Synecdoche New York Review

Synecdoche New York is a movie about movies, but not in the conventional sense. Its affairs do not concern themselves with scrutinizing the method of crafting a narrative, but rather the intentions behind doing so.

What is it to have a true cinematic experience ? I believe it is the singularity of emotions an audience coming from different paths of life experiences when watching a movie. A person feeling the same joy, same sadness, same intrigue as the one sitting next to him. In Synecdoche New York, what Kaufman does is create a world where characters morph into each other every passing scene and subject themselves to desolation of the others, scrutinizing how we as a species react in a state of singularity to same events. But its vision is not limited to the confines of the screen. This movie rather plays outside it. It makes us aware of the actors we are in our perceived reality constructing our own worlds with our own actions while seemingly attributing it to preconceived destiny.

As all great movies made about life are, essentially what defines Synecdoche New York is a quest for a meaning to one’s existence. What Kaufman says is melancholic, but harshly true and beautiful like the poem about spring that opens this movie. Our quest seems to be for a permanent meaning, yet we ourselves change every passing day. All our previous selves survive inside us somehow, and each of them have ascertained themselves with different meanings. Our folly is we yearn for a permanent meaning for our multiple selves, eventually subjecting ourselves to believe in a nihilistic mindset, missing the bigger picture.

As most of Charlie Kaufman’s work has been, Synecdoche New York is a comedy as well. It’s just that it doesn’t rely on gags and one-liners to crack the audience up. Rather it is the irony that even after having every disease imaginable, Caden outlives almost everyone and that this movie begins and ends at 7:45. Does that say something about why it is so convoluted and abstract ? If you look a bit closer at the absurdity of the events, I believe it surely does.

For better or worse, this is a movie about everything. It charters life from the point where thought originates in an individual and subjects the viewer to a downright depressing or hilarious ride, varying on whether you are all worked up when it ends or you have an ironic smile when it does, respectively.

The first time I watched Synecdoche New York, it felt incomplete to me. The second time I realized it was to be completed by my own inadequacies and fears. There are bad movies, passable movies, good movies, excellent movies and great movies. And once in a blue moon, there are movies like Synecdoche New York. These are movies which you feel you can’t tell people about, movies that are so special and so yours that advertising your affection feels like a betrayal. It sure isn’t the greatest movie ever made or anything, but Synecdoche New York is my movie, just as my body is my body and my thoughts are my thoughts. The day I find someone worth recommending it, my God, that would be the day.

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

 

Anatomy Of A Murder Review

As a lawyer, I’ve had to learn that people aren’t just good or just bad – Paul Biegler

One of the few things that bugged me about Anatomy Of A Murder was why had Paul taken the case. There were slim chances of winning and there wasn’t any ready cash in it. By the end, we know why. To bring his friend Parnell back into life. And that’s all the suspense there is in Anatomy Of A Murder. Now, if you expect to watch this movie and experience your pulse thickening and your heart beat racing, I have quite effectively destroyed all the chances you had of that, however slim that might have been. The facts are all laid out in the beginning itself . What follows for the next two hours or so is a mind game. And boy, O boy, don’t I love one of those !

Otto Preminger’s Anatomy Of A Murder is about Paul Biegler (James Stewart) who is defending a military who has killed presumably a man who raped his wife.

Do you know about the television debates between William F. Buckley Jr. and Gore Vidal in 1968 ? Well, if not, well in short they sort of molded modern television debates and their nature. What struck about those debates was the wit. They had me in splits ! And that is what most struck me while I was watching Anatomy Of A Murder. It is a murder trial, there is a man’s life hanging on the trial, but it wouldn’t hurt to infuse humor into it, would it ? There is a furry of one liners at a torrent pace throughout the movie. This is a strict, to-the-book trial movie. And here there are no people sobbing, witnesses shouting ‘You can’t handle the truth!’ nor are there even openings. Considering how the trial was going, I was all anticipated for the big dramatic stand-off. NOTHING.

Why ? Because this movie is not about what the facts are. They are laid out there and they won’t change. It is about the ever-dominating human factor in justice. How is it that a man’s life hangs in balance of what another person thinks at a point of time ? What is going on in their minds ? I have firmly believed throughout my movie watching experiences that the viewer is assigned a certain duty to play out in the movie. Walk out of one that doesn’t do that. Here, we are not one of the jury members, as some might perceive so. Here, we are one among those faceless crowds that sits behind and watches the drama unfolds. Our thoughts are obviously molding an opinion, no doubt at it whatsoever, but we have no control over the outcome. We are there also trying to figure out, what in God’s name are those 12 individuals thinking ? Are they actually not taking into consideration what the judge discredits ? Or do they have preconceived notions, with the utterances only confirming them or disproving them ?

We never know. It is more questions than answers. It is definitely a movie that an aspiring lawyer should watch. It is never the truth that wins. It is what is sold better as truth that wins. The movie, is as the title quite aptly suggest, an anatomy of a murder. It follows it, it examines it, it ends it and moves on. But, the fact that it leaves me emotionless after 166 minutes perturbs me. Yes, it had amazing portrayals, brilliant script and superb music, and it didn’t take sides, but wasn’t Laura’s promiscuity too much entertained ? And every  movie should have an emotional core. One without is like a Tarantino movie without any Samuel Jackson in it. But as the screen fades, I do oddly feel a certain warmth tugging me. It is of Paulie and Parnell’s friendship. I am contented, willing to leave behind a flaw, and admit this is a great movie. O, what a closing ! (No pun intended)

RATING : 9.4 / 10

IF YOU HAVE WATCHED THIS MOVIE, WHAT DID YOU THINK ABOUT IT ? DO LET ME KNOW IN COMMENTS BELOW. YOU CAN FOLLOW ME ON MY FACEBOOK PAGE TOO https://www.facebook.com/pages/Demanded-Critical-Reviews/1565666967024477?ref=hl 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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dr.Strangelove Review

Stanley Kubrick’s Dr.Strangelove follows a psychopath army general Jack Ripper (Sterling Hayden) who thinks the Russians are hatching an international conspiracy to pollute precious body fluids and therefore orders an air strike on Russia. Then we follow the plot into the War Room where the President of United States of America (Peter Sellers) and his associates try to handle the situation with the help of the Russian ambassador while a crew of B-52 bomber headed by Captain Kong (Slim Pickens) stop at no cost to bomb any one of the targets in Russia.

To get the whole essence of the movie, you have to be really knowledgeable about Cold War. I love this stuff because I am a history buff, and that helped me get the essence of it, but not entirely I admit. Like every time you read about Cold War and re watch this movie, you love it even more. Dr.Strangelove is wacky and hilarious ride. Stanley Kubrick’s only entry in the comedy genre is the definitive satire of the satire genre. It is a work of genius right from the start to the end.

I once wrote an article upon how to identify a classic and I specified that many people disregard comedies as classics. This movie proves my point that a comedy can be a hell of a classic. I love over-the-top performances by actors when the scenario is of turmoil. And that is exactly what we get with George O Scott roaring uproariously with vigour and fury against U.S.S.R. and Peter Sellers’  hilarious interpretation of the diagnostic apraxia into a satirical take on the Third Reich Salute.

The script is work of genius. Entire hate against the U.S.S.R is accumulated in a kinetic explosion of hilarious dialogues which leaves the logic out of the ball-park yet is a commentatory of the banality at which U.S.A perceived each action of the U.S.S.R. during the Cold War and vice versa. And the thing is that it never takes sides, it does not determine which side is right or wrong, especially signified by the friendship between the President and the Premier.

Another factor which makes this movie great is the performances. George O Scott is just fabulous. Man, he deserved Best Actor nomination for this ! Just completely over-the-top. Loved it. But, Peter Sellers deserved a win in that category. It is so hard to get into a single character. But this guy portrays each of his three characters with such flair they each form their own identity. In many double-roles I have seen actors give performances in which the characters are indistinguishable but Sellers helms three at a time yet I wasn’t able to figure out that it was him in those three roles until I checked the Wikipedia page.

The effects of the plane flying may look silly now, but that just adds to the humour. The War Room is beautifully constructed and the lighting work is fabulous and the score which is seldom used is stupendous as well.

My favourite scene is a shot in which George Scott is appealing to the President that ‘The so-called Doomsday Machine is just a scam if the Commies’ and he falls, but he rolls over and points to the Big Board. It is a moment of certain flair. The climax conveys the message that if this hatred exists within ourselves, we are all our way to doom. A classic is like wine, it stands the test of time and only gets better with time. I laughed my guts out and enjoyed every millisecond of this 1964 motion picture which exactly as old as my father.

Dr. Strangelove is the king of satires, a jewel for film-lovers and Kubrick’s masterpiece which is a hilarious take on the Cold War and the mentality of the U.S.A and U.S.S.R individuals towards each other. In short, hell of a movie.

Rating : 9.3 / 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 TOOhttps://www.facebook.com/pages/Demanded-Critical-Reviews/1565666967024477?ref=hlYOU 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.