''The Divide'' : Dividing the good and bad.

The Divide (2011)                                                       9.5/10!!

        I actually saw this film 2 weeks ago, but it was so powerful , that I haven't been able to forget it.
      Its striking ,shocking , fearless!
I am not usually into something that's described by those adjectives, but this time I could not stay ignorant.

     First of all , brilliant score! The music by Jean-Pierre Taieb was  emotional and beautiful and at the same time tragic and very moving! Perfect score for this kind of film.

       ok wow 9.5, right? it must have been perfect?
OK, its not all praise. Some of the actors seem to lack professionalism , and the start of the film ( the actual start , not the prologue) was a bit messed up and chaotic, and sometimes even stupid. However the film repaired itself. At the start in the group there is a child, and immediately it feels like the child shouldn't be there , all the parts that involved the child was a mess, and felt awkward and just , well,  bad, not to even mentioned that the child actor was bad, anyways. as the story goes , we quite quickly ''get rid of " the child ( which actually didn't make any sense , not for the story not conceptually and actually just wtf) BUT it works for the better :D. Because after that it goes up from there. ( actually the radio part was stupid as well , but that goes away as well)
        From there on the film gets to the point. A story about how people slowly go insane and mad and brutal and violent and become monsters, if we are locked out of the world in a dark with random people with no hope of life outside.

       So we get to the point . The film is about  despair , helplessness , feat at the beginning. But then , I think this is one of the first films that  gets over that , and concentrates on the what happens after hopelessness and despair and fear. Madness. But not just madness, the inner animal , the brutal human being. The primitive animal. This is one of the story that show what happens when there is no responsibility left. When a human being is given the choice to do whatever he wants because there is nobody that he is responsible to , not even himself, because he knows he is going to die anyway. So the hell slowly brakes loose.Of course one may say it would depend on the person or peoples character( who would go nuts, and who wouldn't) and that's true. The film does show different personalities. And that is a huge plus as well, because the films doesn't just show good guys, but real life bad guys , and how those guys would turn even worse-evil , when put in those circumstances. Usually these type of films show how good people turn bad, when faced with death and despair. But here bad guys get disgustingly mad and bad. Power and control , is what they lust then. When come to think of it , its easy to see how , when all of the possibility of being in control has been taken from a human being( he is locked in(like in a prison) with no control of his life and survival), control suddenly becomes the only thing he desires , and tries to pretend he has, and tries to gain back with all his power.
I guess I have to mention the sexuality , as that was quite a big part of the film. Freud would be proud. And all those who agree with him in that sexuality is one of the main drives on human life.
This film definitely shows that it is so, but you will not be proud of it. Well and that easily ties in with the control and power part.
Well as I mentioned they show different personalities, so yes there are good "guys" as well, and people who stay true to ethics. And then there are those who are jealous , and those who cant let go and move on. and those who just want to be useful and do whatever is required.

  All of this sounds quite scary and disturbing, and it is , it really is , the film is disturbing, no doubt. but the most scary part is , that it is believable. AND that is the sad truth that the film conveys.

      An stellar performance by  Michael Eklund. Scary and one meant for nightmares. I think a new horror villain actor has been born.(judging from IMDB he has 6 feature film roles coming out this year.) All of the actors play their parts well. And the performances seems to get better the closer to the end we go. Maybe it's just because you have slowly familiarized the actors, or maybe they really do get better as the tragedy intensifies and the roles get more demanding. (I guess sometimes it is easier to perform a madman's role than an everyday normal guys ( because that just might come out fake) but crazy sick person , is not something we have all seen everyday( so its more believable) and actors in general have admitted that playing villain is more rewarding). OR maybe because it was shot in chronological sequence! This probably was an interesting experiment for the director , but it only harmed the film, because as I mentioned, the performances and story at the start don't make whole lot of sense. So I assume later, on when the actors came to realize what is like to happen, they got into the characters way better. As did  Milo Ventimiglia at the start he seems annoying and irrational, but later he plays his part perfectly.

        Some awesome scenes/shots sequence ,clearly a reference ( and style wise taken ) from the all well known Requiem for a Dream drug pill consuming sequences. Actually in a lot of ways this film reminds that film.
Overall great , beautiful cinematography and composition. A lot of Stanley Kubrick style symmetric shots used over and over( all the corridors and rooms). 
         The end is just pure magic , in my opinion. So strong and bold , and effective and emotional. Mostly due to the amazing music, and the rest is actors performances(great at the end), and cinematography( the high speed (slowed down movements). Its esthetically brilliant.

        Plot-wise? Ye , it doesn't make 100% sense. Ye you still wonder :and what next? and who were they and why that and that happened.
But when it comes down to how it felt , and the portrayal of the tragedy , it was complete! Emotionally it was complete- there was nothing to be added .
Thus 9.5  . -0.5 for the plot gaffe and sorta bad first half.

Definitely underrated film. However, it truly isn't a cinema film, it is way more personal, you just wouldn't feel comfortable watching it in a cinema full of people. And its not for everybody. you should know what you are going into before actually seeing this film.
(I didn't quite now ,but I had a fair amount of information ,still I was unprepared for the second half, but luckily it worked for the best, although at points I though I should stop (its bad , and unaccountable) But you just have to keep on and see it through.

''I, Robot'' : I, Entertained.

I, Robot (2004)                                                                   7.5/10

A good old blockbuster. A great 2 hours of entertainment.
Will Smith in his trademark role. (Although I still think that his performance in I am Legend is way more professional.)
 The hat that he wears in the first half of the movie, though, is so annoying that it almost ruined the whole film experience for me as I could not concentrate on the plot, but had to think who in the hell would wear something like that in 2035 or even nowadays... ok wear it, but why does it have to be in that weird angle, one ear out , on under :D .. ok its not like I have to wear it.

Kudos for the amazing visual and special effects. It is weird watching film made 8 years ago, and realize that it has better sense of how to use sfx that movies released now( Khm.. khm.. amazing spider man khm..).
An interesting concept , however one that has been talked about and interpreted in many ways. Nothing original but well made nonetheless.
Doesn't really go in depth in any of the more compelling concepts and issues concerning the world of robots and AI and creator and creation, but then again that HAS been discussed endlessly , so why linger on that once again, if we can add extra 10 minutes of cool car crash sequence...

Quite a lot of unexplained but highlighted enough plot details , which at the end of the film doesn't matter, but still makes you wonder why where they necessary to include then at all.
The robot design was original and cool no doubt. They are similar to those robots in "All Is Full of Love" a song by Björk , but lets not be nit-picking.

Overall quite light and bright film. Although , it does touch on some interesting and serious issues and thoughts, it doesn't linger on them too much, so its simply entertainment, with a 'bread crumbs' as speculations on future.

One final though, it never really gives you the chance of asking yourself : what would I do , how would I react and what would my opinion on robots be. it never gives the time to linger on that, and the story is just too tight to have any spots for the viewer to participate with his opinion and perception- the whole film is quite point-blank.

And I never understood why is it called  I, Robot?  Any good thoughts as to this , no doubt , very intriguing title?

Vertigo (1958)

Great poster by the way

VERTIGO                                                     9/10

First of, this was my first Alfred Hitchcock film. I had seen bits and pieces of Psycho and Birds before, but never a complete movie.
What can I say. It was beautiful.
One very important thing for me was the music. It immediately sets the tone for the film. As little as I have seen I still have noticed that music is a big part of Hitchcock's films. And it works. Its creepy its romantic its thrilling and it works perfectly with the shot and emotions portrayed by actors.
 This is a story about love and attachment. How attached we become to the things we love, to memories- image of something.
Great performance by James Stewart. He really managed to portray the longing , nostalgia , melancholia, vertigo (no doubt there , his performance easily conveyed the feeling of dread and terror you might get when experiencing vertigo, very frightening). As for the lead female ,Kim Novak , she didn't have so much material to work with, but she was convincing in her acting, although, she had to act acting , so at the end obviously the viewer is a bit lost because he sees one actor playing two characters, and then you don't know which one was more acted and which was more of an effort. Probably the female part could have been better written, I am not going into details as to not give too much away of the story.
It was absolute pleasure to watch 50s USA as well. Those cars, clothes , designs, and colors, an colorful time to live in.
Why 9? Well, because it is a perfect story about affection.
It makes you wonder about all the things you have loved and how you would like to return to that time when you loved them.
Oh , and of course , the vertigo effect shots were stunning , something that works amazingly on your visual sense. Kudos for discovering "contra-zoom". That itself is worth watching the film.