What Is The Greatest Cinematic Experience I Have Ever Had ?

What is it to have a great cinematic experience? As much as the art it derives its existence from, a great cinematic experience is subjective to its very core. I have read various testimonials of couples on the internet talking about how Norman Jewison’s Moonstruck made them fall in love with each other. I, on the other hand would readily make a case that watching a submarine fight while sitting on a beach would be a far better way to spend one’s time than watching the same movie in question.

In these few recent years during which I have fallen madly in love with this art form, the question of how a movie is perceived differently by every individual has hounded me persistently. And it’s not just confined to either a negative or positive response. Even to this day, the lovers of Francis Ford Coppola’s haunting masterpiece Apocalypse Now are debating whether to hail it as a pro or anti war movie.

One of the most pivotal and obvious reasons a movie may allure some and parry others is primarily because of its subject matter. A person who hasn’t gone through heartbreak may not think twice of Marc Webb’s (500) Days Of Summer after having seen it. However, it will stand out as a favorite of one who has experienced this heart-wrenching ordeal because the movie illustrates his life situation, which induces a personal experience for him in the cinema hall rather than a mere steady flow of 24 frames per second.

Another factor causing a major divide among the audiences is one’s perception of cinema itself. A friend of mine who lives a floor above hails Micheal Bay’s Transformers as the greatest movie he has ever seen. This opinion of his was obviously met by me with great dissent and inept sarcasm (Micheal Bay is so dumb he got locked in a grocery store and starved). But the more I think about it now, I don’t see his opinion to be flawed at all for when he walks into a cinema theater, all he expects to take from it seems to be unabashed entertainment which Bay seems to offer.

And as I realize now, I could go on and on about the various factors which seem to be responsible for this psychological phenomena, but none of them would be a concrete factor which one can consider the principal reason for a person to either hate or love a movie. In the end I truly believe, a movie is to a person what he is or has been.

But, dear reader, it was your inquisitiveness towards my own personal experience which brought you to this paragraph. And the answer to the titular question is a relatively well-known movie from Paul Thomas Anderson titled Magnolia. Why ?

Because after watching it, I knew the movie had changed me irreversibly, but I had no idea how. Many of the meaningful moments in our lifetime seem to ascertain themselves with deep, life changing philosophical depth, but somehow, the most important among them always seem to evade their greater meaning from us, as if to make us revisit and learn from them from time to time.

One of my greater fears I have as a human being is I have depleted my quota for the emotions a human being feels in his lifetime and what I am feeling now is just lesser version of what I have already felt. But after watching Magnolia, I knew I was feeling something deeper than anything I had felt, but I also knew I would never have the words to describe it.

For me watching Magnolia wasn’t just a cinematic experience, but more or less, a life experience. And a profound one too.

(Share your greatest cinematic experience and your thoughts on the different perception of movies in the comments)

THANKS FOR READING. IF YOU HAVE LIKED/HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS / HAVE ANY  DOUBTS, PLEASE SHARE. I WILL RESPOND TO IT AS SOON AS I CAN. AND PLEASE SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE. YOU CAN FOLLOW ME ON MY FACEBOOK PAGE TOO https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100011549616628 YOU CAN ALSO E-MAIL ME ON castlebang786@gmail.com OR favebook2011@rediffmail.comPhoto Rights : Google Images, Wikipedia

Copyright : All written content on this site, unless otherwise noted, has been created by the website owner. As such, the content is the property of the website owner. This content is protected by Indian and international copyright laws. If you wish to reproduce, re-post, or display any of our content on your own site please only do so if you also provide a link back to the source page on this website and properly attribute authorship. Our preference is that you seek our permission before doing so. If you see anything on this website that has not been properly attributed to its originator please contact me. In response, I will attempt to correct the attribution of the offending material or remove and/or replace it. All material on this website is posted in accordance with the limitations set forward by the Information Technology Act, 2000. If a documented copyright owner so requests, their material will be removed from published display, although the author reserves the right to provide linkage to that material or to a source for that material. As a website devoted to discussing and reviewing movies and television I will at times, for illustrative purposes, present copyrighted material, the use of which might not always be specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available  for purposes such as criticism, comment, and research. The website owner believes that this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material because the articles published on this website are distributed for entertainment purposes.

Shoah Review

Every art form owes its origin to a characteristic so deeply ingrained in the human race, that over the course of history it has proved to be the standpoint among our various attributes which separates us from all other animals – a proclivity to preserve the truth for the future generations, so as to enlighten them on the mistakes of the past generations and how to evade them during the course of their lifetimes. Literature stemmed from Herodotus’ accounts of the brutality of wars and gradually gave form to genres and sub-genres with a voice and style of their own. However, written words failed to emanate certitude, for it had to stand trial against the existence of the boundless imaginative powers of the human race.

But eyes, how can they lie ? The invention of cinema, thus stands out till date as a definitive tool to capture the truth, and freeze it forever. And Shoah, the 9-hour epic by Claude Lanzmann constituting of the interviews of Holocaust survivors, historians and SS officials stands out as the greatest use of cinema in its century and a half long history.

Speaking from a professional and personal front, writing anything about Shoah is an exigent task. How do you review testimonials of the survivors of one of the greatest human tragedies tailored to form a documentary ? In my entire life, there hasn’t been a movie which has impacted me as a human being as Shoah has. As the movie progressed, there were times where I closed my eyes and just listened to the testimonials. There was an appalling truth in the eyes of these survivors which seemed to flash the horrors they were describing. To look eye-to-eye with them was too naked and painful than a human being can bear.

Whenever I review a movie, I often find my responsibility to talk about a movie reminiscent to that of a salesman. I can spend my time praising the product, enticing you to buy it, or talk adversely about, thus discouraging you from buying it. So the question here is how can I sell to you a 9-hour documentary about the Holocaust with only conversations ?

Well, because you as a member of this species are entitled by your moral responsibility to give a damn about the sufferings of others. Shoah maybe a long film, but it definitely isn’t a slow one. The conversations are emotionally harrowing, sometimes even darkly funny and more often than not, intriguing in their nature. I watched this movie over a course of two days. At nights, I was plagued by various visions of death in my dreams. Watching Shoah isn’t a pleasant experience, but it is a rewarding one. Great movies have the power to change the very soul of a human being and no movie better personifies that than Shoah.

The only fallacy, which turns out to be the greatest strength of Shoah the more I think about it, would be the interrogative style Lanzmann adopts with SS officials. Although this method is faulty for it could have lead to clear-cut villains and heroes in this story, it ended up exposing the helplessness of these men as well. The testament which moved me the most was that of a Nazi official towards the end of the movie whose words state explicitly the torment he had in coming in terms with violence unfolding around him. Imagine the guilt of surviving a hell when everyone who you loved didn’t. Now imagine living through the fact that although you couldn’t do single damn thing about it, you too will stand out in history as a perpetrator of the greatest tragedy in human history.

That is what this extraordinary movie seems to say. ‘No one survived the Holocaust’.

RATING :- 10 / 10

THANKS FOR READING. IF YOU HAVE LIKED/HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS / HAVE ANY  DOUBTS, PLEASE SHARE. I WILL RESPOND TO IT AS SOON AS I CAN. AND PLEASE SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE. YOU CAN FOLLOW ME ON MY FACEBOOK PAGE TOO https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100011549616628 YOU CAN ALSO E-MAIL ME ON castlebang786@gmail.com OR favebook2011@rediffmail.com

Photo Rights : Google Images, Wikipedia

Copyright : All written content on this site, unless otherwise noted, has been created by the website owner. As such, the content is the property of the website owner. This content is protected by Indian and international copyright laws. If you wish to reproduce, re-post, or display any of our content on your own site please only do so if you also provide a link back to the source page on this website and properly attribute authorship. Our preference is that you seek our permission before doing so. If you see anything on this website that has not been properly attributed to its originator please contact me. In response, I will attempt to correct the attribution of the offending material or remove and/or replace it. All material on this website is posted in accordance with the limitations set forward by the Information Technology Act, 2000. If a documented copyright owner so requests, their material will be removed from published display, although the author reserves the right to provide linkage to that material or to a source for that material. As a website devoted to discussing and reviewing movies and television I will at times, for illustrative purposes, present copyrighted material, the use of which might not always be specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available  for purposes such as criticism, comment, and research. The website owner believes that this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material because the articles published on this website are distributed for entertainment purposes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sachin – A Billion Dreams Review

On the second of April in the year 2011, I (like billion others) was glued to the television screen in my friend’s house. The consistency with which Jayawardene was belting out boundaries was draining us all bit by bit of any hope that this wait of 28 years would finally come to an end. 274 runs were put on board by the visitors, a target imposing in nature even in a normal one-day international, forget in a World Cup final. If India was to lay hands on the World Cup, Sri Lanka had ensured it would be only after the biggest run chase in World Cup final history. After the fall of the Nawab of Najafgarh, the hope of 1.311 billion people took the crease. And after a straight-drive which I to date consider the greatest played in the history of cricket, Tendulkar departed from the crease due to an edge which was held on to by the masterful hands of Kumar Sangakarra. At this moment, my friend switched off the television.

Such was the influence of Tendulkar. For masses all over, Tendulkar encapsulated the entire batting lineup. His wicket meant the downfall of the entire team. The fact that my own personal favourite player and captain of the Indian team, Mahendra Singh Dhoni took the Indian team home is another story. But, this trivial incident seems to be the memory that stands out whenever I recount that eventful day.

This beautiful nation I live in is in itself a rags-to-riches story. From reeling under extreme poverty, India has taken gargantuan steps to consolidate its position as a considerable force in international politics. However, there was a need to stand out. We were developing for sure, but never in the forefront of anything. That is where Tendulkar came in. His rise to the numero uno position coincided with India’s development, turning his career into a prismatic view of India itself. Harsha Bhogle rightly states ‘He stood for everything India stood for – humbleness, a respect towards elders and a zeal to be the greatest. In him, everyone saw their hopes and that they too can come true’.

Never in my life have I ever seen an audience sit through the ending credits of a movie. But, when I went to watch Billion Dreams, every audience member had his eyes glued to the screen till the credits ended. That is because Sachin – A Billion Dreams is not just a movie, it was an experience. In the footage of his last match, a fan is seen holding a board which says ‘ I wish I could have had a time machine just to go back to the 15th of November, 1989’. For the time this movie was projected in the cinema hall, every single one of us in that room had time spiraled back for us, our hearts beating for Sachin again. I won’t give a rating at the end of this, because I give ratings to movies, not experiences.

There few sportsmen that stand out. A handful that define an era, if they are lucky. Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar at the end of his career had ended up defining an entire sport.

THANKS FOR READING. IF YOU HAVE LIKED/HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS / HAVE ANY  DOUBTS, PLEASE SHARE. I WILL RESPOND TO IT AS SOON AS I CAN. AND PLEASE SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE. YOU CAN FOLLOW ME ON MY FACEBOOK PAGE TOO https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100011549616628 YOU CAN ALSO E-MAIL ME ON castlebang786@gmail.com OR favebook2011@rediffmail.com

Photo Rights : Google Images, Wikipedia

Copyright : All written content on this site, unless otherwise noted, has been created by the website owner. As such, the content is the property of the website owner. This content is protected by Indian and international copyright laws. If you wish to reproduce, re-post, or display any of our content on your own site please only do so if you also provide a link back to the source page on this website and properly attribute authorship. Our preference is that you seek our permission before doing so. If you see anything on this website that has not been properly attributed to its originator please contact me. In response, I will attempt to correct the attribution of the offending material or remove and/or replace it. All material on this website is posted in accordance with the limitations set forward by the Information Technology Act, 2000. If a documented copyright owner so requests, their material will be removed from published display, although the author reserves the right to provide linkage to that material or to a source for that material. As a website devoted to discussing and reviewing movies and television I will at times, for illustrative purposes, present copyrighted material, the use of which might not always be specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available  for purposes such as criticism, comment, and research. The website owner believes that this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material because the articles published on this website are distributed for entertainment purposes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ace In The Hole Review

There is a simple, yet powerful quote that hangs in the office of Albuquerque Sun-Bulletin where Kirk Douglas’ character Chuck Tatum works. It says’ Tell The Truth’. From its humble beginnings in Strasbourg to the industry churning billions per year it is now, the fourth estate has changed for worse. A Good Samaritan initiative which stood for truth above everything else now has deteriorated into a ruckus of so-called ‘journalists’ all waiting eagerly for tragedies to lap up like street dogs who wait for the biscuits the good old man throws their way during his evening walk.

Chuck Tatum is that growler who eats up all the biscuits without giving the hungry ones behind him even the pleasure of a single crumb. While on his way to cover a story about a rattlesnake hunt, Tatum chances upon a human interest story – in other words, the whole biscuit factory. And he sure as hell doesn’t want anyone else to have shot at it except him. And what unfolds for the rest of this movie’s run time is a repugnant pother which has aged liked wine.

If there was ever a spiritual prequel to Sidney Lumet’s Network, it would be Wilder’s Ace In The Hole. It is a vigorously cogent work which has, rather unfortunately, stood the test of time. When it released back in 1951, it was received with lukewarm reviews and poor box-office returns. No wonder, for it was unlike all the movies Hollywood was churning out then. All like puppies wanted to be petted by everyone. Ace In The Hole takes a stand, abides by it and spurts out the truth in a right-in-your-face manner.

It shouts ‘We ourselves are the perpetrators of the crimes we accuse the media of. Where would be the demand if there was no one to sell to ?’ Maybe the world would be a hell of a better place if we took just a minute and really thought about that.

(When the movie released, the studios started charging the people to visit the sets. This movie is worth watching just to laugh at the irony of this fact)

RATING :-  9.4 / 10

THANKS FOR READING. IF YOU HAVE LIKED/HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS / HAVE ANY  DOUBTS, PLEASE SHARE. I WILL RESPOND TO IT AS SOON AS I CAN. AND PLEASE SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE. YOU CAN FOLLOW ME ON MY FACEBOOK PAGE TOO https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100011549616628 YOU CAN ALSO E-MAIL ME ON castlebang786@gmail.com OR favebook2011@rediffmail.com

Photo Rights : Google Images, Wikipedia

Copyright : All written content on this site, unless otherwise noted, has been created by the website owner. As such, the content is the property of the website owner. This content is protected by Indian and international copyright laws. If you wish to reproduce, re-post, or display any of our content on your own site please only do so if you also provide a link back to the source page on this website and properly attribute authorship. Our preference is that you seek our permission before doing so. If you see anything on this website that has not been properly attributed to its originator please contact me. In response, I will attempt to correct the attribution of the offending material or remove and/or replace it. All material on this website is posted in accordance with the limitations set forward by the Information Technology Act, 2000. If a documented copyright owner so requests, their material will be removed from published display, although the author reserves the right to provide linkage to that material or to a source for that material. As a website devoted to discussing and reviewing movies and television I will at times, for illustrative purposes, present copyrighted material, the use of which might not always be specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available  for purposes such as criticism, comment, and research. The website owner believes that this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material because the articles published on this website are distributed for entertainment purposes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ginger & Rosa Review

Love is an irresistible desire to be irresistibly desired‘. These words of the great American poet, Robert Frost rings true for this 2012 movie from Sally Potter starring Elle Fanning and Alice Englert. The plot of this movie is concerned with a deteriorating friendship between the best friends Ginger and Rosa when the latter gets in a romantic relationship with the father of the primer.

Watching it ushers back memories from a 1962 French movie ‘Cleo From 5 To 7‘ in their uncanny representation of making love as an affirmation of life. Throughout the movie, Sally creates and nudges the audience repeatedly to comprehend the psychological brutality of the Cold War due to which the characters seem to be consciously adapting themselves to the finality of their lives, thus depriving themselves of the morality of their judgements.

The aspect of this wonderful movie that impressed me the most, and has gone unfortunately unnoticed to the public eye would be the underlying subtext to the dialogues. The scene in which Rosa comes out in open to Ginger about the nature of her relationship with Ginger’s father is breathtaking. The entire scene concerns itself with talks about the nuclear war and the Ten Commandments, however the underlying pathos is evident as anything can be.

One of the great accomplishments a drama can do is paint a story without a villain like A Separation. In a movie titled’ Ginger & Rosa’, Rosa seems vague in her actions as compared to the clear-cut emotional complexity of Ginger. As the movie progresses, Potter succumbs to the need to paint a character where the audience can corner their hate towards, and poor Rosa seems to be the scapegoat. When the movie ended, I was completely befuddled with Ginger’s acceptance of Rosa’s actions which to me seemed so vile in their nature.

Yet, there is so much to admire in this emotionally complex tale of friendship and love and existentialism that it stands out as a must-watch without a shimmer of doubt.

RATING :- 8.5 / 10

THANKS FOR READING. IF YOU HAVE LIKED/HAVE DIFFERENT VIEWS / HAVE ANY  DOUBTS, PLEASE SHARE. I WILL RESPOND TO IT AS SOON AS I CAN. AND PLEASE SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE. YOU CAN FOLLOW ME ON MY FACEBOOK PAGE TOO https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100011549616628 YOU CAN ALSO E-MAIL ME ON castlebang786@gmail.com OR favebook2011@rediffmail.com

Photo Rights : Google Images, Wikipedia

Copyright : All written content on this site, unless otherwise noted, has been created by the website owner. As such, the content is the property of the website owner. This content is protected by Indian and international copyright laws. If you wish to reproduce, re-post, or display any of our content on your own site please only do so if you also provide a link back to the source page on this website and properly attribute authorship. Our preference is that you seek our permission before doing so. If you see anything on this website that has not been properly attributed to its originator please contact me. In response, I will attempt to correct the attribution of the offending material or remove and/or replace it. All material on this website is posted in accordance with the limitations set forward by the Information Technology Act, 2000. If a documented copyright owner so requests, their material will be removed from published display, although the author reserves the right to provide linkage to that material or to a source for that material. As a website devoted to discussing and reviewing movies and television I will at times, for illustrative purposes, present copyrighted material, the use of which might not always be specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available  for purposes such as criticism, comment, and research. The website owner believes that this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material because the articles published on this website are distributed for entertainment purposes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Cinema Of Andrei Tarkovsky

There was a time when visual suzerains held cinema-going audiences spellbound with their every frame a painting modus operandi, hiding beneath these visual orgasms philosophical undertones to be sought after and admired, and in case of savants, comprehended. When I first chanced upon this blogathon, the name that popped up in my mind instantly was that of Quentin Tarantino, a true master of fiery dialogue and the power it unleashes on the minds of the audience. However, if I forsake for this moment my preference for the verbal aspect of cinema than the visual, I cannot seem to think of any other name than that of Russian film-making’s prized gem christened Andrei Tarkovsky.

I belong to the 21st century. Consummated by fast-paced movies, this is a generation which seems to forgive and even adore directors who forsake art if they seem to provide ample entertainment. So obviously, when I was introduced to the cinema of the likes of Ingmar Bergman and Terrence Malick and Bela Tarr, the reaction was reminiscent of a drug addict’s to rehab. However, when the sepia-coloured screen faded in, I was completely mesmerized.

I am talking about my viewing experience of the 1979 classic of Tarkovsky’s titled Stalker. There are very movies which penetrate deep into one’s soul and create an atmosphere which forces one to introspect on the very foundation of one’s existence. Stalker was one of the very few gems that conjured that atmosphere for me. As the movie progressed deep within the Zone, towards the room where one’s innermost desires were satisfied, I experienced my own subconscious tracing its path towards my soul and exposing a facet of it. A facet so veracious in nature that I was taken aback by the years I spent pretending to be oblivious of its existence. When Stalker neared its end, I was left sobbing inconsolably. Maybe when we look so deep into ourselves, sadness seems to be the only emotion invoked. Even if I say Stalker changed me irrevocably, I believe it still would be a gross understatement to the emotional impact this masterpiece by Andrei Tarkovsky unleashes.

But I believe that you, dear reader, still have a pertinent question hanging on the back of your minds. Why Tarkovsky? Why chose him over Welles or Ford or Hitchcock or Kubrick? Your question holds a firm validity since none of his other movies have even come close to Stalker’s greatness. The Mirror seems to be an artistic mess (a description I believe Tarkovsky intended it to be characterized by). His Solaris is an imperfect masterpiece in my opinion, oscillating between Tarkovsky’s and Stainslaw’s (the writer of the novel on which the movie is based) vision, in the end delivering a work-in-progress feel when the screen fades.

Well, the answer to the aforementioned question is crystal clear when I think about it. All directors have a distinctively personal work, say Malick’s Tree Of Life or Fellini’s 8 ½. With Tarkovsky, it was always personal. He intended every movie of his to be a pathway for the viewer into his own being, various cinematic models reminiscent of the pathways John Cusack’s character finds in Being John Malkovich.

All of Tarkovsky’s works were meditative in their nature, with soothing visual imagery at every turn.  It was not an attempt to lure the intellectuals or instill in his movies metaphorical subplots. On the contrary, it was his daring attempt to make art accessible to every layman. An opportunity to analyze and meditate upon the events which had transpired before. Unlike all other intellectuals who have graced the cine industry, Tarkovsky actually wanted ‘everyone’ to understand.

http://phyllislovesclassicmovies.blogspot.in/2017/03/announcing-favorite-director-blogathon.html

Decades Blogathon – L.A. Confidential (1997) — three rows back

Welcome to Day 4 of the Decades Blogathon – ‘7’ edition – hosted by myself and my blogging brother Tom from Thomas J. For those who don’t know, the blogathon focuses on movies that were released in the seventh year of the decade. Tom and I are running a different entry each day (we’ll also […]

via Decades Blogathon – L.A. Confidential (1997) — three rows back