"Magic in the Moonlight", Good Ol' Woody

Magic in the Moonlight

Before 2014 ends, here's our yearly date with our dear Woody Allen. Despite being a devoted fan, one has to admit the quality of his latest works is far from, sometimes light-years distant from, his better moments, and for that reason, there's a growing little fear his next attempt is going to be a serious let down, like “From Rome with Love” and “You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger”. On the other hand, even this less memorable Allen period has offered moments of genuine brilliance, with top-notch “Midnight in Paris” summoning all the talents the director has.

So where does "Magic in the Moonlight" stands? Luckily, in a much comfortable zone. Without achieving the levels of accomplishment of "Paris", but delightfully pleasant and full of undeniable charms. A lightweight affair, armed with a sweet-natured contrivance, solved without much mystery, but packed with grace, thanks to the cast and the funny (maybe not memorable) storyline, mixing magic and romance.

The plot of “Magic in the Moonlight” is pretty straightforward. Stanley Crawford (Colin Firth, playing the traditional Allen's alter ego), is a famous magician (Wei Ling-Soo), but also a realist-pessimist person (Nietzsche meeting Kierkegaard meeting Schopenhauer), skeptic and with a knack to identify a fraud when he sees one. That's exactly what his friend and also fellow magician Howard ask him to do: help him unmask Sophie Baker (played by Emma Stone), a supposed clairvoyant, who is amazing a wealthy family with her ability to guess things she couldn’t possibly know and contacting with the missed ones. As you might guess, too, Sophie is not just an intriguing woman, with Stanley slowly believing she might be a real psychic, but also an adorable one. summarized on Stanley's great one liner "Her smile is rather winning". 

Granted, you see the romantic side coming way even before the two appear on screen. Is predictable, sure, but it doesn't harm the movie as one would expect. Two obvious reasons explain why. One is the cast. It's impossible not to fall by Emma Stone impossible eyes and magnetic light in her face, with these flapper looks. And it's hard not to laugh with Colin Firth's messed up head. The skeptic collapsing, his solid way of thinking no longer valid, while neglecting he's starting to have feelings for Sophie. The dialogues between the two (funny, philosophic, flirtatious) are the highlights of the film. And they are also surrounded by a whole bunch of secondary roles that, like the memorable, almost final dialogue between Stanley and his aunt Vanessa, played by the  great Eileen Aitkins, puts the cherry on top of the cake. The Cote d'Azur impressive surroundings also does help.

The second, and luckily the main plot line of the movie is to discover whether or not Sophie is a fake, and Allen's has a far more interesting "trick" to play here, building up the mystery in a simple, yet effective way, letting the movie develop and finally, end in a well-rounded, thoroughly satisfying manner. Again, not groundbreaking or rating high among Allen’s filmography, but entertaining, smart and rather enchanting. Good ol' Woody doing some magic, again.

SCORE: 6,75/10

"Delicacy", drama, comedy & awkward love

Delicacy (La Délicatesse, French original title)

Romantic comedies (rom-coms) might be the most exploited film genre ever (scary kids announcing paranormal activities on a haunted house rank close), so it is hard to find something original or fresh on the overwhelming majority of movies on that vein released over the year. "Delicacy" might not be groundbreaking, but at least has a notable amount of charms and some remarkable freshness in its development.

"Delicacy" could have been a major disaster. It starts with the extra-cute / but cool (a bit annoying really) depiction of Nathalie's, played by the always charming Audrey Tautou, (although she looks extremely thin this time imo) life along her husband. Love, happiness, in that sort of "Amélie"'s vibe, so delightful for many, so irritating for others. But out of the blue, tragedy appears with the death of Nathalie's husband.

In a radical change of scenario, and with little information for the spectator, we see the transformation of Nathalie into a fierce executive director that buries herself (and her desolation) in work. But just when it seems we are moving towards a conventional drama until she's able to "love again" (I know, this last line is worryingly unpromising, right?) there's another drastic turn of events... and comedy makes its "apparition". 

I completely understand the critics or reviewers that claim "Delicacy" suffers from a muddled development in its storytelling. It does. The tone switches might be too much for many, and debuting directors David and Stephane Foenkinos (adapting the former's novel), are on the verge of losing a natural, credible rhythm in their narration of situations (some secondary roles doesn't help either,with their odd behaviour), leaving the viewer with a wonder of where is this story going?. But somehow they manage to emerge from that little sense of chaos.

It might be thanks to their ability of avoiding drama, presenting a very light-hearted film, the lack of pretensions (no moralizing remarks), but foremost, it's a matter of chemistry. While Tautou's is capable of giving credibility to the different states of her emotional turmoil throughout the film without losing her natural "spell", is Markus, played by the unknown (for me at least) actor François Damiens, the "Swedish" (no spoiling), who really steals the show. The directors make use of our pre-conceived notions on what sort of person "fits" the other, and building up on this flesh & bones "beauty and the beast" topic they create an unlikely romance that is quite amusing and rewarding, with several awkward moments that are really funny. When Tautou and Damiens are on screen together, the scenes look genuine. And that makes "Delicacy" a pleasant "ride".

Overall, a film with charms that overcomes its erratic pacing and weak structure with the great, effortless charisma and chemistry of their leading couple. A bit bland and confusing (these unnecessary dramatic scenes near the end), but also quite entertaining and pleasant.
SCORE: 6/10

EardrumsPop & Young Romance= glorious indie-pop

ePop022- Young Romance

Any indie-pop lover knows that each time EardrumsPop announces a new release, it's time to go to their website and let your ears celebrate their (nearly immaculate) taste. But in this occasion, there was even more anticipation than usual, as the band featured in their ePop022 is Young Romance, a band already discovered on this blog, and one that got me completely haunted with just a bunch of songs. I was anxiously looking for their next step, and here it is, in the form of an  EardrumsPop EP. What a wonderful combination!

Previous tunes like "Swollen Hearts, Bitter Tongues" or "She, Me, Him and You" proved this London duo had a very special talent to inject a burst of real emotion and passion to their sweetest, utterly romantic indie-pop tunes. It seemed impossible to achieve, but with this EP they have reached a new level, Paolo and Claire have penned a couple of perfect songs.  

"Follow on Your Own" is sublime: slow burning verses, killer chorus where Claire's voice is disarming, a background of layers and fuzziness. Definitely one to rank among the best-songs-of-the-year list. And is followed closely by "Break My Heart By Morning". Listening Young Romance's tunes one has to believe Paolo's words (you can read them on the digital booklet also included on the EP) of "wanting their songs to capture the rush of feeling something for the very first time". Indeed.

Unfortunately, "Rose Tint", the song Young Romance chose to cover (the tradition of the EardrumsPop EPs is to cover a song the featured group considers it deserves more attention), from the group Lulu and the Lampshades (now just Landshapes), passes almost unnoticed. An ok song nevertheless, but pales by comparison with the couple of terrific songs. Oh! And if I may add another little complaint: unfortunately, the artwork doesn't do any justice to the beauty of this EP. Being completely honest, it is very close to be on the next Stop Awful Covers post. 

But let's concentrate on the positive. EardrumsPop did it again. A stunning free!!!! EP from Young Romance, a lovely duo that makes gorgeous indie-pop. Run (virtually) and grab it (Odd box Records will release a physical, limited edition of the single, cheers for that too!).

SCORE: 7,5/10

Listen them!!

Young Romance by Young Romance

"The Artist", is recreation an art?

The Artist

And finally, I was able to watch "The Artist", the great success of the 2012's Oscars Ceremony, and outstandingly acclaimed by a majority of critics. Undeservedly, in my opinion.

"The Artist" brings, again, an interesting debate to the table. Is recreation an art? Because that's what this film is. A stunning, really well done and packed one if you want, but still a mere recreation. Its not the first time I'm writing this. "Drive" was an hyper-cool recreation of noir 80s film. "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy" another one, this time with the 70s spy-films. Cinema is exploiting this to a horrid extent, showing without any shame their despicable lack of ideas. How many remakes have you seen in the last 10 years?

Recreations are not only a matter of cinema, though. Think on music, for example. Garage, soul, r&b, nowadays the 90s' indie, they are/have been on top of the "trend"... How many bands have tried to sound like The Strokes debut? Like Belle and Sebastian? Like Pavement? It's even understandable, simple to understand why. Younger generations "weren't there" when these bands existed or where on their "highest peak", and is always easier to "connect" with a band you can watch or follow while you grow up. Everyone has one to fall for. I openly admit mine is falling, or at least paying attention, to any band that resembles a bit to Joy Division. But let's go back to movies, where the technical advances makes the recreation even more attractive, with new possibilities. No wonder why producers are eager to put their money on a "remake" or a film devoted to recreate a particular style. There's way less financial risk, in their heads at least. But aren't we missing what made movies, or music, relevant? Aren't we missing the content?

"The Artist" is not a bad film. It's wonderfully presented, and in that sense, all the technical awards are more than welcomed. In my opinion, director Michel Hazanavicius did a great job in his attempt of create an engaging "game" of references: "Citizen Kane", "A Star is Born", "Sunset Boulevard", the "Vertigo" score, the "cute" dog like Chaplin's, the musicals... I already said it, the recreation part is superb. As a referential, nostalgic exercise, "The Artist" is outstanding. But as a film in its own, its seriously flawed, a really shallow one. It uses a gimmick, in this case doing a film, entirely, like a silent one, as a excuse for not working on the plot. And a gimmick can't stand being used for almost 100 minutes, not even if you are telling the story of a silent movie star.  

Ok, so "The Artist" cannot be judged within the terms of contemporary movies because its an homage of silent cinema, and its struggle against the apparition of sound. Well, if that's the case, thanks progress from bringing us the sound. How silly was silent cinema if "The Artist" is such an unforgettable rendition of that era. Were silent movies that superficial? Because in here there's a huge lack of depth in the script, in particular with their characters. Something to be blamed for, considering the premise.

This is the story of Gene Valentin, played by Jean Dujardin. He is great as the caricature of a silent movie actor, with constant overly exaggerated facial expressions and "mugs" for the camera to get their point across. But is just that: a caricature. He's not the one to blame for, but he does nothing to save his character from being unidimensional. Its success, unrealized love affair, struggle against progress in cinema, utter desperation, etc, is completely unrealistic, seems Hazanavicius just wanted to include drama, comedy and romance for the sake of it (again, if that's part of the homage, he's doing little favour to the silent cinema era). Just a matter of whether the spectator find this amusing enough to not care about the fact there's no information regarding the plot, zero development regarding characters, and that he/she would be the only responsible to add/include any meaning to the actions of the main actors.

So, if you are looking for a nostalgic but contemporary, lush and technically flawless recreation of the silent cinema era, "The Artist" will please you. Granted. But if you are looking for a sounding, solid film that basically tells an interesting story... look somewhere else. "The Artist" is empty, leaving aside how it looks. And cinema shouldn't be empty, I believe.

SCORE: 5/10

"The Rum Diary", Depp's failed homage to Dr. Gonzo

The Rum Diary

I'm a devoted fan of Hunter S.Thompson, and therefore I loved "The Rum Diary", the novel. Knowing the friendship between Johnny Depp and the Dr. Gonzo, and the personal interest the box office star had on the project, I was really expecting to watch the film. Unfortunately, and although it might work as an entertaining movie, occasionally eccentric, doesn't meet the expectations.

To me it is hard to relate the majority of the film with the book Hunter wrote. It seems to me Johnny Depp's and director's Bruce Robinson main focus was to serve an homage to the writer and American counterculture icon. But I highly doubt the Dr. Gonzo would have liked a tribute that looks and has all elements of a Hollywood blockbuster. A bit of comedy, a romance, a serious plot taken in a very lightweight way, a hero (a bit unusual, but a hero nevertheless) and a happy ending.

If I remember correctly (and I'm pretty sure I do), "The Rum Diary" wasn't a romantic story, which makes the whole affair with Chénault (sorry to say, but Amber Heard role is completely empty) a bit...excessive. Quite frankly, to me the novel was a quite dark one, where drugs, booze, surreal and very dangerous situations gave the tone of an explosive dark comedy. But as I understand from Hunter's literature, behind the grotesque, there was a quite depressive vision of the world. Not to mention that Hunter's period in Puerto Rico was frustrating for him. Something the movie doesn't show at all.  

More worrying issues while watching the movie (comparing it to the book). The disappearing of Yemon's character. The almost irrelevant importance of the "San Juan Star" environment, in particular the local bar (Al's), which on the book was the place where all the newspaper staff gathered and wasted their time. And painfully, the end, miles away from the novel, and really really flat.

Ok, if obviously failed as and adaptation/homage, then let me try to review quickly  "The Rum Diary" just as a film, as if I didn't know anything about Hunter and his novel. Then this is sort of an adventure movie, with an unlikely hero, journalist Paul Kemp (Hunter's alter ego), played with Johnny Depp, who does an ok job, an  impressive cast to benefit from, but sadly not developed to their entire potential, something to regret having great actors as Aaron Eckhart, Richard Jenkins and Giovanni Ribisi, an awkward tone and a plot that weights, with serious problems of balancing, between a political/corruption case and a romance (with loads of alcohol), with director's Robinson deciding to go for the easy one. Did I say the end is flat and disappointing? 

Don't get me wrong. Overall, "The Rum Diary" is not a bad film, but it is unremarkable, and in my opinion, it is fair to say the potential of Hunter's story has been a bit too much for director's Robinson, resulting in a very far from the homage the Doctor Gonzo deserves.  

SCORE: 5,25/10

"Remember Me", an unforgettably disastrous film

Remember Me

Sometimes reviewing a film shouldn't take long. In five words: "Remember Me" is a disaster. As a person who works with human rights daily, I defend that no one, with independence of his/her crimes, should be punished watching this. I have many arguments to justify my "thesis".

"Remember Me" fails in every category you can imagine. First and foremost, the script. From the very beginning when Tyler Hawkins (Robert Pattinson, also executive producer of the film) meets Ally (Lost' actress Emilie de Ravin) the movie is just a blatant collection of clichés and nonsense that results in an obvious and very serious problem of balance and condemns the characters to an erratic and incoherent behaviour. There are some one-liners that go directly to the "twilight zone" category. Here's my top three: 1.At a very fancy restaurant, where the couple have lunch with Tyler's father (Pierce Brosnan), said by Ally regarding her mother's death; 2. Ally again, at their first proper date, about why she orders ice-cream first; and 3. A very profound dialogue (Pattinson with that permanent appalled infinite-looking pose) between the two lovers that goes like this (Tyler): "I'm undecided". (Ally) “About what?".(Tyler) "Everything". Honestly, what the hell was (Will Fetters) the writer thinking? And it goes worse, much worse, at the end.

As a direct consequence of that, the acting is weak, with specially huge question marks on the starring couple: it is just the script or Robert Pattinson and Emilie de Ravin are such bad actors? I incline myself for the first option, but seeing the "vampire" move from pose to pose is annoying (sorry Rob, you're not precisely James Dean) makes me doubt. It is not a problem of leading characters. Pierce Brosnan is a corporate-ceo caricature and even a very good actor like Chris Cooper looks pretty silly on his role.

Oh wait! Maybe it is not the script or/and the acting. Maybe is just the editing process of the film what fails, because you'll have the feeling, regularly, that scenes are brutally sequenced, disconnected. That makes the film rythm awkward and its development highly uncredible. Everything looks artificial, constructed, so there's zero emotional impact as a result. And considering the heavy subjects of this romantic drama, death, romance, family relations, bullying, divorce, disconnection with the world, and particularly the way it ends, that's an unforgivable mistake.

And finally, did I mention the end is bad? Sorry to insist, but it is. Atrociously bad. No matter what they say, it's an unnecessary twist. Worse, it's a tricky twist, one that wants to be compelling using a real tragedy.

My obvious recommendation, and taking advantage of director's Allen's Coulter ("The Sopranos", "Boardwalk Empire", "Hollywoodland") too evident message with this film, let's live the (precious) moment. Choose something else to do instead of watching this.

SCORE: 1,25/10

"Soul Kitchen", a fresh and delicious light comedy

Soul Kitchen

After seeing the very solid, intense and heavy fuelled dramas "Head-On" (Gegen die Wand) and "The Edge of Heaven" (Auf der Anderen Seite), I was really curious to see what would be the approach of Fatih Akin to comedy, his first being "Soul Kitchen", a lightweight, love-and-life story located in the docks of Hamburg, with a gastronomical pretext.

We could say the movie is a fast-paced feel-good comedy, and if we scratch a bit beyond the surface, the plot is not very original and some questions towards the end are resolved in a quite unbelievable way. But by the time these "issues" may arrive, you should be irresistibly attracted by the "delicious menu" this very peculiar restaurant is offering you.

The actors are capable to give their characters some genuine and hard-to-find charm to their roles. The rhythm of the film is excellent, dynamic and engaging. The way it is filmed and a few twists in the plot serve the purpose of adding a slight touch of surrealism. Something that also applies to the locations and, of course, to the soundtrack (the groovy and interesting music is also an important actor in the film).

An intelligent, not groundbreaking, but fresh and particularly charming movie.

SCORE: 6,5/10