mean, I liked the way the relationship with his wife is portrayed, but his obsession is too sudden and childish, so unbeliavable. Claude Lacombe and his investigators is just the technical story; its characters have close to no development, and all they do is explaining you in a concrete way what's happenning.

The shots and special effects are both great and the best thing of the movie. Every sci-fi shot is fascinating, and the use of music in those is mind blowing. Just thge way the ending scene is done makes the movie much better and very thought provoking. The use of light and darkness is brillintly surprising; the ETs are signed with a hard to lok at light, and the rest of the time, there's mostly darkness. The UFO's are just lights of different colors, and that works. The special effects are mostly light, but the control of the wind and perfeccion with which everything's done make the stunning.

The acting is good by Melinda Dillon, Teri Garr and Cary Guffey. The first one shows such a desesperation and affection that you can only like her and roo for her. Teri Garr portrays the not understanding wife, and she does that amazingly. I found myself conecting more with her than with Roy, who was just mad. Cary guffey had the right cuteness and fresh look to make you love his character, and he has a good delivery for someone so young. Richard Dreyfuss is quite ridiculous, because he just sounds mad and I could barely connect with him. The actors fro François Truffaut bit weren't bad, but they didn't have much to do.

The cinematography was truly great, with al the impressive lighting, and the editing mkaes all ends meet beautifully. In the end, This is not a very equilibrated movie, but technically it's a masterpiece and it has one of the best endings ever.

Running With Scissors by Augusten Burroughs

This is one of the weirdest books I've ever read. I had to keep remembering that this is actually a true story, as it reads like another universe. The good thing is that there's no self pity; Burroughs always finds the funny side of things, and he seems grate ful to have lived such a messed up childhood and teen years. All the situations are so surprising you can't avoid to laugh at them. The writing is subtle and every word is well chosen. Tgr people involved in this are all real, despise the fact that the point of view obviously transforms them. It's very creative, and often touching. I connected with them, even if my life's totally different. Some of the scenes are really gross, though, so I recommend this if you're not faint hearted.

In Cold Blood by Truman Capote

I don't usually read true stories, because they tend to get boring. This one is incredibly exciting, because it tells a real story, recreating it and rewriting it with a lot of inside views,which makes it much more interesting. all the people here are understood by the writer, and there are no monsters, just people wyho do mistakes and pay for them. All of them are fascinatingly complex. The writing is great and I found it original. The characters atart by being described, in a very traditional way, and then you get to see whothey actually are. The sentences are offten really poetic and touching, and some of them are really disturbing. Everything gets more amazing when you know this actually hapenned. Overall, a fascinating read and a classic of modern literature.

Annie Hall

I feel that life is divided into the horrible and the miserable. That's the two categories. The horrible are like, I don't know, terminal cases, you know, and blind people, crippled. I don't know how they get through life. It's amazing to me. And the miserable is everyone else. So you should be thankful that you're miserable, because that's very lucky, to be miserable.

Annie Hall is one of the best movies Woody Allen has done. It's witty, intelligent, realistic, beautiful, touching, and unique. It toys with our concept of time, as we see a relatioonship and the beggining, middle, and end of it, not always in this order.

The screenplay, as in all Woody movies, is great. The romance always sounds so real- with its bad and good times, and no forced happy ending- that you root for them to stay together. The characters are amazing. Annie Hall is wonderfully developed. She's truly beautiful, sweet, humane and quite odd, which makes her endearing. Woody Allen is just himself, nervous and paranoid. The jokes are always thought provoking and incredibly witty and ironic. The dialogs are about as good as you can get; not just they keep you interested, but they're full of references to another movies and books and have a lot of criticism to our society and ourselves. The way the story is told gets you even more interested, with all the flashbacks giving you insight in who the characters were and who they become.

The acting is stunning. Diane Keaton, as Annie, gives one of my favorite performances ever. Her character is well written, but it's quite difficult to pull off. She can just get the right quirky, messy look,. with a lot of swetness and beauty. She has an amazing delivery, speaking about everything in a light, cute way. The supporting actors are all good, but no one can get close to Keaton. Woody Allen, even if just playing himself, is particulary good.

The direction is one of the best Allen has done, with the hand held camera and his way of starring at the camera and saying what he thinks or wishes. The editing makes the movie much more interesting; it runs smoothly an it's easy to understand, and at the same time it helps you to get a full understanding of the relationship. The music and photography are good, but not remarkable. Overall, this is an obligatory movie for everyone, and what every romantic comedy wishes to be.

Les Bidasses en Folie

Les Bidasses en Folie, a french movie from 1971, is a very short, easy to watch, slapstick hippy comedy. The gags are always very physical, and during the first half hour of movie they work and it's pretty enjoyable and funny. It' outdated and supposed to be cool, and that makes it even funnier. You laugh at how ridicolous it is. Then, the five characters go to war, and you just grow tired of watching them fall and acting stupid, even if it's still funny. The actors have some good body language, and the gags are funny, but it lacks any link of decent storyline or characters. It's just fluff, cute and sugar coated, with a positive feeling. It can leave you with a smile on your face, as some of the moments are spot on. Fortunately, it's short, because if it had 5 minutes more you'd be incredibly tired of watching this. It's not my type of humour, but it's not bad. I wouldn't recommend this, except if you have nothing else to do and only want some fluffy, 70's styled movie.

The Last Picture Show

One thing I know for sure. A person can't sneeze in this town without somebody offering them a handkerchief.

This is a subtle, real portrait of confused teenagers, the hidden lives of a group of people, and a town dying, with everyone going to the city. Its influence on more recent movies, such as American Beauty and Ghost World, is quite obvious. It's ahead off its time, because it is brave enough to criticise society and to show us the lives of a group of people, just as they are, without sugar-coating them and not being afraid of making them sometimes unlikeable, just the way people are. The screenplay is very good. The characters are realistic and well written, and their attitudes and actions are always where they should be. The pace is just right; it's a slw movie, but always entertaining and thought provocking. The dialogs are great, and they always have double meaning, so you really have to be focused on them to get to the core of their meaning. The fact that the characters go to the movies and that's really important makes this beautiful for any movie buff. Besides, the end of the picture show, is, too, the end of an era, the death of a town.

The acting is truly amazing, by just everyone. A look, a movement, the accents, the timing and delivery are just brilliant. all the actors were perfectly cast. Timothy Bottoms underplays a sensitive, shy character, but it works and makes the movie and his character not over the top. You can feel his pain, but in a subtle, still intense, way. Jeff Bridges makes an unlikeable character have a certain grace and you can root for him. He has a good timing and his feelings are real. Cybbil Shepherd has the most amazing body language you can get. She's seductive, sweet, mean, and most of all confused, and you can see all this just by looking at her. It's a complex character, and Shepherd has just the right look and freshness for the part. You can understand her character, even if you don't particulary like her. Cloris Leachman is incredibly expressive; her character is depressed and unhappy, and she's the nicest person. She's just so eager to be loved, and her movements show it all. Ellen Burstyn is very good, her character's in a point of her life in which she's stuck, without knowing how. Ben Johnson has some good delivery and you root for his character, but it's not that great.

The direction is simple, focusing on the actors, but still brilliant. The ending, so full of meaning, Cybill Shepherd shots, the large shots, languid and beautiful, the close shots, emotional and touching and the use of light and dark. The black and white makes this nostalgic and beautiful. Overall, really impressive; ahead of its time, tackling important issues and technically impressive. It's a true classic.