2012

We were warned,
so what???

First, he send the aliens to attack our earth,
then, he adopt Godzilla from Japan to destroy New York,
years later, he froze the world.

After a huge failure of '10,000 BC' , Roland Emmerich use his trademark movie 'Independence Day' and 'The Day After Tomorrow' again to promote his new movie.
Another action disaster blockbuster,
this time he apply the 2012 phenomenon which is predicted by Ancient Mayan.

I knew Roland Emmerich style, always wana make American looks patriotic, and he likes to inject family values in his movie.
I like 'Independence Day', the story is so fresh, it was a classic!!!
But 'The Day After Tomorrow' is totally plotless, he just want to destroy the world for the sake of satisfying his audiences.

Hey, I know not everyone cares about the story, moral values and message.
Some people just like to see disaster movie, they just want to get viewing pleassure, and I understand that.
But come on, atleast put some effort in scriptwriting please!!!
THIS IS LAZY!!!

Same old shit in 'The Day After Tomorrow' and 'War of The World', another divorced or broken family unite together again because of the end of world.
THIS IS BORING!!!
2012 pheonomenon is something big, it's gotta be something sensational.

It is so near from us, like it's going to happen tomorrow.
Mayan prediction and Mesoamerican Long Count Calendar, are some really interesting issues!!!
This is the only reason why I want to watch '2012', because I wish that this movie would has a distinction with other disaster movie. (well, atleast with other Roland Emmerich's movies)

In the end, I am dissapointed, but still, I knew this is going to happen.
165minutes feature-time is too long, too draggy for a boring story like this.
He spend too much time to build-up the characters and plot, but in the end, the characters development are still weak and the story still sucks!!!

After I watch the movie, I really think that movie like 'War of The World' and 'Knowing' wasnt that bad you know.
'War of The World' has been criticized for its ending, but atleast Spielberg's skill is still maintain in many scenes.

'Knowing' has been criticized for its ending too, and the sudden 'application' of aliens to dissolve the myth.
But atleast the plane crash long take scene is massive, the ending scene with the great Beethoven's Symphony 7 is absolutely beautiful....

But '2012' is effortless, and it doesnt make any sense.
I know no one can predict the future and the end of world, I can't really describe the picture, but I am sure that it is not going to happen in this way!!!
Come on, great flood???
Animals aboard???
Vessel???
NOAH's ARK???

I think Roland Emmerich has forgotten the sign of rainbow, haha, he is gay anyway....
Ok, no personal attack, but the great flood's idea is really stupid.
It proved that 2012 phenomenon is just a tool for Roland Emmerich to destroy the earth.
The whole movie has nothing to do with Mayan's prediction and 2012 phenomenon!!!
If you insist you want to watch another disaster movie (with no surprise), you will not be dissapointed perhaps....

I saw and heard the crowd response in the cinema, and obviously, they did not pay attention to the movie when the characters are talking.
They only enjoy the movie when they see the massive disaster scene with crazy CGI (which I admit it is very good, well....atleast better than 10,000 BC).

The moment John Cusack hug his children and kiss his ex-wife, I feel nothing at all....
Don't get me wrong, I am not cool-blooded mammal....
But seriously, the feeling and mood is NOT THERE!!!

All the filmmakers want, is to give viewing pleassure,
and all the audiences want, is to receive this plessure....
No point!!!

In future, we don't even need real filmmakers to make movie,
all we need is graphics, computer and effects genius!!!
After all, I miss Michael Bay's 'Armageddon'.
I know Ben Affleck and Liv Tyler sucks, but still, the whole movie is so exciting.

and one last thing,
Michael Bay use fire!!!

Inglourious Basterds

Two assassin plans to kill Nazis leaders,
one by a French Jewish cinema owner,
another by a group of American soldiers called 'Basterds'


An anticipated new Tarantino's film, as I am a huge fans of him.
I can watch Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, Kill Bill again and again but never get bored.

Inglourious Bastreds is pretty good, but if compared with Tarantino's previous movies,
there is no surprise, and there is nothing to cheer.

His style is still there, but the brilliant non-linear story-telling technique is gone, very dissapointing....
No iconic trunk shot, no long take in close-up shot, and....

No Uma Thurman,
which I believe her role is being replaced by a young French actress Melanie Laurent.
I guess if Uma Thurman is going to act in Inglourious Basterds, Melanie Laurent's role is definitely hers.

Whatsoever, Melanie Laurent is younger,and she did a good job in the movie,
especially in the scene where she holds her tears when she is talking to the 'Jew Hunter'.

The feeling of sadness and revenge, Melanie Laurent handle the expression better than Uma Thurman in Kill Bill.
But regarding to the character development, Tarantino definitely put more effort on Uma Thurman.

Christoph Waltz, who act as the 'Jew Hunter', a clever and charming detective,
present an awesome show for us!!!
Tarantino's claims that his character, Hans Landa, is probably the greatest character he ever written. ( I think it is)

He steal the show everytime he appear, he control the situation, he manipulate the scene!!!
He deserved Cannes Best Actor Award.

Another man to watch~~~Brad Pitt~~~the Hollywood superstar.
Okay, nothing much to comment on his acting all this while, but I really like his show in this movie.
His funny American accent, and his character....very well-done!!!

Diane Kruger's acting is.....poor???
well....average lar.....okie???
Mike Myer's cameo doesnt really boost up the excitement....

Back to Tarantino,
oh I miss the brilliant messy plot,
I miss the violence art,
I miss the fantastic title for each chapter....

Anyway, he still maintain his strength to handle a scene, everything is well-planned.
The script, the mise-en-scene, the gun-fight entry.
He can really drag a single simple scene to become very entertaining and interesting.

The conversation is long, and mindless.
But I like it!!!
That's Tarantino film, I simply can't resist his charm in the movie,
for no reason, and I just can't explain why....

And also, Tarantino like to do something unexpected....
We didnt see much in this movie, but personally I didnt expect Hitler will die....

After Brad Pitt is being captured and Melanie Laurent is being killed, I really thought that this is gonna be another failed attempt to kill The Fuhrer after 'Valkyrie', starring by Tom Cruise.

Lastly, is the music he used,
I can't tell you how much I love it....
you'll know why if you watched Kill Bill before!!!

So far, Inglourious Basterds is the best movie in 2009.

The Pianist

Music has his passion,

survival has his masterpiece.

The Pianist is one of the most incredible holocaust movie I have ever watch.
Powerful plot, massive setting, and great cinematography.

Adrien Brody act as a Jewish-Polish pianist, Wladyslaw Szpilman,
who suffer in WW2 when Nazis Germany occupied Warsaw.

Polish director Roman Polanski is a master in this movie, he really create a terrify atmosphere in order to allow audience to feel the cruelty and merciless of Nazis, and I am sure you will be amazed by many shocking scenes in the movie.

A well-written script gives Szpilman a good character development.
The opening scene has just shown us the passion of Szpilman towards music, he keeps on playing his music even when the radio station is bombed and the technician has left the building.

Szpilman's respect to the music can be seen in the scene where he was interupted by the restaurant's guest, his reaction has shown us how much he loves music....and piano....

The scene where he saw a piano in the hiding place, he dare not to play the piano because of afraid being discovered.
But he played the piano in his mind and imagine himself is in an orchestra performance.
This is really heartbreaking....as we can see his passion keeps him alive....

Szpilman's character is so real, he is just an ordinary man that afraid of Nazis, he could not fight with his fellow Jews rebels.
He apologize and beg to the Nazis when he need to, he just want to live....
He looks like a coward, but no...he is not....

His conversation with lady actress shown that how much he wish to join the rebels....
but he always remain rational and realize his own capability...
he is a musician....he cannot fight....

The scene where he attempt to open the canned food is so pitty....
Can you imagine how hungry he was at that moment?
He got a canned food, but he couldnt find a can opener....

Now, the Nazi officer Wilm Hosenfeld see the inhumanity and the pointless of war....
right in front of him, stood a Jews....
both of them were stunned....because they do not know how to react and what to say at that moment.....

Then, Hosenfeld ask Szpilman to play a music....
its funny to see Hosenfeld's reaction when he realize Szpilman is playing Chopin's composition, as later it was revealed that he is the one who played Beethoven's Moonlight Sonata in earlier scene.

Now....we can see the idea of juxtaposition from their selection of music composer,
because Szpilman choose Chopin's (Polish) and Hosenfeld choose Beethoven's (German).

If you noticed, the second lady who helped hiding Szpilman, played Bach's music as well by cello.
In that scene, Szpilman expose himself to German composer's music.
But now, it is Hosenfled's turn to expose himself to a Polish composer's music.
Both of them tends to accept each other's culture, art and music....
Roman Polanski is brilliant here in giving audiences a hidden meaning message!!!

Another fantastic scene is where Szpilman found that Hosenfeld has give him a loaf of bread, strawberry jam, and can opener.
The way Szpilman taste the jam and lick his finger, its like he is having orgasm....(sorry being rude here....)

But my point is, Adrien Brody is fabulous here....
he can really act!!!
Oh God....
the satisfaction of tasting strawberry jam!!!

How wondeful...
Now I can always remember this scene when I eat my bread with strawberry jam....

There are many many other fantastic scenes in the movie....
I really cannot mentioned everything here....its TOO MANY!!!

Anyway, this is gotta be my favourite holocaust movie....
A must watch!!!

The Man Who Wasn't There

The last thing on his mind is murder.

2001 film by Coen Bros.
This is a must watch noir because it is nearly perfect.

It is not difficult to recognize Coen Bros. style,
because their story-telling technique are always brilliant.

I watch No Country For Old Men and Paris Jet'aime before, I like it.
But, I have to say, I prefer The Man Who Wasn't There very very much more.

The highly praised No Country For Old Men is a boring movie for average audience, most of the scenes are silent and Coen Bros minimize the use of score.

But The Man Who Wasn't There is a beautiful movie,
Beethoven's Piano Sonata sounds just fine and fit to every single scenes in the movie.

One thing that impressed me the most is the cinematography.
I never see a movie that the camera works so clean and neat.
The movement, the angle can really capture your attention.
Very straightforward, very smooth, very masterful.

Billy Bob Thornton's acting is fantastic in this movie,
and his voice is really sexy (I hate to use this word) for a film noir narration.

"Me, I don't talk much....I just cut the hair."

How cool?

Yeah, he act as a barber in the movie,
and it is memorable that he was smoking everytime he appear in his scene.
He did mention some great metaphors about hair, very meaningful.

Tony Shalhoub (Monk) who acted as the expensive lawyer, has steal the show everytime he talk.
It's like Edward G.Robinson's character in Double Indemnity.

Scarlett Johansson takes a supporting role in the movie, not bad.
Everytime she plays the piano, and the music come in, it takes your breath away.

UFO are mildly shown in the movie.
Frankly I am not really sure what is the intention and motive behind that, but for a black&white film noir, this is something unique, something exaggerate, which gives a big contrast with the rest of the scenes, and it add color to the movie.

This movie is originally filmed in color and transferred back to black&white.
I am not sure how did they do that, and why did they do that.

Did Spielberg filmed Schindler's List in color during shooting process?

Anyway, for me, this movie is a must watch, it is excellent,
everything you can see from the movie, the props and set, are so accurate to the time frame.

If I tell you this is a 1940 film, I am sure you will believe that!!!
But well, unless you can recognize the movie stars.

Another great film comes in to my favourite movies' list,
this is very stylish and amazing!

The Butterfly Effect

A young man who suffer memory black out,

is able to travel in time supernaturally everytime he read his diary.

It is always a bad idea to 'travel in time', you can easily found weakness and hole in the plot.
Lake House starring by Sandra Bullock and Keanu Reeves is the best fucked up example.
But Heroes did it brilliantly!!!
Scriptwriting for these kind of story is very hard, it kills your brain cell, and it usually end up in a big mess.

But what so brilliant about Butterfly Effect is, the movie success to avoid these complex concept but yet remain the excitement of 'travel in time' idea.

The story put the characters into a painful childhood, a fucked up teenage life.
By doing that, the director have a very huge space to spin here and there, twist here and there.

As we can see, there are many childhood and teenage memories that allow Ashton Kutcher to move forward and move backward freely.
Oh yeah, this movie is starring by Aston Kutcher, my favourite actor, I simply love him.

It is hard for me to put aside his comedian image, but damn....
He can really act in Butterfly Effect!!!
In my opinion, this is his best movie ever.

Back to the story, basically it's all about how a young man trying to clean up his mess cause by his teenage life.
He has a supernatural ability to travel in time, and he is able to redo his past and try to fix things in order to please everyone he had hurt.
But things never turned perfect, everytime he changes something for a good intention, someone he love (his mum, his friend, his childhood sweetheart) have to suffer.

The story drag Ashton Kutcher from one miserable situation to another,
and it is really sad to see the person you love suffer so much,
but you can't play the role as God to rescue them.

But one thing very special about his character is, he is able to 'possess' his own body when he travel back to the past, and travel back to the present.
What I am saying is, when he travelled back to his childhood, he is still he himself, the young and mature man.
And when he travel back to the present days, he still able to keep his memory for what he have changed and done.

Does this contradict to his memory black out background?
I am not really sure.
If Im not mistaken, in the present days, he mentioned that he has 7 years without memory black out.
Has he fully recover?

But the thing is, his character himself does contradict to the butterfly effect.
If you have change something in the past, you should remember the past, but you definitely wont remember that you have fixed the past, right???

But after all, the female fortune teller told us, Ashton Kutcher's character do not have a soul, and he do not have a lifeline in this world, right???
Does this make the story reasonable???

Well, this is just a movie, ofcourse it is fun to think about it,
but even if you didnt, that does not spoil the entertainment.

All of these concepts and ideas, screetching back and forward, consequences and situation,
are simply a naughty story-telling technique by scriptwriters to play around with audiences mind and brain!!!

There are several alternative ending for the movie, I am not sure which one is the theatrical's version.

Spoiler alert:


First ending ,I like it where Ashton Kutcher kill himself when he was still a fetus.
This is clever. It shows that everyone in his life can live happily without him.

But back to his mum, she lost her baby once again,
does this pain equal to her pain to see his son lost his arms?
What I am saying is, this does not make any differences you know....
His mum could feel bad and get sick again.

But the director quickly end the movie by showing montage of happily ever after.
This does not allow audiences to think.
So, it seems like the ending is perfect, but frankly I think it is not, anyway I still like it.


Second ending is Ashton Kutcher travel back in childhood to break up with his childhood sweetheart.
This is a very logic ending. Nothing special.
But well, does that resolve his childhood sweetheart from being abused by her father?
You see, things can't be perfect, but the movie can make it happen.

Others ending are basically caused by this incident, where Ashton Kutcher meet his childhood sweetheart again on the street....and this is what going to happen....

1. He stalk her.
2. He ask her for a coffee.
3. He does nothing and continue walking.

All of these ending suggests that he still remember the girl, but he is not pretty sure about that.

1492: Conquest of Paradise

A 1992 Ridley Scott's movie,

tells the story of Christopher Columbus's discovery of New World.

500 years after Columbus' voyage, director Ridley Scott present this movie to gave us a breathtaking adventure's experience!

Ridley Scott is one of my favourite director, since I have watched Gladiator.
His movie is always beautiful and glorious!!!

Once again collaborate with Greek gifted composer Vangelis, since Blade Runner.

His concern to the score and music theme shown the role of sound in his movie.

From Vangelis to Hans Zimmer, from Blade Runner to Hannibal,

Ridley Scott often care about the music used in his film.

'Vide Cor Meum' has been used in both Hannibal and Kingdom of Heaven.

This shows how stubborn Ridley Scott is, his principle, his style, his passion....

The movie had a poor box office performance, I'm not sure why.

But personally, I like this movie so much.

Ridley Scott presents his visually beautiful and unique surreal cinematography technique!!!

I would say this movie is one of the most underrated movie ever.

One of Ridley Scott's earlier film, but his directing skill is very mature.

Story-telling and character development is very good.

People might argue that the feature time is too long and the plot is weak and overall boring.

But I think it is really difficult to tell a story of one great person in a movie.

The only weakness of this movie is the poor acting.

Wrong casting for Columbus.

I can see the main actor's effort, but it is just not enough to credit him as a great actor in this movie.

When you ask people about '1492: Conquest of Paradise', I bet most of them will think about Vangelis and his soundtrack, instead of the movie itself.

This music is absolutely a classic, a superior and powerful theme, a masterpiece!!!

The choir's voice and Vangelis's music weapon can take your soul away....

The effect and influence of this main theme is undeniable.

The music even guide us to construct Ridley Scott's shot, and allow us to imagine Ridley Scott's surreal scene.

A great music that beat a great movie!!!

A great composer that beat a great director!!!

This is how I'm gonna conclude my review.

Angels and Demons

Battle between Angels and Demons.

Conflicts between Catholic Church and Illuminati.

Dispute between Religion and Science.

A less controversial film adaptation from Dan Brown's novel.
Ron Howard treat the movie Angels and Demons as the sequel to the movie Da Vinci Code, although the book Angels and Demons was published before the book Da Vinci Code.

But throughout the whole movie, you cannot find any cliffhanger or bridge that reminds you about Da Vinci Code.
Tom Hanks reprises his role as Robert Langdon, is the only character remain.

Ofcourse, there are still some controversial issues in the story, but the way these issues present is not as harsh as Da Vinci Code.
As I always said, it's about questioning the fundamental truth of the religion, or not.
Da Vinci Code did that, but Angels and Demons did not.

So, personally I think it is fair to say that Angels and Demons is not an anti-Catholic film, because Robert Langdon never denied the existance of God.
The funny thing is, it is Robert Langdon who proved the conspiracy of Jesus Christ; this time comes to protect the church and pope, along with a beautiful scientist.
Moreover, the priest (Ewan McGregor) made a fair comment to support both science and religion.

Allright, let us now put aside the religion issue and just compare the movie Da Vinci Code, and the movie Angels and Demons.
Even though I do not see this movie is a direct-sequel to Da Vinci Code, but I think it is usual to compare these both movies, since they were film adaptations from the same novel author, directed by the same movie diretor, and lead by the same actor.

Novel fans think Da Vinci Code did not success to capture the interesting details of the novel.
I think the plot is very messy, too much of unnecessary story-line.

But, Angels and Demons is a harmless, comfortable, and entertaining movie.
After the failure of Da Vinci Code, Ron Howard learned from the lesson and makes Angels and Demons become a face-pace movie.
All of the important details and the essence of the novel remained in the movie, which is a good thing I believe.

The plot is solid and smooth, more action sequences....
There is no time for you to take a breath, because the clock is ticking and the bomb is going to explode in Vatican.
Tom Hanks (with a better hairstyle) do not have any room to flirting around with the pretty actress, and he simply do not have any extra time to meet an old friend and argue with him.

One similiar thing between Da Vinci Code and National Treasure (as I mentioned in January's entry) is how the way the clues being discovered and how the secret being revealed, it is very entertaining.
But this time, Angels and Demons did not surprise me or WOW me, perhaps these techniques are not fresh anymore.

Everyone around Tom Hanks looks like a fool and idiot, he got a team formed by Swiss Guard and Catholic Church to back him up.
But in the end, we can only see a Robert Langdon one man show.

*spoiler alert*

The worse thing is, priest Camerlengo (Ewan McGregor) can alone direct the whole conspiracy drama, with just a little help from an assassin.
He can cheat the whole Catholic Church by giving them an old enemy, Illuminati.

Now what? Tom Hanks VS Ewan McGregor?
I mean, how can he do that???
he is too brilliant, which is very ridiculous....impossible....

Worse come to worst in the twist,
his plan moves so smooth all this while and he nearly success, but in the end he is defeated by what you know?

Not Holy Grail,
not ancient scrolls,
not Robert Langdon's brain.....

but is CCTV....what the hell....

I don't know how the novel ends the story, but personally I think this idea is very stupid. (no offense to novel fans)
Come on, you knew hell a lot of Catholic Church history and you got the whole Vatican Library to back you up, but in the end it is the CCTV to fuck you up?

What Dan Brown wants to prove? Technology can defeat religion knowledge???
:D

CCTC? omg....this often happen in HongKong's cheap and low cost TV dramas.
This does not show how clever Robert Langdon is...to discover a CCTV....

Come on, this is Dan Brown, his fans think he is the most creative author of the world, I think he is a clever person too. But how can he ends the story just like that???

Anyway, frankly I don't know is this Dan Brown's idea or Ron Howard's idea, scriptwriter perhaps? anyone care to correct me???

If you really like Da Vinci Code (regarding to any elements), and you tends to find something similiar in Angels and Demons, you will be dissapointed.

Once again, music plays a vital part in Dan Brown's film adaptation.
Hans Zimmer develop the "Chevaliers de Sangreal" of Da Vinci Code as the main theme in Angels and Demons.
Not as epic as last movie, but it is much more peaceful and sorrow.

Pearl Harbor

2001 war film based on true event--
Empire of Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor.

Directed by Michael Bay
Produced by Jerry Bruckheimer
Music by Hans Zimmer

My friends who know me well, probably knew these three fellows are always my favourite filmmakers.
The chemical effects between them is clearly seen in "The Rock".

Jerry Bruckheimer pair up with Michael Bay for the third time since "The Rock" and "Armageddon".
But "Pearl Harbor" is a huge dissapointment.

This movie proves a fact that action movie director should not direct a war film.
Same mistake repeat by John Woo in "Windtalkers".

Two worst things in this movie is the screenplay and acting.

The essense of history in Pearl Harbor event is totally gone.
It's all fucked up by the triangle relationship between Ben Affleck, Josh Hartnett, and Kate Beckinsale.

If you divide this movie into parts according to plot by feature time, you will find how draggy the script is.

First part, it's all about romantic and "touching"(not for me) love story.
Feature time: 90minutes
Comment: Boring!!!

Second part, attack on Pearl Harbor.
Feature time: 30minutes
Comment: Michael Bay showed his character. Not bad....great sounds effect and editing!!!!

Third part, American revenge....and.....unresolved love conflicts.
Feature time: 60minutes
Comment: Oh no, not again!!!

There is lack of historical facts, truth and real characters portrayed in the movie.
The footage is a waste and doesnt really concern with the plot.

The love triangle itself can already be made for another movie independantly.
It is a waste because Pearl Harbor's attack is a huge event in world history, but unluckily audiences cannot get any meaningful message from the movie.

3hours is absolutely draggy, and suffering.
The 30minutes bombing scene is well-done but it didnt advance the plot.
It can only shows how talented Michael Bay is to explode buildings and ships.

Another poor thing in this movie is the bad acting.
Ben Affleck is one the lead actor that I hate the most.
I really don't know what the hell is going on to his acting skill.
He just, won't improve.

But ofcourse, there are still some good things you can find in this movie.
The soundtrack is good, Hanz Zimmer remains his quality in Pearl Harbor.
The music makes the movie beautiful and it fits well to those nice scenery at Pearl Harbor.

Some of the scenes' cinematography is great.
I like how the first armor-piercing bombs drops on the ship.
Very memorable!!!

Overall, Pearl Harbor is not a great movie.
Feelike vommit after watching....

Sorry Michael Bay!

新宿事件

一个拖拉机工人成为偷渡客，再成为华社老大的故事。

我个人虽然不是很期待这部电影，但知道是由尔冬升执导，还有成龙和吴彦祖主演，信心还是有的。

故事述说来至中国大陆的华人偷渡到日本谋生，被当地人歧视的悲惨事件。

看电影前，我并不知道成龙这角色“铁头”是不会武功不会打架的。
若无意外，这应该是成龙电影生涯里头一次没有动作场面。

成龙向来塑造了一个大英雄的形象，突然在“新宿事件”里不打了，看到坏人时更是不知所措。
说真的，这样的画面我看得很不习惯。。。给我的感觉是。。。他很明显是在“做戏”啦！

当然，虽少了动作场面，暴力镜头还可是多的不得了，而且几乎每一幕都拍得令人毛骨悚然！
整个故事的节奏拍得不错，但毕竟情节太多，尔东升在处理一些细节方面显得非常马虎。

例如“铁头”枪杀两名黑帮人物的一幕最糟糕，还有钱嘉乐被石头击中头部的一幕也蛮“儿戏”。
话虽如此，也别忘了这些画面可能都是因为太过残忍而被剪掉的，所以接得不美。
（大马剪了7分钟）

吴彦祖的演技接近完美，没有什么可挑剔的。
他的角色“阿杰”是众角色里最鲜明的。

我常常注重character development, 但看到阿杰痛苦的经历，我多么地盼望这戏里没有什么character development.

电影最特别的地方，是在故事大纲里有三大看点。

1.它让观众看到华人如何被欺压和歧视。
2.华人如何团结起来为自己挣回一口气。

通常一般电影人都会以这两大看点拍成一部“报复片”。
大家可能看了会感到非常痛快甚至拍案叫绝。

但，有看过尔冬升电影的人应该知道他绝对不会那么简单就给我们一个快乐结局。
电影第三大看点，就是。。。

3.华人搞内讧后的下场。

尔冬升向来注重电影含义和教育性质，“新宿事件”也不例外。
当我看到“铁头”和一班兄弟买了一部栗子车给“阿杰”时，心里感到好温馨。
林雪跳起舞来更是让我会心一笑。

电影结束前，让我们再次看回了这一幕。。。
那感觉是完全不同的。
心里深深地受感动。。。
我多么希望故事在那一幕后就结束！

尔冬升在电影后段仿佛掴了我们一个巴掌，让我们华人好好的自我反省。

Saving Private Ryan

The mission is a man.


In WW2, three of the four Ryan brothers have die within days in battlefield, the only survivor Private James Francis Ryan is the new mission for Captain John Miller!

Saving Private Ryan is the best war film ever!!!
This is a movie that you must watch before you die....no doubt!!!

The movie starts with the old Ryan mourning for the soldiers at Normandy memorial.
There is a very notable shots that zoom slowly in to Ryan's eye to show his pain and emotion.

The similiar shots repeat in Captain Miller's(Tom Hanks) eye, in the invasion of Normandy, only the facial expression is diffrent this time.
(If you can recall, later this shots is used by My Chemical Romance's MTV "Ghost of You")

The opening 20minutes of Omaha beachhead assault is breathtaking!!!
Probably the best war scene you will ever watch!!!
The cinematography that Spielberg used allow you to feel the battle, to feel the soldiers' fear, to feel the intensity of war!!!

Sound of guns, rifles, snipers, bombs and grenade is like a great symphony that gives you perfect audio pleasure.
The explosive scenes are all well-done with smoke and dust, body parts are all flying here and there, blood and liver spreading out all around the ground.

Vin Diesel and Matt Damon acted in this movie too, when they were young and not a big superstar yet.
But the most impressive performance should be credited to Barry Pepper, who act as a fantastic sniper marksman!!!

There are some scenes that worth for us to discuss and think....

1. Vin Diesel was trying to rescue a little girl in a town, and he ignored Tom Hanks' order to leave her alone....in the end....he get killed by the German soldiers.

2. When the medic was injured badly, he asked a soldier to give him more morphine to ease his pain. But the soldier is in dillemma because he think that the medic cannot be rescued and it is a waste to give him morphine.

3. A German soldier is captured and Tom Hanks' squad want to kill him, but he surrender and beg for mercy. He said he hate Hitler, he said he like America, he said how much he admire America actress and singers, he even sing Star Spangled Banner.....

4. Tom Hanks let the German soldier leave....but.... in the final battle, it shows that the German soldier is recruit to German army and he success to kill Tom Hanks.

5. Private Ryan is found, but he refused to go home because he think he do not deserved this "privilege"

6. The language translator who never get army training joined the squad. He felt guilty when he saw his friends were killed, and he cannot do anything, but looking the German soldier pass infront of him.


All of these scenes show the dillemma situations that are faced by soldiers in the war battle.
Is there any ethics and human moral thinking that they must and they should consider?

Ofcourse, conflicts between Jews and Nazis is portrayed mildly in the movie as well.

The story is already good, and the scriptwriter add all these meaningful and heartbreaking sub-storyline to the movie....it's nearly perfect!!!

One last thing that I must mention, is the massive setting of the movie.
Absolutely masterpiece!!!
You will never find such a great setting in any other war movie....

This is a classic, the greatest movie of all the time!


Go slap yourself if you have not watch this movie!!!
(joking....i know it's not funny)

p/s:
Recently I'm busying for E-learning, it sucks, and it cause me emotional abuse.
Please bear wit me....

Slumdog Millionaire

Jamal Malik is one question away from winning 20million rupees.

How did he do it?

A: He cheated
B: He's lucky
C: He's genius
D: It is written

10 Oscar nominations, won 8.

Best Picture

Best Director

Best Original Score

Best Original Song

Best Adapted Screenplay

Best Cinematography

Best Editing

Best Sound Mixing


Most of the time, people dare not to criticize an award-winning movie....
I admit, I watch this movie after it won.

but,

If you ask me,
"Did the movie deserved Oscar or not???

I will say "Yes, they deserved...."
but I prefer Benjamin Button.

Why?

Benjamin Button's cinematography and music are much more excellent,
the whole movie is like a masterpiece of art....
everything is nearly perfect if you compare it to other nominators.

But why Benjamin Button lost those big awards in Oscar?
First reason is because it was starring by Brad Pitt, and other Hollywood stars or actors.

You will always have big advantage at box office performance if your movie is starring by a movie superstar.
But in movie awards, semi-pro actors have the advantage!!!

But the main reason that makes Slumdog Millioanire become the multi-awards winner,
is the story....

Well, the story sounds fine for me,
not bad....not that great.

But, it hits the correct timing.

Why did I say that?
because the world is in economic crisis now, especially America....

and, Oscar is an America movie award.

When you look back to the previous Oscar,
almost every year,
the panel prefer the movie that is recognized by American!!!

Which is why,
if you success to hit the target,
the award is yours.

Everyone is discussing about Slumdog Millionaire and Benjamin Button recently.
But, it is hard to judge Slumdog Millionaire today because,

if you say the movie is good,
people might think that you are an opinion-follower.

if you say the movie is bad,
people might say that you don't have taste.

One thing I don't like about their cinematography,
is that they used alot of Dutch angle.

Most of the time,
filmmakers learn how to use Dutch angle,
but they do not learn why.

Dutch angle is a very eye-catching, and a very aggresive technique.

Why Slumdog Millionaire use it?
I have no idea....
I just don't like it.

Well, if you want to read a more expressive review,
you can visit Mun Yi's blog (in my friend's list)

and the answer is,
D: it is written

The Reader

A young student (Michael) who has an affair with an elder woman (Hanna),

visits her apartment and reads to her literature books,

everytime before they have sex.


The Reader is a film adaptation based on the German novel of the same name.

It tells a story of a lawyer who had an affair with an older woman, Hanna (portrayed by Kate Winslet) when he was a teenager.

Years later, Hanna is accused for commited war crimes as she was one of the SS guards who responsible to the death march.


Michael feels guilty for loving a war criminal, but then he found that Hanna has a secret that she considers worse than her Nazi past.

she is illiterate!

~she got no education and she don't know how to read or write~

Because of inferiority, and to protect her secret, Hanna willing to accept full responsibility for the death of 300Jews in the death march!!!

Kate Winslet gives us a stunning performance to show her character's frustration, panic, shame and innocence.

It is so sad and heartbreaking when you see Hanna is being accused by the judge,jury and other defendants.

She cannot speak something to defend herself.


But ofcourse, in the trial scene, it makes me think and think again....

what does "illiterate" has to do with commiting a war crime???

Burning 300Jews doesnt require your reading skill right?

Back to the human morality issue, is "education" that important to teach us about what is right or wrong???


Hanna think that she was just fullfilled her duty as a SS guards,

she joined Nazi because the party offered her a job.

For an innocence woman like her, who are not educated about history,moral,politics and war....

She didnt realize that killing 300Jews is a wrong thing to do....

She did it, she is guilty, only she is not.

What do you think?


The Reader is a great movie,

the best Kate Winslet's movie I have ever watched....

She won Oscar and Golden Globe awards for this movie!!!


~don't miss it~

Valkyrie

Tom Cruise's fourth mission impossible, is to kill Adolf Hitler.

Based on the true story, "Valkyrie" is a terrific historical thriller.
Basically the story is about the failed attempt of assassination to Hitler.

Yes, you can predict the ending if you know the history and facts.
But still, the solid screenplay brings you a breathtaking roller-coaster ride!!!

The setting, colour, costume are all very convincing.
They success to create a dark, scary and thrilling atmosphere of Nazi era.

Bryan Singer makes a great come back after his huge dissapointment of "Superman Returns".
No more superheroes, no more science-fiction.
And this time, we can see a mature directing technique by him,
no more horrible dialogue and dumb villains.

Thanks to the music and score, it is really good.
Audiences will hold their breath everytime Hitler appear, he looks so evil.
Every single movement by Tom Cruise when he is doing his "mission impossible", makes the audiences sweat.

Despite the criticism and controversial issue, I found that Tom Cruise can really act.
Well, not as good as Tom Hanks and Russell Crowe, but....
Who says good-looking actor can't act???

Ofcourse, the controversial issue will always rise when your story touch about religion, race, politics, and war.
Some people do not like Tom Cruise to take the role.
Some people do not like the movie to worship this Nazi officer.

But, if you do not bring these topics into the movie,
I dare to make a fair comment,
Tom Cruise act well in the movie!

"Valkyrie" is a very pure and incredible story.
It did not touch too much on love and family.
Tom Cruise's wife only appear for two, or three scenes in the movie.

The movie is very focus on the plot!
Not much of unnecessary character development!!
Well-done!!!

赤壁决战天下 Red Cliff Part 2

赤壁之战，是三国演义里最重要,

规模最大，人才最集中的战事。

看了“赤壁- 决战天下”，我个人觉得下半部并不比上半部拍得更突出。

当然，除了亚洲国家，其余的地区所上映的“赤壁”是浓缩版的电影，
并没有分上半部或下半部。

所以，电影没有突破，乃是预料中事。

吴宇森的风格在“赤壁”里是模糊的，除了白鸽子，你很难捉摸到他的拍摄手法。

长话短说，

这电影值不值得看？

值得！

看电脑特技，看大场面，看武打戏，都值回票价了。

上半部好看，还是下半部好看？

下半部！

电影无须再介绍人物背景，一气呵成地把故事说得非常流畅。

我个人并不是很喜欢上半部，觉得剪接，transition 和一些摄影手法很奇怪。
很不干净，失去了美感。

上半部所交代的人物情节更是闷透了，
高潮只在“孔明智激周瑜”和“八卦阵”上。

但，下半部不再婆婆妈妈，
单刀直入，干净利落。
闷场并不是没有，
但总得来说拍得尚算有节奏有水准。

孔明草船借箭一幕拍得够震撼。
周瑜的离间计衬托得锦上添花。

这场戏是我最喜欢的。

但，整部电影实在有太多的战争场面了，让我看了目不暇给，
尤其是“七星坛孔明祭风”，“火烧连环船” 和 “火烧赤壁”的高潮戏，让我看得眼花缭乱。

电影似乎犯下了 “珍珠港” 的老毛病。
Budget太多，有时候弄巧反拙，便会失去了文戏的平衡。

梁朝伟和金城武把各自的角色都演的不错，
瑜亮两大奇才之间的化学效应更是电影的最大看头！

两人虽是盟友，但不忘来个公平挑战，斗智斗力。
不但愿意接受军法处置，也胆敢打赌人头。
很喜欢他们俩在城门口舌战的一幕，很精彩！

可惜的是，
吴宇森并没有善用到他们两人。
很失望！

不能怪他，毕竟他也是个动作片导演。

当然，“赤壁”仍然会是近年来的吴宇森代表作。
亚洲人想拍史诗战争片?

除了要过张艺谋这关，

也必须达到吴宇森在“赤壁”里所定下的新标准。

[●REC]

A TV reporter and her cameraman cover

their nightshift at a fire station for their late show.
Somethings happen in an apartment nearby, fire alert.

And so, they follow the firemen to enter the building.
But once they get in, military seal off the building.

Well, next movie I wana recommend, is a 2007 Spanish horror film called
~[●REC]~

This is the original movie that has been remade by Hollywood entitled "Quarantine".
and I say....
~Most frightening cinematic experience ever~

I don't really know how to write a review for the movie of these two genre....
~cartoon, horror~

The story is very simple and not fresh.
Basically it's all about virus infection and zombie.

But, one main thing that distinguish [●REC] with other zombie movies is the shaky camerawork.
Shaky cam is a cinematography technique that is used to create unbalance and unstable image.
The camera movement and zoom are purposely make like an amateur's work.
To make it simple, audience watch the movie from the camera point-of-view.

You can see this technique in Blair Witch Project and Cloverfield....
it used "fake docu handheld" style to shoot the movie.
But personally, I prefer [●REC]

What so interesting about [●REC], is the scenario and incidents that happen inside the building.
All those characters are well-planned....their personalities,their position, their destiny.....

There are some scenes that is absolutely scary and terrifying.
You will see, and you will know....

I like the scene where the reporter and cameraman are trapped inside the room.
All the zombie waits to attack them outside the room.

But there is another "semi-zombie" waiting to get "activated" inside the toilet of the room.
Their safe area is getting smaller and smaller, how brilliant is this!!!

Everything you can see, is all part of the plan.
Clever, very clever!!!

They success to create unpredictable scenario in a predictable story....
I assure you, you will like the atmosphere, the feeling.
You can really experience it!!!

Not much of editing, visual efffects and conversation.
No music used at all.

Screaming,chaos,running,shouting.
The main actress did a fantastic job to carry audiences emotion!

I think this movie is now showing on Malaysia cinema.
(I'm not sure what takes it so long to arrive our big screen)

"Quarantine" was shown on cinema last December if I'm not mistaken.
I did not watch it, and I don't know is it good or not.

But for [●REC],
I think it is the most scary and terrifying movie in recent years!!!

Ong Bak 2

Tony Jaa plays Tien, a man who was born as a prince.
But after his parents murdered, Tien need to fight and steal for the bandits to survive.


Ong Bak 2 is the prequel to Ong Bak (which is Tony Jaa's debut film for leading role)
I didnt see any linkage between these both movies.

Ong Bak 2 is a historical epic movie, which is fictional ofcourse.
The setting, the costume, and the make up are so fantastic.

Tony Jaa plays multiple role in this production,
which include director, producer, action choreographer, stunt person, and actor, based on his idea and story.

The fighting sequence is so violent and breathtaking.
You can see amazing kickboxing, wrestling, swords, knife....
and all those Thailand martial art that I bet you never see before.
(definitely harmful than silat or keris!!!)

First impressive scene, is the crocodile fighting scene in the swamp.
The movie hits audiences' emotion right before Tony Jaa appear!!!
To make it simple, the action scene is already good even before Tony Jaa comes to the screen.
So, what happen after Tony Jaa appear???

He make the elephants kneel down.
As we all know, elephant is a sacred animal in Thailand.
What is the message Tony Jaa trying to bring? I am not so sure.

But personally, I think this scene is just used to show Tien's nobility.
"Even the elephants shall kneel down to him!"
I call him Tien the Tarzan....

Another impressive scene is the drunken fist.
You saw Jackie Chan and Beggar Su did this before, and now you can see how Tony Jaa fight like a Drunken Master.
The way he fight, is like doing breaking in hiphop dance, only he is better.
I call him Tien the Grasshopper.

The story is like a misture of Narnia(sequel) and Gladiator.
Another great come back revenge movie!!!
I call him Tien the Prince Caspian, or Tien the Spaniard.

There are also some ugly creatures, that fight like a leopard and crows(I am not so sure which animals they tried to imitate)
And that, clearly shows us that this movie need not to be watch as a historical movie.
Because it is a fictional story, blends with myth and legend, and being shown as a historical epic movie.

Things that I don't like?
Well....

The score of the movie is not bad, the feeling and mood is there.
But in some parts of the movie, the music did not fit the image at all.
And personally, I think it spoiled the great fighting scene.
Watch it....and you will know what I mean.

There are also some scenes that are so draggy, and I hate it!
The enthronement of the new king (ceremony of crown) is so boring, and I nearly fall asleep.

Ong Bak 2 left an open ending for the direct-sequel, Ong Bak3.
The story has not end yet.

I don't like how Ong Bak2 conclude the movie.
It leaves a large question mark (I mean, it is too huge) for the audience.
I don't really know what is the ending mean,
but I guess it has something to do with karma, and Buddhism teaching.

I saw a negative review by a Flixter user, and I found that it is so funny and interesting.
She said,

"Shud call the movie "Tony Jaa: The
Million Ways to Kick Everybody's Butts
using Every Region's Martial Arts"
with exclusive footage of "How to Climb
on an Elephant the
Extreme Way".

Plotless. Mindless. Kickass
Annoyance but still fun to
watch. "

Anyway, Ong Bak2 is still highly recommend from me!!!
I don't know how my friends get the movie ticket for me today, I thought it is not showing yet.
But....
Yay!!! What a surprise!!!

For those people who did not watch it yet, don't wait!!!

Cast Away

A modernize Robinson Crusoe story.
A crash landing on the deserted island, and he begin his amazing journey.

The main character's name is Chuck Noland, played by Tom Hanks.
If you take the first word from Chuck, then add in to his surname,
it reads "C.Noland"
"See No Land!!!"
Sacarstic?

Allright,my opinion to this movie....
I like Tom Hanks' performance in this movie.

Overall, this is a boring movie with not much use of sound, not much use of visual effects, and not much use of excellent cinematography.
After the plane crash, you can only see one man show.

Man to watch~ Tom Hanks~
He steal the show, and it's like watching HIS SHOW on HIS STAGE.
Tom Hanks' outstanding performance support the whole movie.

No music used in almost the entire movie.
Trust me, this is a movie that you are not going to watch together with your friends or family, because it is so quiet.
Overall, this movie is so boring and dull.

Without the music to carry audience emotion,
it allows Tom Hanks to has his very own space, to fully utilized his great acting skill.
Tom Hanks carry the audience mood all by himself.

Beside, Chuck Noland do not has any friend in the island, which mean....
there is no acting opponent for Tom Hanks, only a volleyball, called Wilson.
How amazing is this, to see a volleyball co-starring with a top-class actor.

I know many people do not like this movie, and many people will not like this movie.
But, if you only seek for a good acting, you should watch this movie.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

Being born as an old man, but must live his life reverse,
and get younger with time.

Before I watch this movie, I have already attracted by this story.
How amazing is this story?

Benjamin Button's diary recount his entire extraordianry life.
It's like we all (as audience) moving forward together with the plot, but he is moving backward.

But, actually, I think it is not.
If you realize his mentallity and intelligence, he is moving his life forward too.

The "reverse" part is the most interesting part.
But actually, this is only happen to his physical appearance.

Is his life extraordianary?
Is his life amazing?
Is his life so special?
Is his life really that curious?
YES....

But, the way Benjamin Button grow, old and die, is pretty similiar with ordinary people.
"We all end up in diapers."
right?

In the end, eventhough he is growing younger, but still,
he lost his memory, he gots bad temper,
he lost his ability to speak, walk, and write,

just like an old man.

The most important thing is, due to his physical appearance,
he is able to see everything by his own point of view, in different angle and different dimension.
And these....are the moral issues that worth for us to think and think again.

Ofcourse, due to the fate that he has to start his life aging backwards,
there are alot of contradict, complex and sad consequences that he has to face.

I really cannot share much with you about this movie,
I do not know how to describe my feeling after I watch this movie.
I do not know how to explain the complex plot.
because it is too amazing, and you really have to watch it yourself.

This movie is a multi-nominated film in Oscar.
Critically, it receive positive comments.

I like the cinematography, screenplay and music.
Absolutely beautiful.

The make up and CGI of Benjamin Button are very convincing and good.
But you cannot give full credit only to behind the scene,
as this character cannot played by any Tom Dick or Harry.

Did Brad Pitt act well?
I have no extreme comment to this.
But I think his acting is quite mature, not bad.

And Cate Blanchett's great performance, really can see some chemical effects between Brad Pitt and her.
But personally, I found that Cate Blanchett looks so similiar like Tilda Swinton (another female character in this movie, the actress who played the white witch in Narnia).
I get confused, I admit.

Watching "Curious Case of Benjamin Button" remind me of some movies.
there are some similiarities between these movies.

"Forrest Gump",
for their (Forrest and Benjamin) amazing journey.

But Forrest is a much more "real" character.
You probably can see a Forrest in real-life.
Tom Hanks portrayed this character with his natural and "naughty" performance.

Benjamin is darker and mysterious,
you can't find any Benjamin in this planet.
Brad Pitt lets you feel heartbreaking and numb.

If I have to choose one of them to be my friend, I would choose Forrest.

This movie also remind me about Adam Sandler's "Click".
Another meaningful movie that makes you think about your life.
It teach you how to appreciate every single moment in your life.

We can see, Benjamin struggle for his entire life to be with Daisy.
He grow younger and she grow older.

When they met at the age of 40+ , it is the perfect timing for them to live together.
These are the most precious moment for them, but it only happen for a very short moment.

The movie tell us, learn to appreciate.
it is worth for you to struggle your entire life, just to get a short but lovely happiness.

Not forget to mention Andy Lau's "Wait Till You Are Older".
Also a serious movie that talk about life and death.

Ofcourse, unlike "Wait Till You Are Older",
this movie didnt explain much about how come Benjamin Button is born like this and why he need to live his life reverse.

Luckily they didnt, because if they did, it will definitely spoil the movie.
I am sure the reason or cause would be a "childish" and ridiculous one,

just like how "Wait Till You Are Older" get fucked up.

It also remind me about Tom Hanks' earlier movie "Big",
I can't actually recall the plot of the movie, will talk about it nextime.

The flashback narration is like "Titanic", anyway, this is just a minor part of the movie, not so important I know.

Allright, I guess I talk too much,
before I end, I wana recommend you all to watch this movie, that's all!!!

Gladiator

A general who became a slave.

A slave who became a gladiator.

A gladiator who defied an emperor.

"Gladiator" is one of my favourite movie all the time.
Everytime I watch this movie, again and again, I never get bored....

The story is great.
You can always feel the excitement when you are watching a revenge movie.
The character, Maximus is develop well.
How he falls, and rise again, but then, a great death conclude the story beautifully.

Russell Crowe won the Academy Award by playing Maximus.
His performance is indeed very stunning and absolutely top-class.

Credit to the director, Ridley Scott,
a master who know how to shoot visually unique image,
a talented story-teller who know how to make good use of classical music.

Hans Zimmer once again mentioned in my blog,
indeed he is a great music composer.
The sountrack is spectacular.

Ridley Scott often use strong female portrayal.
Lucilla is not a major character, but definitely a tough one.

For a year 2000 film, the CGI used by Ridley Scott is acceptable.
Obviously, the CGI is clearly seen in the movie,
but the visual effect is still considered good.
Massive setting of Germania battle, Ancient Rome, Colosseum and crowd are all well-done.

A very strong relationship linkage between Maximus and the Emperor, Commodus (played by Joaquin Phoenix).
Commodus want to kill Maximus, because he hate Maximus.

It is not because his father chose Maximus to rule the empire,
but because his father love Maximus.

Firstime they met in Colosseum, Maximus turn his back to Commodus.
Commodus get insulted and wants Maximus to die.
But the crowds want Maximus to live.

Commodus wants to win the crowds, that's why,
in the end, he let Maximus live, because the crowd ask for it.

Secondtime, Commodus arranged a game that is unfair for Maximus, but still Maximus survive.
Commodus tried everything to kill Maximus, but Maximus just simply wont die.

When Maximus request for permission to kill his opponent in the arena,
Commodus granted him, because the crowds ask for it. (again)

But Maximus didnt kill his opponent,
then the crowds called him Maximus the Merciful.

Commodus get even frustrated.
Maximus won the crowd, and that's why he won his freedom.

Thirdtime, Commodus stabbed Maximus before the game.
But still, Maximus able to silent the arena by paying back his revenge, and died with honour.

These are my favourite scenes in "Gladiator".
Every action sequence advanced the plot and develop the characters.

I think only those people who watched this movie will understand what I'm talking about.
Because it's all about Ridley Scott's story-telling technique.

Anyway, another unmemorable scenes that captured my attention is....

1. The Roman Senator admitted that Roman Empire is a mob.
2. Marcus Aurelius wants Roman Empire back to Republic.

Is that true???
frankly, I don't really know.

But, the most important thing is, this movie is amazing.
A must watch movie, a highly recommend movie, a great movie!!!

The Da Vinci Code

The most controversial film of all the time,

since The Passion of the Christ....

Writing a review of the Da Vinci Code is hard for a person like me....
because, I am a Christian.

I watch this movie a couple of times, first time because of movie's popularity,second time because of curiosity.

First time I watch this movie from an audience point of view, but then, I watch it from Christian point of view.

I never read the novel before, I know many of my friends like it.
But if you asked them,majority of them do not like the movie.

Mainly because it is not exciting, and it is not as detailed as the novel did.
But most them clearly know that this is just a novel,with fictional story.

As for me, I got nothing much to say, from an movie audience point of view.
It is a boring movie, messy plot and weak structure.

The only thing I found that is good?
Hans Zimmer's score.

Beside that, I really don't know what is so good about the movie.

Now, from a Christian's point of view.
This is going to be harsh for some people who like it.

The first mistake is the title for the story and film.
Da Vinci Code?
come on, this is Dan Brown Code.

Do you know who is Leonardo Da Vinci?
I bet you don't know.

Because most of us do not even know how to pronounce Da Vinci.
It should be pronounce in Italian, not English.
So,the translation of Chinese is so wrong.
And for your information, Da Vinci is a small town in Italy, not a person's name.

Allrite,maybe you don't care.

Next, I won't say Dan Brown is a devil, I won't say Dan Brown is an evil person who distorted the truth, historical facts and biblical history.
But, I say Dan Brown is a clever author who know how to make money.

Leonardo Da Vinci, probably one of the most clever person in history.
He died, and his name is used by Dan Brown to make money.

What if the novel called "Dan Brown Code"?
it won't sell....because many people called Dan and called Brown nowadays, especially in Western countries.

What if the novel called "Leonardo Code?"
it won't sell....because Hollywood has Di Caprio, and everyone knows that he is an actor.

The story of Da Vinci Code is very interesting indeed.
I admit that.

In the earliest part, a man is pursuaded by an Opus Dei's monk in the Grand Gallery of Louvre Museum.
Then, an Amercian symbologist called Robert Langdon,from Harvard University is contacted to investigate the crime scene.
Then soon, he is confused and seek for the help from Leigh Teabing, a British Royal Historian.

Interesting right???

What if I say,
A man is pursuaded by a psycho killer in Museum Negara Malaysia.
Then, an Malaysian professor, from Kolej Tunku Abdul Rahman is contacted to visit the crime scene.
Then soon, he is assisted by a Indonesian Historian.

Ya, sounds funny,maybe some will laugh.
But frankly, it won't sell.

And nobody will believe the story,
because Museum Negara do not have a large history like Louvre did.
Nobody really care about Malaysian, nobody care about Kolej Tunku Abdul Rahman.
Nobody will believe in an Indonesian historian.

In the Last Supper painting, John is actually Mary Magdalane? and she rest at Jesus' arm?

if you really know Da Vinci's painting, then you will know why John is portrayed that femine.

If he is Mary Magdalane? Where is John then?

Judah, the one who betrayed Jesus is appeared in the painting?

but John, the best student of Jesus, did not?

Ridiculous!!!

I bet John will smack Leonardo da Vinci if he really paint the Last Supper without him.

Why Peter is holding the knife?

because the knife is used to cut the bread,

that simple.

There is no code inside!

Da Vinci will smack Dan Brown if he is still alive.

Da Vinci would be so upset because he was so poor in his life,

but his name is used by Dan Brown to make easy money.

For those who believe in Da Vinci Cide, I do not want to use the word "cheated".
But, which other word can I used?

The main point here is, Dan Brown wants to make money, and he did.
From the novel he wrote and publish.
From copyright he sell to Sony to make movie.

Who buy his books?
I didnt , my friends did.

Who watch the movie?
I did.

So, did he reach his goal?
Yes.

Anyway, for those who spends their money on Da Vinci Code, but they do not believe in the story, you are not cheated.
But yes, you gave your money to Dan Brown.

I think about National Treasure.
The concept they use is absolutely the same.
To use some historical facts, such as scroll and coins, to twist and distorted the truth.

But, the different is.
National Tresure glorify American History.
So, no people will stand up and protest.
People like it, I like it.
I know it is not true, but I feel the concept and story is good.

But, Da Vinci Code has greater controversial.
It tends to convince the reader that Jesus is not a son of God, and He actually marry with Mary Magdalane.

Allright, I don't care about your religion at this moment.
But, Da Vinci Code actually question the most fundamental teaching and truth of Christianity.
So, what do you expect from Christian reaction?

Christian is ALLOW to watch the movie, I make it very clear.
Some of the Christian is NOT ENCOURAGE to watch the movie, because some of them do not have strong beliefs or strong biblical knowledge.

As for me, I don't think movie has such power to affect one person's religion.
Most of us know Da Vinci Code is not true, even the fans.

You don't expect a person to convert to Christian after he/she watch Passion of the Christ.
But, you don't expect a Christian to convert to other religion after he/she watch Da Vinci Code either.

Right????

Why are we talking about Da Vinci Code here?
it is no longer a hot topic.
I just listen to a preach by Stephen Tong Evangelistic Ministries Inthernational on CD, very interesting.

Some might take it seriously, some might not.
But I take it seriously.

Some people said, it is just a movie.
You can avoid it if you hate it.
"you don't have to say too much!"

But, the pastor just voice up the truth and reply the message in Da Vinci Code.
I think it is necessary, and it is reasonable for them to speak something, and to make some response.

Last time, my friends ask me many questions about Da Vinci Code, but I can't reply them much.
Today, I know, and I admit, I am taking this movie seriously.

Yes, the hot topic and hot controversial were what Dan Brown wish to see, because more discussion of this movie sells more money.
I am the best example, I watch it because everyone is talking about this movie.

At this point, Dan Brown has success.
This is the fact.

Jesus will not reborn in this world again.
Leonardo Da Vinci and Isaac Newton are dead.
We cannot prove anything from the person mentioned in the novel.

What left?
Historical location?

More and more people come to visit the church and museum mentioned in the book.
People come to the church and want to see Mary's tomb.

Their intention is influenced by the movie.
But, the church and museum cannot protest much because the fact is,
more people come to visit these location.

So, who do you believe in?
the fictional characters mentioned???
or Dan Brown?

Many people like Da Vinci Code because it hurt Christianity badly.
People who hate Christianity, people who do not belive in Jesus.
They simply enjoy the show and story,
because they feel that they are not alone,
because they feel that what they believe is supoorted by historical facts,
because Dan Brown wrote what they wish to read.

Angels and Demons is coming soon to the silver screen, and it is highly anticipate by many fans.
Frankly, I will go to watch the movie, because I want to know what happen.

I don't know what will happen in Malaysia, as we know, this country's official religion is Islam mah....

The country CAN BAN Passion of the Christ because it is too violence.
But they can allow Da Vinci Code to be screened, and highlighted that it was not censored.

Funny?

The Dark Knight

Absolutely the best film in 2008!!!

The best superhero movie ever,
and the most successful commercialized movie ever!!!

If you ask me, I dont know the best movie in 2007,
but "Transformers" is definitely the best commercialized movie.

But if you ask me the best movie in 2008,
I have no doubt to tell you that "The Dark Knight" is the best!!!
both commercially and critically....

There are too many credits to give, not only Heath Ledger....
Ya, he died, that create greater impact and gain more attraction....

But the movie didnt promote too much to his dead,
and the movie never highlight that this is the last movie by Heath Ledger.

The Joker is an anarchic villain,
Heath Ledger is like being possessed by this character.
His tongue,his lips,his movement,his facial expression,his voice,his laugh,his smile, and his gestures,it is simply so great.

I remember a scene in Bruce Wayne's mansion,
where the Joker came to find Harvey Dent,
he definitely steal the show....
the way he threated the people in the ballroom,
you really can sense his psychology element.

When the Joker saw Rachel Dawes,
he actually clean up his hair and face,
it shows that he is still attracted to female,
it shows that he is still a human with flesh.
I love it....

Talking about Rachel,
I like how she is being portrayed in a superhero movie.
She is tough, she is brave, and she really can do something,
instead of sreaming for help and waiting for Batman!

I just finish my graduation thesis,
doing a research to study Female Characters Portayed in Action Movies.

Some of my respondents doubt that MaryJane Watson is not a weak character.
Perhaps they just don't like the word "weak".
But the truth is, how Dark Knight portray Rachel is definitely better!!!

She stand up to infront when the Joker is threatening others.
She challenge the Joker,and she kick the Joker, with no fear at all.
Atleast she do somthing.

Next thing to talk about is Christopher Nolan.
A great director,a great scriptwriter.

Because of Nolan, "Batman" is a much more mature fim, compare to Tim Burton's Batman.
Because of Nolan, Batman is darker.

We can see the effort they put in scriptwriting of "Batman Begins" and "Dark Knight".
Every single scene and sub-storyline are important to support the whole movie.
You can never miss a single second of the movie, because everything moves so fast.
There are too many thing to talk when you seriously think about the structure and plot of this movie.

I love the editing too.
The way they edit is great.
You seldom see a great editing that is so obvious, visionary and good.

The scene where the Joker killed the the Mayor and the Judge,
inter-cut with the scene in Bruce Wayne's mansion, where he wana find Harvey Dent.

And also the scene where the Joker kidnapped Rachel and Harvey,
while he is detained in the police station.

The inter-cut is so great.
And ofcouse, music play an important role to this movie.

It was composed by Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard.
The action scene's music is composed by Zimmer.
The non-action scene's mucis is composed by Howard.

This is one of the best soundtrack I have ever heard.
Basically, it modified the theme in "Batman Begins".
But they also add in score for the Joker and Two Face,
which are all heartbreaking and breathtaking.

The ending of the movie is great too.
I simply love it.

To use Gordon as the narrator,
and to allow Batman turned become the silent guardian.

Batman is a hero that Gotham deserved, but not what Gotham need at this moment,
that is why,
he ran,
and Gotham chase.

There are alot of things that audiences might not get it, and do not understand.
Christopher Nolan do not explain it too clear, which is a good thing.

For an example, where do the Joker come from?
only the comic fans will know.

The duel between the freaks, is great and exciting!!!

I never read the comics, but I watch Tim Burton's Batman.
According to the earlier movie,
the Joker is actually the same person who killed Bruce Wayne's parents in the valley.
(when he is still young)

Batman hate him,
and he take it personally....
which is why,
he failed....

the Joker do not want to kill Batman,
he just want to play games with him,
this is the two facts I have no doubt at all.

Why Batman do not want to kill the Joker when he have the chances?
(in the movie, he actually have it twice)

I interpret in this way....
Batman hate the Joker too much,
even if Batman kill him,
it won't help Batman to release his anger and hatred.

Batman do not know what to do without the Joker....
Batman is confused, Batman is weak, and he is defeated in this movie.

The interesting thing is, the Joker has no rule,
he has a complete freedom.
That is why he can appear in anywhere,
even in the TV, with no mask.

But Batman, he has a rule,
He need to save the day, yet hiding the reality from the world.
That is why he has to run,
he cannot take off his mask.

The Joker know his weakness.
He use Batman's weakness to complete himself.
As he said to Batman in the movie,
"You complete me"

In Tim Burton's movie,
he said,
"You made me"

So, a tragedic incident happen to Batman and the Joker.
They made each other, because of hatred.

To make it simple,
without the Joker,
there is no Batman.

Without Batman,
there is no Joker.

So, the truth is,
Batman CANNOT kill the Joker.

That is why,
when the Joker said,
"Come on, I want you to hit me!"
Batman can't do it.

I don't know what will happen in the third installment in Christopher Nolan's era.
But I am sure it would be very reasonable and very great.
Let's wait and see.

Maybe the Batman will kill the Joker???
who knows?

But personally, I don't think so.
I afraid this kind of scenario only has low possibility.
And I prefer to see the Joker win in the battle.

Anyway, it was just a movie.
Some might like it, some might not.
Soem might take it seriously, some might not.

But for me,
"The Dark Knight" met my satisfaction
I love it!