I read all the 27 reviews for this film on IMDb. I feel most of them cover most of what I feel about this film yet I can’t make my mind completely about it. I won’t call it a great film because it clearly has many flaws but it’s a good film nevertheless. It’s good because it scares you. I loved watching The Tenant by Roman Polanski for the first time but its effect faded a bit after repeated viewings because after all it was not as wonderful as I thought it was when I first watched it. I think I’ve watched Repulsion too but can’t recall even a single scene from it. Darling is kind of homage to those films as per many reviewers on IMDb but I beg to differ. I feel certain elements are not fresh at all but film has its own uniqueness too. Strobe images of lead in many limited angles, claustrophobic atmosphere, screeching noises and dull staring into camera are both annoying and scaring at times. The film is scary and you may say it uses confusion, jump-scares, strobe effects to achieve it, yet it succeeds in creating tension. Until halfway through it I considered it to be slow and dull but by the end I thought it was scary in parts and confused in others. Continue reading “Darling(2015)”
Equus is a very graphic film. It has a rare story. The writer Peter Shaffer came across a news while travelling english countryside where a stable boy had blinded six horses. He made a play out of it. This play was later adapted into a screenplay by him and Sidney Lumet directed a gripping horror mystery which keeps haunting you even long after you have finished watching it.
Francois Ozon’s film is a voyeuristic masterpiece. A teacher of French literature is bored with talentless students in his middle school before he comes across a student who has something different in his essays: a first hand observation of a friend’s house where he has long wanted to enter. The teacher not only keeps checking his essays but starts guiding him under his personal tutelage for better writing and gives way to his student in doing what he has been driven to do. He goes as far as stealing papers of another subject to help him out in his plans to enter in the house and stay there as his essays become more and more riveting chapters of a novel!
It’s a film too good to be believable. The incredibly beautiful plot is full of serendipity. This film is a wonderful journey of adventure with many layers of mystery. The cinematography is superb. Editing is perfect and performances are excellent.
John Voight, Sigourney Weaver, Shia Labeouf and other kids have performed remarkably well in this film. Beautiful Patricia Arquette learned riding horses especially for shooting of this film–she has done amazing in role of kissing kate barlow. Louis Sachar’s screenplay which is based on his own novel, is, one of the best screenplays ever written in my opinion.
A kid is sent to a juvenile facility for a crime he didn’t commit. Continue reading “Holes(2003)”
Solaris is a science fiction classic. It’s an Andrei Tarkovsky film. I’ve to admit that I’ve not seen many films by the director –the reason being that his Stalker bored me to the core. Though he has an impeccable reputation as a director who presented visual poetry with existential questions on big screen. This film is a testimony to his reputation and much more. I feel that it’s a film in the league of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey. It was made 4 years after that film and they have many similarities–visual poetry with existential themes being the first and foremost.
The film moves with a very slow pace which is a telltale Tarkovsky mark. But whatever is presented in first few frames seems like a beautiful poetry–visually stunning. The dialogues throughout the movie switch between being philosophical to being personal hogwash but they keep you interested. The traffic scene in the beginning which shows how advanced science is in that age–a person can do a visual call while driving without any need to steer the vehicle or care about the traffic, which moves smoothly because of the complete mechanization-is fascinating albeit a bit slow. The supposition is that in such a traffic there are no accidents because highest efficiency has been reached–or at least I thought so.
The climax where Kelvin is still fighting his demons off on Solaris ocean which has evolved now to develop its islands which replicate his memories, is somewhat unexpected twist, since audience supposes that Kelvin leaves the Solaris and comes back to the Earth once replications of his wife stop happening after the encephalogram experiment’s success. The rain inside the house keeps audience wondering–is he dreaming? Is it Earth, or is it Solaris–why is it not raining outside while it’s raining inside the house? These questions keep pressing upon you even when film is over.
A psychologist is sent to a space station far off from earth in order to investigate why crew members went insane. He finds out that only two of them are alive but starts noticing some strange things. He then meets the clone of his wife and finds himself in a great dilemma–whether to get rid of this clone or to love her as he loved his wife. This gives the film an existential bend. It’s a mystery–a slow mystery only till interval–Solaris part 1–the second part mostly offers philosophical questions and psychoanalysis of the psychologist. The film is a wonderful experience in my opinion–if you’ve some patience for slow but visually stunning films–you should go for it. It mentions the Greek mythological character Sisyphus, insinuating towards eternal hell, which reminded me of 2009 film Triangle where similar replication is witnessed. Timecrimes, a science-fiction film also has certain similar elements.
image courtesy: here