Reviews by Lexi

''Do you think if you get General Aidid, we will simply put down our weapons and adopt American democracy? That the killing will stop? We know this. Without victory, there will be no peace. There will always be killing, see? This is how things are in our world.''

A solid decent war film that follows the US siege of the Somalian city Mogadishu. Starts with us all getting acquainted with the marine characters and their routines.

Josh Hartnett: Eversmann

Two black Hawk choppers are put down. What transpires is alot of desperate marines trying frantically to secure and survive against impossible odds.



Josh Harnett, Orlando Bloom, Ewan Mcgregor, Eric Bana, Jason Isaacs all do a magnificence job of their marine counterpart roles. Also a peek from Ioan Gruffudd.
Some graphic scenes and bloody gore that are sickeningly realistic. Amazing battle scenes and tense heart-pounding music. Was quite savage in parts. Even some slapstick comedy lurking in here!
For whatever reason, I don't remember hearing much about the civil war in Somalia or about the Battle of Mogadishu on which Black Hawk Down is based. The plan seemed simple enough: the Army is sent into Somalia by the government to try to put an end to the Civil War. On October 3, 1993, a group of them were sent on a quick mission to capture the Somali warlord that had been running the country with an iron fist. It didn't take long for the operation to go completely FUBAR as two Black Hawk helicopters were shot down. Things went from bad to worse, as the Rangers found themselves surrounded by thousands of armed Somalis, whose only goal was to shoot any American soldier that invaded their space.

''It's what you do right now that makes a difference.''

Without having to draw a breath, a well deserved cry has to be made for Ridley Scott, who has succeeded in making one hell of a war movie with Black Hawk Down. Unlike some war films that lace the battle with slower character-building sequences, you have to wait only thirty minutes for the Rangers' mission to go into motion. And the action doesn't stop for the duration o the film, as the rest of the movie is filled with flying stray bullets, explosions and bloodshed. The fighting is so chaotic that it is hard to follow the action and tell what is happening, at times, and it becomes almost too easy to become emotionless to the violence. By the third time someone yells RPG's! though, every viewer knows it's wise to duck and cover.

While the American soldiers go in with a solid plan, it doesn't take long for panic to set in, and pretty soon, you're not sure which side is more disorganized. It's amazing to watch what seems like thousands of extras playing the Somali militia swarming over the soldiers, and the action and camerawork is reminiscent of a video game as the soldiers try to escape their precarious situation through the streets of Mogadishu. As the movie progresses, the tension continues to build as the grim and unrelenting hopelessness of the situation sets in both for the soldiers and the viewer.

It's pretty amazing how much has been made of the 19 downed American soldiers when over 1000 Somali men, women, and children were killed during the raid. While the movie is clearly weighed towards the American perspective, I can't imagine how it must have felt to be the guy who gets to play "Dead Somali with a Gun #354".

''You Americans don't smoke anymore. You live long, dull and uninteresting lives.''

Although characterization has always been used extensively in war movies to get the viewer to care about the characters, Black Hawk Down works better because it utilizes the soldiers, they are personified as little more than grunts in the field doing the bidding of their superiors. At least the soldiers had their names taped to their helmets, so that this didn't have the problem of some war movies, where it's sometimes hard to tell who is who. Some of the best performances of the film come from Tom Sizemore as the gung-ho Lt. McKnight and Josh Hartnett, who plays the sergeant who leads the mission and feels personal guilt every time a man is lost. Sam Shepard also is excellent as Major General William Garrison, who sits back in the safe zone watching his doomed men be overpowered by the enemy. Eric Bana's part is small, but he has some of the best lines in the film, really driving home the point of why soldiers do what they do. Ewan McGregor's role is even more minor and insignificant, but his Trainspotting compatriot, Ewen Bremner offers the movie's little bit of comic relief.

As expected in a Ridley Scott film, the visuals and camera-work are stunning with the movie having a gray almost monochromatic look that makes the orange flames and red blood really stand out. As is typical in Scott's recent movies, there is lots of flying dust, rubble and debris mixed with slow motion shots of falling bullet casings and splattered blood. He also uses animals and non-military personnel well in some of the shots to show that this firefight is happening in the middle of a populated market district.

Ridley Scott rightly deserved an Oscar nomination with Hawk . It`s his movie and he surpasses some aspects that Spielberg achieved with Saving Private Ryan. War is hell and this is a film of stark and haunting imagery of victims of famine , of mutilated soldiers and civilians . Both editing and cinematography are superb with many great scenes like the small stream of American soldiers walking up the street while on the other side of the houses a massive torrent of armed militiamen are walking in the same direction...
By the end, while the troops are shown retrieving, you see an old man crossing the roads, holding a dead kid in his hands. There is no emotion to be seen in his face. You hear a music at the background. And with the single scene you are convinced about the brutality of a war. This single scene discloses the greatness of the cinema,reveals the talents of a film maker and greatness of an art form.

''No one gets left behind, you know that.''

Ash: Ripley, for God's sake, this is the first time that we've encountered a species like this. It has to go back. All sorts of tests have to be made.
Ripley: Ash, are you kidding? This thing bled acid. Who knows what it's gonna do when it's dead?
Ash: I think it's safe to assume it isn't a zombie.

A mining ship, investigating a suspected SOS, lands on a distant planet. The crew discovers some strange creatures and investigates.

Sigourney Weaver: Ripley.

Alien sees us following a seven man crew journeying to Earth aboard a huge space freighter aptly named Nostromo. The crew is in cryo-sleep, but the on-board Computer A.I. interrupts the journey, thanks to a foreign radio signal is picked up. It originates from an uninhabited planet and the crew lands to investigate. There they make contact with a foreign entity...



What makes Alien legendary is the constant feel of uneasiness it leaves in the pit of your stomach. Right from the beginning you have a sense that something isn't right. The crew is not particularly friendly towards one another, and you truly feel all the Crew relation tension. The ship itself is a huge worn out industrial-style maze of metallic halls and lonely corridors, and it feels more like a prison than a place to live. It is as if not only the alien but also the ship itself is against them. The Alien itself is the scariest monster in history because it is a ruthless, soul-less parasite completely devoid of any human or civilized attributes. The design of the monster is a stroke of genius. Sure it has a humanoid corporeal form, but it has no facial traits or anything else which could give away emotions or intentions,apart from it's gritted teeth visage. Its actions reveals no weaknesses nor rationally intelligence, its more or less the opposite of human and more of an insectoid, instinctive creature, plus it's nature and instinct allows for the alien to be more adapted to the inhumane interior of the ship. To sum up, you then have a setting where the humans are caught in a web of in-group tensions, an inhospitable ship and the perfect killer which thrives in the ships intestines. You almost get the feel that the humans are the ones who are alienated to each other and to their own ship.

Dallas: [looks at a pen being dissolved by alien's body fluid] I haven't seen anything like that except, uh, molecular acid.
Brett: It must be using it for blood.
Parker: It's got a wonderful defense mechanism. You don't dare kill it.

Ridely Scott is such a minimalist in some of his film projects, sci-fi nuts find it to be slow and unenterprising. So many people prefer Aliens, its sequel, to this one, which is unfair. I think Aliens, directed by James Cameron, is another sci-fi masterpiece (and maybe the best action film ever made), but I think Alien is the same quality but for alternative reasons. In fact, I would say that it is among the best films ever made, in sci-fi, only equaled or rivaled to, the enigmatic 2001:A Space Oddysey.
The plot absolutely lacks contrivance. All the plot points develop how they would naturally. And there are great surprises throughout the film. Even if you haven't seen the film, you know about the chest-bursting scene. You probably saw it parodied dozens of times. But watch the scene where Ian Holm reveals his secret! That is one amazing scene! I actually saw the sequel first, so I kind of knew that secret, too, but it still shocked me. It was so well directed.

Notice how the dialogue works. It never particularly draws attention to itself. It actually reminds me of Robert Altman, how he directed such movies as Nashville, where many characters are speaking at the same time, and nothing seems more or less important than anything else. It is just like real life. Alien is one of the most realistic, documentary-like sci-fi films ever made.

Also notice the setting. The Nostromo's design is so believable that I feel that I'm actually seeing a real space vehicle. The alien ship also beams with its spookiness.
The characters are also extremely believable. They are so well written that even the first character who dies is completely developed. If you get the DVD, they actually created dossiers about each of the crew members. It also has extra scenes which round out the characters even more. I think Ripley is one of the most endearing characters in film history. Even in the last two sequels, which were visually interesting but not very well written or directed, Ripley held my interest. I teared up when she died at the end of 3. If they made a fifth one, I would go, no matter how terrible I knew it would be. The acting is also top-notch. Ian Holm, a great actor, gives one of his best performances here. I love the last scene that he is in. Truly a master. And of course Sigourney Weaver could have just as easily been nominated for an Oscar for her performance here as she was for Aliens.

Ripley: [nervously eyeing Alien while she pushes buttons] You are my lucky star. You... Lucky, lucky, lucky, lucky, lucky.

The most important part of a film, in my mind, is the mood. And heck, does Alien have one of the most genuinely spooky movies I've ever seen. Make sure you watch it after the sun has gone down. Also, watching it alone will help. The special effects are kind of cheap, but Scott knows this well enough. He only shows the alien for seconds at a time. Besides keeping us from seeing the shoddiness of those puppets, this technique makes the alien seem all the more creepy and mysterious.

As mentioned the ship is very claustrophobic and Ridley Scott adds to the eeriness by using camera movement, lights and shadows in an effective way. The living quarters are bright and should be comfortable to the crew, but there is something sterile about it all. The rest of the ship is basically a huge basement.
The music by Jerry Goldsmith underlines the eeriness so well, and the movie wouldn't have worked without his score. Combined with the sounds of the ship it all adds to the uneasiness.

This is not a story about heroic people who boldly teams up against evil. It's a story about ordinary people facing true fear, which is the fear without a face. The fear we can't understand and can't negotiate with, because its only goal is to survive on the expense of us. It's a story where some people bravely fight back whilst others are destroyed by the terror. It's a story where people a killed in a completely random way. There is no higher-order justice behind who gets to live and who dies. All seven characters are just part of a race where the fittest - not necessarily the most righteous - will prevail, and all seven characters start the race on an equal footing. None of them are true heroes, and none of them are true villains.

All the above makes Alien so great as a horror movie, not just a tense psychological Sci-Fi one. The terror isn't just the Alien itself, it's the entire atmosphere, which gets so effectively crawling under your skin, that you just can't shrug it off, until after the end credits like you can with so many other Hollywood horror movies. The title Alien doesn't just refer to the monster, it is the theme of the movie and it is the feeling you have during and after the movie.

''Final report of the commercial starship Nostromo, third officer reporting. The other members of the crew, Kane, Lambert, Parker, Brett, Ash and Captain Dallas, are dead. Cargo and ship destroyed. I should reach the frontier in about six weeks. With a little luck, the network will pick me up. This is Ripley, last survivor of the Nostromo, signing off.''
[to Jonesy the cat]
''Come on, cat.''

Ripley: Just tell me one thing, Burke. You're going out there to destroy them, right? Not to study. Not to bring back. But to wipe them out.
Burke: That's the plan. You have my word on it.
Ripley: All right, I'm in.

The only survivor of the Nostromo, Ripley is discovered in deep sleep half a century later by a salvage ship. When she is taken back to Earth, she learns that a human colony was founded on the same planet where the aliens were first discovered. After contact with the colony is lost, she finds herself sent back to the planet along with a team of warriors bent on destroying the alien menace. Also looking for survivors along the way.

Sigourney Weaver : Ellen Ripley

57 years after the events of the first film, Ellen Ripley is found and awakened from hyper sleep to discover that a terra-forming colony has been set up on LV-426, the planet wherein she and her fellow crew of the mining cargo spaceship Nostromo first encountered the titular aliens. When Earth-based communications loses contact with LV-426, a band of marines are sent to investigate, taking Ripley and a representative from the company that financed the colony, Carter Burke (Paul Reiser) along for the ride.
For the difficult job of following up Ridley Scott's excellent Alien, director James Cameron decided to go a completely different route--to make a fast moving, slightly tongue-in-cheek, boisterous action extravaganza. Remarkably, he was able to do that while still maintaining a stylistic and literary continuity that melds Aliens seamlessly with the first film.



Ripley is given alot more depth in character in this piece, although unfortunately, some of the more signifying scenes were deleted from the theatrical release (View the 2-hour and 37-minute Director's Cut instead). Cameron created Aliens into a grand vision of sorts, where Ripley's heroic efforts, have much more meaning as she's not only fighting, but also fighting to retain a part of her self, of something she lost due to her 57-year slumber. As in the first film, she is still the most intelligent, courageous and resourceful member of the crew.
The marines accompanying Ripley back to LV-426 may be too much of caricatured stereotypes for some tastes, but for anyone more agreeable to that kind of exaggeration, it's a joy to watch.
Bill Paxton and Lance Henriksen, both turn in wonderfully over-the-top performances, at their diametrically opposed ends of the emotional spectrum--Paxton as the spastic surfer/redneck and Henriksen as the intense, moody sage, with a surprising reality and an even more surprising conscience to go along with it. We also get a cigar-chomping Sergeant, a crazy, butch Private, and a complex, pensive Corporal as main characters, and a mysterious, bright young girl, Newt (played by Carrie Henn). Much of the center section of the film focuses on the interaction of these characters, despite the action trappings going on around them.

[pulling out his pump-action shotgun]
Hicks: I like to keep this handy... for close encounters.
Frost: I heard *that.*

James Cameron carries over the crypt/labyrinth motif of the first film Ridley Scott manned; and adds a metaphorical descent into the bowels of hell climax. The action throughout is suspenseful. Aliens contains one of my favorite cat fights in any film. It's also worth noting the influence this film may have had on Paul Verhoeven's Starship Troopers(1997); although admittedly, we could say that Cameron was influenced a bit by the Robert A. Heinlein book, as well. Throughout all of the varied action sequences, as well as the important early scenes of colonists on LV-426; Cameron is able to clearly convey the logistics of very complex sets, so that viewers remain on the edges of their seats.
Cameron's piece was garnered with two Oscars respectively for Best Effects, Visual Effects, and Sound Effects Editing; Rightly so, this films effects are in a word timeless.

Cleverly it must be mentioned: Cameron mirrors Ridley Scott's method from the predecessor Alien; The Aliens result in being so effective because we're not told too much about them, maintaining the mystery and the suspenseful illusion. We only receive glimpses into their physiology, their behavioral patterns and their primal insectoid intelligence. Cameron gives us just enough to become hooked, but not so much that we become overly familiar with the aliens, or start to question the logic behind the film. He also smartly carries over some devices from the first film that were abandoned to an extent, such as the acidic blood of the aliens, and he supplies answers to the few questions that the first film raised, such as why the blood doesn't corrode instruments and objects when a dead alien is examined.

Ripley: Get away from her, you *bitch!*

The main problem with Alien, some have said, was that, as great as it can be, the characterizations were reduced to the minimum (not that it really mattered, with Ridley Scott ensuring the film retained the right pace and suspense throughout). With Aliens, character development is the last thing fans should worry about; Cameron being fully aware of each individual's potential and exploiting it as much as he can. Ripley, whom was just part of an ensemble in the original, is now allowed to carry the whole film, and boy, does she carry it: rarely has there been a more solid, compelling female role in a genre movie like this (the fact that Sigourney Weaver is the only actress, thus far, to have received an Oscar nomination for a science-fiction film is further testament to Aliens' immortality). The supporting cast is equally good, with a multitude of different characters ranging from funny (regular Cameron collaborators Michael Biehn and Bill Paxton) to weird (Lance Henriksen's android Bishop) and bringing something extra to the movie's unique atmosphere.

On a superficial level, it could be said Alien was a horror movie, while the follow-up is an action-oriented piece; this may be true, but one should also notice that every single spectacular battle scene actually oozes tension; never leaving the audience with a pause to breathe or relax. In fact, Cameron has succeeded where many other directors would have failed: he stayed faithful to the originals tone, but managed nonetheless to make the film undeniably his own baby.
Relentlessly creepy, occasionally very violent and consistently compelling, Aliens is a pitch-perfect piece of adult science-fiction. Watch it on a double bill with Scott's version and you will get four hours of genre film-making at its finest.

''We'd better get back, 'cause it'll be dark soon, and they mostly come at night... mostly.''

''Life is a game. So fight for survival and see if you're worth it.''

In future Japan, the government captures a class of ninth-grade students and forces them to kill each other under the revolutionary "Battle Royale" act.

Tatsuya Fujiwara: Shuya Nanahara - Boys #15

Aki Maeda: Noriko Nakagawa - Girls #15

Batoru rowaiaru(2004) translating as Battle Royale is based on the shockwave novel by Koushun Takami, unsurprisingly a bestseller in Japan, and also resulting in a very controversial yet deep story. The plot is relatively simple (a class of junior high school students are forced to kill each other on a remote island, the last survivor wins and can go return home), but it is simplicity that gives the piece strength. No need for a very long prologue before we enter the main act.



Battle Royale seems to draw it's subject matter from pieces such as The Most Dangerous Game(1932) and Lord of the Flies(1963) applying it to a socially significant tale that involves elements of horror, satire and science fiction yet hitting on deeper society subject matter at the same time. Sardonic, emotionless references to the broader picture of Japanese culture and the majority attitudes that Japanese society has for the behaviour of their youths while addressing the importance for them to succeed in their education by their peers or parents.

The same themes are made explicit, for example in a film such as Takashi Miike's Visitor Q(2001), which shares the satirical, meta-textual approach presented by Battle Royale, but in a much more subversive and controversial form. In fact, the moral implications behind Visitor Q and Miike's other great film The Happiness of the Katakuris(2001) show that the problems facing contemporary Japanese society can be corrected by restoring the basic foundation of the family unit through the retrogressive ideas of the fraternal and maternal role-models that influence in determining the future lives of their children. Tellingly, the characters of Battle Royale have evolved in ultimately being disconnected from their parents, cast adrift in a world that they're ill-equipped to understand and as a result unable to cope with the pressures of adapting to adult society.

''And so our compulsory education was coming to an end...''

Here, similarities to the story of Lord of the Flies blossom with the idea of children chaotically spiraling out of control, but contrasted further against the lurid, pulp sensationalism of a film such as The Running Man(1987) for example; In which the socio-political fears of the Japanese government are exploited by both the commercial corporations and the media into producing scandalous entertainment. It's a disturbing vision albeit a compelling one.
One that blesses the satire with a much needed dose of raw magnetism as the story takes breaks and pauses to delve into teen soap romance and the occasional paradoxes of Japanese youth cinema. Despite this though, the tone of the film is exceptional throughout; perfectly juggling the more comical moments of satire, particularly those involving the always brilliant Takeshi Kitano, with the disturbing scenario and bursts of excessive violence. It is also worth noting that the film is able to invoke elicit empathy and understanding for this large cast of characters, creating elements of back-story and personality, for many characters, from the very brief scenes of narrative exposition.

Throughout the film, the performances from the young actors are strong, covering the sheer horror presented by the film's central concept and the various ways in which the different kids attempt to survive (some refuse to fight, some band together, others attempt to smash the system and a worrying few can't wait to cause bloody mayhem), and the skilfully way in which the writers bring the usual teen preoccupations with looks, popularity and the opposite sex as factors that eventually lead to their own downfall.
Battle Royale becomes more than a film,and indeed more than merely a medium or contemporary storytelling. It is an in-depth study into the complexities of society, violence and survival. The futuristic spin and ideology of indeed fighting fire with fire brings to mind, ''Two wrongs do not indeed make a right.'' which sums up the flawed solution of solving a problem using extremist ways of eradicating violence with indeed more violence. The film succeeds in being duly a piece of entertainment and at the same time a deep engaging story that asks us questions. Battle Royale succeeds in showing us our worst natures when we are forced into a fight for survival. When the educational study comes to a close, ask yourself...What did I learn from this?

''You just have to fight for yourself. That's just life...''

''For within each seed, there is a promise of a flower, and within each death, no matter how small, there is always a new life. A new beginning. Amen.''

Ripley continues to be stalked by a savage alien, after her escape pod crashes on a prison planet.

Oh please David Fincher you didn't direct this did you?


Sigourney Weaver : Ellen Ripley

After the first two incredible Alien movies maybe it could only go downhill. Maybe, part two should have been the finale with the viewers believing they all got good endings. Did anything good come from the third installment? It did help to cover what Ripley discovered in Aliens, that the Company wanted an alien to use as a weapon. I don't know if that was enough of a reason to warrant a third part, and though it lacked much of the intensity of the first two, I did like Alien 3.

If you recall in part two, Ripley and two other surviving crew members all slept in their life pods thinking the danger was over. Alien 3 picks up at this point as we see the survivors were not alone as they thought. Ripley crash lands on prison planet Fiorina 161 and is informed of the two other survivors deaths. Almost immediately prisoners are being killed, an obvious signal to Ripley one of the creatures is on Fiorina. The planet is desolate though and Superintendent Andrews (Brian Glover) has to tell Ripley they have no real weapons there since there is no way for the prisoners to escape.



Ripley: What about me?
Dillon: God will take care of you now, sister.

It has inexplicably become popular recently to call this film 'underrated', but it must be noted that this film is so bad that David Fincher and almost anyone else involved in the project has practically disowned it. Fincher had an agonizing time making this film, as he was brought into the project late into development and had to endure frequent, nearly intolerable creative interference from the studio. There are moments of typical Fincher brilliance in both versions of the film, but both are still without doubt bad films. It is worth noting that the extended special edition of this film is not by any means a director's cut, it is an assembly cut, simply adding in some deleted footage to make the film more complete, and without a doubt they were successful. The extended version of Alien3 doesn't feature the seemingly horrendous editing evident in the original theatrical release, but it is still a film marred by executives not allowing the director to take control of this film. David Fincher hates this movie so much he refused to do a commentary track for the Alien Quadrilogy DVD set. Even James Cameron, notorious for being hard to get to do commentary tracks, did one for Aliens. Alien3 gets started where Aliens left off with Ripley's escape pod crashing on the prison planet Fiorina 161 which is also host to a correctional facility. Newt and Hicks die as a result of the crash but somehow an Alien from the previous film decided to hide on board and somehow escaped detection.
The prison planet does not allow weapons funnily enough, leaving the prisoners and Ripley to fend for themselves.

Yes, the Aliens fan in me doesn't quite like how the entire second film's story is practically erased and its ending ruined in just the first few minutes of this film, but I'm willing to accept this if it was done well. It isn't. Alien3's script is foul, stupid, contrived, and utterly idiotic. Say what you will about Aliens and its script, but there's a difference between not taking yourself too seriously and simply being stupid. Alien was a claustrophobic, fascinating horror/thriller that was built on the 'less is more' ideology, and Aliens was the complete opposite: a pure, uninhibited action ride, brilliantly executed by all means. Alien3 wants to be dark, it wants to be depressing, it wants to have the mood of the first while showing the Aliens as much as Aliens did, and it fails. Alien3 has a weak plot, and it is as contrived as anything can possibly get.

This is a film made by the FOX executives and whomever they sent to ruin any chance David Fincher had to make this film look good. There are a few scenes where Fincher's superb directorial style is allowed to shine through, but most of this film feels forced. It feels like Fincher wasn't allowed creative control of well...a single thing.

Ripley: Do we have the capacity to make fire? Most humans have enjoyed that privilege since the stone age.
Aaron: [looking nervous and uneasy] No need to be sarcastic.

The script went through multiple rewrites and the version that makes it to the screen is a silly, contrived, hideous mess. Some of the dialogue is genuinely horrendous and some scenes are just incredibly bad, such as the attempted rape/assault as Ripley leaves with Bishop's remains after finding them. Some of the acting is so absolutely horrendous that one has to cringe at the sight of it. Ultimately, this feels like a contractual obligation. I'm certain Fincher walked onto the set of this film with true enthusiasm, ready to create a dark, brooding monster of a film. What we get, thanks to FOX executives, is a lame, watered down version which is only dark due to the camera lenses involved.

There are genuine moments of wonder in Alien3. Moments of majestic beauty and gritty horror which fill you with joy and dread simultaneously. In both versions, you can see that if Fincher had been given full creative control that this could have been a truly artful, highly enjoyable film. It could have even surpassed Alien in terms of artistic quality. Alien3 is an ugly disjointed spectacle, it is literally creativity being stamped out, destroyed, and this neuters any effect this film could have had. This is the most forgettable of the series. Note the scene where Ripley is cornered by an Alien, the one most often used in promotional stills, and note the scenes where the Alien is chasing the prisoners and Ripley in the ducts. These are masterful scenes shot by a master director. Unfortunately, a movie is a sum of its parts, then some.

Some people like to pretend that the extended cut of Alien3 fixes all the problems. However, the issue with Alien3 is hardly over 30 minutes of deleted and alternative footage.
In conclusion, this was a well made movie with terrible stylistic decisions that essentially ruined it.

''In an insane world, a sane man must appear insane.''

''This is what I do; if some idiot with a sledgehammer could break in do you really think I'd still have a job?''

A woman and her teenage daughter become imprisoned in the panic room of their own house by 3 criminals.

Jodie Foster: Meg Altman

Kristen Stewart: Sarah Altman

Forest Whitaker: Burnham

David Fincher has made a number of films I'm a huge fan of. Ranging from Zodiac to Seven. Panic Room; Fincher delivers again, a tense fired-up fast paced thriller. He has a talent for using every trick in the book in a way that perfectly merges with the material. He also always makes the most out of every script, which means the comparative quality of the movie relies strongly on the quality of the script Fincher has to work from.
Alien 3 was a false start for Fincher, a mangled and predictable script made merely watchable by excellent direction and some good acting.
In the cases of Se7en and Fight Club the screenplays were brilliant and so are the pieces themselves.



I won't even begin summing up all the loop holes Writer David Koepp has come up with. The fact he's aware of some of them (a villain says `we could've done that' after Jodie Foster's Meg Altman smashes the cameras) doesn't make them any less dumb. There's a case to be made for characters not behaving completely rational in the circumstances the movie presents, but Panic Room frequently stretched my ability to suspend my disbelief. Fincher does a good job of masking most of them, but no amount of great directing could ever compensate for the script's inclination towards cheap thrills.

[Meg smashes the house's security cameras with a sledgehammer]
Raoul: Why the hell didn't we do that?

Koepp's screenplay is conceptually quite strong but turns out to be not only a shelter for plot holes you could build a panic room in, but also a collection of ideas that you could call 'tried-and-tested'. I would rather call them tired-and-testing. You've heard the derogatory terms before; it's Die Hard in a house! or it's an adult Home Alone.
There's truth to both labels, but it goes beyond that. A scene echoing Rear Window I can forgive, but does that cops-knocking-on-the-door sequence have to be lifted from Bound? And is it just me or does the (in itself excellent) opening sequence merely update the one from North by Northwest? Then there's the use of plot devices so familiar you have trouble actually remembering in what film you've seen it before (because it's ten movies, not one). The best example may be the diabetic kid fitted as standard.

Another thing I appreciate in Fincher's other films is the amount of depth he finds room for. One thing becomes clear when watching this film, it's Fincher's homage to Hitchcock project, a thriller played straight with some technical wizardry supporting it (lots of CG camerawork and a reverse dolly zoom, a technique pioneered by Hitch in Vertigo, as the final shot), but a thriller which mainly goes for suspense. While Fincher's direction goes a long way in the suspense department (he cleverly bypasses the predictability of the screenplay) he doesn't seem to have applied any knowledge about why (certain) Hitchcock films are still interesting. Those films' main strength are the strong psychological themes throughout (Psycho, Rear Window and Vertigo). While Koepp makes some desperate resort to Altman's claustrophobia, it doesn't really go for that angle. In fact it doesn't seem to go for any psychological angle at all. As such, I found it too plot driven and lacking characters I really connected with. That lack of depth in any sense may not kill the movie, but it does reinforce my impression that this is Fincher's 'good-career-move' flick. A straight, stylish thriller with plenty box office potential but little substance. It feels somewhat like a film to rebound his career after cult hit Fight Club became a box office dud.

''I spent the last 12 years of my life building rooms like this specifically to keep out people like us.''

BUT....like I said, while the writing on this film isn't anything to be proud of, in terms of bringing it to screen there are little errors. Fincher succeeds in drawing tension from the most trivial of scenes, using his trademark bag of tricks. He's helped by Howard Shore's fitting soundtrack as well. Again every one of his shots is interesting in itself while they still serve a function, which is atmosphere. It's not as doom-laden as Se7en but threat is always sustained throughout. Panic Room isn't simply stylistically satisfying the way most Hollywood movies are nowadays. It goes beyond that. Technically, this really is a masterpiece. Also, Fincher gets the best out of his cast. Foster has a few truly wonderful (short and emotional) beats, while also showing being capable of handling a physical role such as Meg's. And the triple act of the burglars works wonders, even if Dwight Yoakam goes far OTT by the end.

I've lost count of the times I've watched this thrill ride. Camera angles, intelligent vantage points and multiple split screen shots which work to great effect. The music and sounds really do add to the tension also providing shocks and electric to certain scenes. In the guise of long dreary tones, that if you have ever played the original Resident Evil in the mansion, the same isolated helpless melody is used here, to great effect.

Jodie Foster a veteran actress is top notch class as a damaged fragile mother warily looking out for her daughter. Kristen Stewart also gives a performance worthy of note.
Jared Leto, Dwight Yoakam and Forest Whitaker also flesh out their characters to great effect, granted Dwight as Raoul is in a mask for most of the duration of the film.

For all it's tension there is humour also and some brilliant action sequences as Meg and daughter outwit their captives, the burglars.
One of my secondary fave thrillers, David Fincher continues to make smart slick films that give something for your mind to chew on.

''It's disgusting how much I love you.''

''Sean... He's on the beach now, a toe in the water. He's asking you to come in with him. He's been racing his mother up and down the sand. There's so much love in this house. He's ten years old. He's surrounded by animals. He wants to be a vet. You keep a rabbit for him, a bird and a fox. He's in high school. He likes to run, like his father. He runs the two-mile and the long relay. He's 23. He's at a university. He makes love to a pretty girl named Claire. He asks her to be his wife. He calls here and tells Lara, who cries. He still runs. Across the university and in the stadium, where John watches. Oh God, he's running so fast, just like his daddy. He sees his daddy. He wants to run to him. But he's only six years old, and he can't do it. And the other men are so fast. There was so much love in this house.''


In the future, criminals are caught before the crimes they commit, but one of the officers in the special unit is accused of one such crime and sets out to prove his innocence.

Tom Cruise: Chief John Anderton

Max von Sydow: Director Lamar Burgess

Minority Report is from Speilberg and Philip K Dick's book as the material to feast Steven's directing talent upon. The result is Report ends up being visually stunning, a brilliant story and concept and a compelling sci-fi piece all infused together.
MR is set in the year 2054, a future that, outside of the roads and constant eye-scans, still visually resembles the present (or the past, in this movie's case). Tom Cruise stars as John Anderton, one of the heads of Pre-Crime, a division in Washington, D.C. that has the ability to stop murders before they happen, thanks to the work of three Pre-Cogs, psychics (two male and one female) permanently placed in a watery bath, delivering info about the future to the Pre-Crime division (just how it's done is revealed in a very clever and tense opening sequence).



Tom cruise on form can do no wrong yet again along with an amazing turn from Colin Farrell. The chase that transpires between the two esculating from a Jet Pack chase to a Flying Car Factory is awe dropping to watch. In fact if you think this is just all about action you shouldn't be watching movies, as Minority mixes depth with watch-ability and comes out victorious and on top.
Max Von Sydow also had a role that pleased me immensely.
Samantha Morton also stuck out for me and fueled my emotions.

Director Burgess: You don't have to run John.
John Anderton: You don't have to chase me.

Spielberg's work here is, right from the off, much unlike anything I've ever seen him do. Sure, there was the debatable quality of A.I., but not a segment in that film resembled Minority Report's opening scenes, a montage of quick-cuts awash in blue colors that builds in both violence and intensity, in spite of the fact this sequence moves backward (meaning the violent act is committed first, then we see what led up to it). The segment ends with a close-up of an eye, with the camera pulling back to reveal a woman lying in a pool, ominously stating the word, "murder." It's a chilling, daring intro that holds a lot of promise, and instead of disappointing, the rest of the film actually manages to improve upon it.
The future that Spielberg presents here is entirely believable, from both a societal and technological viewpoint. Most interestingly, when I first saw the previews, I'd expected a "Big Brother" type society akin to 1984, one in which the government monitored all the actions of the people. But that's not the case here. The government presented here questions the ethics and logic behind Pre-Crime because if this were reality, it would be a subject matter of serious concern, and not just hive-minded behavior and blather about how this is for the good of humanity. Finally, we get a film that features a dark view of the future, but simultaneously gives us reasonable, intelligent characters that realize there are pros and cons to everything.
Much more successful, somewhat surprisingly for Spielberg, are the darker moments. There's a great scene when you see Anderton and his kid at the swimming pool. Anderton sinks to the bottom to show how long he can hold his breath, but then when he resurfaces his kid has gone. It captures all the terror of losing a child with great skill.

I also like the scene where Anderton is confronted with his child's 'killer'. Anderton, quite rightly, is utterly deranged and Cruise does an excellent job of selling the character's anger and grief. Therefore it's slightly annoying that these great darker moments have to co-exist with such contrast. Just take the ending. Pre-crime is shut down, Anderton is reunited with his wife, Anderton's wife is pregnant and the pre-cogs live happily ever after. It's far too neat and tidy, especially for what's supposed to be a gritty thriller.

''There hasn't been a murder in six years. The system, it is perfect.''

Like Total Recall, this elaborates on (plus alters) the Philip K. Dick story it's based on, and if the result is essentially The Fugitive with a bigger budget and a Sci-fi twist.
You all know the plot (Precrime cop Cruise discovers he's wanted for a murder he's going to commit in just over 50 hours and goes on the run, etc.,), but Scott Frank and Jon Cohen's screenplay offers intriguing notions alongside all the thrills, and Spielberg delivers a welcome return to basics - let's not forget this is the master who did Duel and Jaws - while not betraying any close fans of his works. (Yes, we all know Schindler's List, Amistad, Saving Private Ryan and A.I. Artificial Intelligence were not just mainstream but educational.) One moment we're experiencing a high-speed chase through an automobile factory, the next we're pondering the ramifications of a system that allows crime to be non-existence.
Along with BladeRunner, A Scanner Darkly, Total Recall, all of these I am a fan of and in Dick's work there is immense vision and a warped mind that appeals to my tastes everytime. Steven Spielberg usually can do no wrong. A.I. was a gamble for the master but with Minority he throws an Ace.

This is by far Steven Spielberg's most complex film to date. Though this is not Spielberg's first venture into science-fiction, it is his best. Tom Cruise makes a very believable protagonist here. The entire issue of "Pre-Crime" is treated as something of a flawed advance in law enforcement. It raises questions of how the police can be truly certain that a person is going to commit a crime or is it inevitable that the future can be altered. You see, it is all just too complex to really put into words here, you just have to watch the movie and form your own thoughts.
Drawing inspirations from Hitchcock's thrillers, also from every chase movie ever and if you think this a bad thing you are gravely mistaken. Minority on canvas is like a spray of Fugitive mixed with a dabble of Sci-Fi Matrix feel in all its shades of blueness. Coat that with thriller and a story to die for and that sums up Minority Report in a nutshell. The twists when watched first time are mind blowing, one movie I own that i never get tired of watching.

Masterful Work.

''Everybody runs, Fletch. Everybody runs.''

''Fuck off with your sofa units and strine green stripe patterns, I say never be complete, I say stop being perfect, I say let... lets evolve, let the chips fall where they may.''

An office employee and a soap salesman build a global organization to help vent male aggression.

Edward Norton: The Narrator

Brad Pitt: Tyler Durden

Helena Bonham Carter: Marla Singer

Fight Club is after looking past all the violence, extreme cinematographic techniques, computer-enhanced images, and other tricks Fight Club plays on us, we see another level to this film. It's a show about young men trying to find their place in society at the end of the 1990s.



Edward Norton and Brad Pitt play a couple of typical guys in typical situations for men of their age, with no idea where to go with their lives. Okay, you can argue that Pitt's character isn't so typical, and that he has some idea what to do. I'd say he's only about a half-step ahead of Norton.
Helena Bonam Carter also shines as Marla Singer, shes such a good actress and displays her fondness for roles which provide questions and deeper meanings, like her Burton Roles and her part in Hallmark's Merlin. Fight Club is another one of her roles that redefined her career.
It begins with nameless character, known in credits only as Narrator, spiritually and physically beaten 30-year-old professional fighting insomnia and seeking a way to reconnect with the world, although I doubt he was ever properly connected to begin with. He is engaged in a losing battle with life he chose (although judging by his misery you would think somebody else chose it for him). Battle that's fought on modern day yuppie frontlines - corporate offices, airports, his expensive IKEA decorated condo, airline first class, business trips etc., and is in desperate need of something. He is essentially inside a materialist prison, a brain washed zombie clone in society,
Watching from aside one would think that something is emotional comfort, meaning, love or a thing along those lines. Whatever it is, he seems to have found it, albeit briefly, in various disease support groups that he now starts to frequent pretending to have different ailment or disease for every day of the week. Listening to people, in some cases dying, open up about their problems gives him a visceral sense of freedom. Suddenly he can sleep and enjoy life again. "I let go. I found freedom. Losing all hope was freedom", he reasons. Until…..Marla Singer strolls into his life and messes all of that up. She, you see, is also a pretender and the knowledge that another person like him is present at these meetings bothers our Narrator to the point that his insomnia returns.
We also understand how Tyler invents his later apparent alter ego of sorts, when we re-watch. This being represented with quick flashes of his mental perception of himself coming forth. Later in Fight Club even these quick cuts are explained, giving an extra dimension to the film itself, a film within a film within a film, worlds within worlds.
The story then shifts to the Narrator's relationship with a strange, confident individual named Tyler Durden with whom he hits it off on a plane during a business trip, soap and crashing arise in the conversation, a random friendship results, in which we learn more. Their bond intensifies, solidifies, then after Narrator returns home and finds his condo blown sky high as a result of an electrical malfunction. This act the first escape from the possessions and materialistic shackles confining him.
Having no family or friends to turn to in a time of need, he calls Marla, hesitates, then calls Tyler before moving in with him in a boarded-up apocalyptic house. On Tyler's insistence they create a weekly fight club that starts up as a jealously guarded secret gathering, where a few young males can nurse their anxieties and frustrations by beating each other to a bloody pulp! Bingo! This is what Narrator has been looking for all his life, a release and escape from reality.

''This is your life and it's ending one minute at a time.''

Norton & Pitt's characters, went through school, graduated college, and got normal, thoughtless jobs...jobs, not careers, because they felt it was expected of them, they in a way, conformed to society. Now they don't know what's expected of them. Their fathers are gone and can no longer tell them what to do. They've been confronted with opposing images of what constitutes a man all their lives: the cold, power-hungry yuppie, the sensitive, caring friend to the environment, the politician that cheats and lies to the people he represents, the attractive actors and models who don't seem to be capable of having an original thought.
Like so many other viewers I found this a worthwhile movie to watch for about the first third. The film deals out some hard blows against modern consumer society, that could be called daring for a high budget Hollywood production. The given thesis- relief and the chance to achieve self-discovery through violence, is inane though. As the story develops we see that the whole Fight Club thing leads the protagonists to become some sort of a terrorist organization, culminating in a series of attacks that obviously destroy a good part of the town in the end. Isn't that turning the whole point upside down, so that the message could be: Non conformity will inevitably lead to chaos and destruction, so please avoid any critical assumptions.
In a way I felt that in the end the script-writer attempts to apologizes for the hard strokes dispersed in the dawn of the effort.

They're finally coming to a point where they have to figure out what they want to do with their lives, or give up life by these images society presents them.

''Man, I see in fight club the strongest and smartest men who've ever lived. I see all this potential, and I see squandering. God damn it, an entire generation pumping gas, waiting tables; slaves with white collars. Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need. We're the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War's a spiritual war... our Great Depression is our lives. We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact. And we're very, very pissed off.''

Convinced that real life and growth come about from conflict, they start fight club. Norton and Pitt's characters discover that in this repressed, politically correct society, the best way to really know yourself, the only way to really grow, is through conflict, through fighting. They fight to see what they're capable of giving out and taking. They fight to dominate each other, but more importantly to conquer themselves. They fight to recognize each other as human beings and to gain respect for themselves.
This film reminds me of a modern A Clockwork Orange. Some critics complained about the film being pro-violence, heavy-handed, and pure style over substance. Others have acclaimed it as a masterpiece, one of the few mainstream films that actually contains a message. I'm in the later camp, as I think Fight Club is one of the best films of the decade. As just like Alex DeLarge, many people didn't realize that Tyler Durden is the villain. It could've used a little more subtlety, but I can't complain because whereas film buffs are more used to multi-layered films, this is about as subversive as mainstream audiences could handle. Its also a very detailed film, so repeated viewings are required.
David Fincher is often an under-rated filmmaker, again he's created a masterpiece. The film has the same MTV-style editing that makes everything as quickly paced as possible, but for once it serves a purpose rather than just style.

Whether you're offended by the violence or not, you have to appreciate the symbolic importance of the conflict. You have to appreciate wanting to be someone else, and in the end, wanting to be simply just yourself. This is essentially what Fight Club is, an eternal battle with ones self, a culmination of struggle, and a release from the prison society creates for us. Fight Club is a revolution of the mind.

''It's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything.''

''What's up doc?''

A man named Mr. Smith delivers a woman's baby during a shootout, and is then called upon to protect the newborn from the army of gunmen.

Clive Owen: Smith

In this deliriously over-the-top masterpiece of outrageously clever mayhem, star Clive Owen is an unstoppable good-guy gunman who is given to asking the question "you know what I hate?" before doing something about it, with explosive shot out consequences.



You know what I hate? Dishonest, hypocritical reviewers like the ones sitting in certain screenings. Although there is positive grunts of enthusiasm and other appreciative sounds during the deliciously inventive stunts, laugh out loud jokes, gasped and groaned at all the right places, and generally appeared to be having a ball, they said afterwards that they didn't like said film.

What the hell is wrong with critics like that? Are they afraid the art-house crowd won't take them seriously if they express appreciation for a film in which a newborn's umbilical cord is cut with a gunshot, or a thug gets killed by having a carrot shoved in his mouth and out the back of his head? What, you mean Bergman or Antonioni never filmed a lactating hooker tearing out a ring from a Marilyn Manson look-alike's personal area to convince him to talk?
Not everything has to politically correct to be greatness, which is why some critics can't show their true feelings or views on said films due to not being Critical enough. Spinning lies and their own dream-land view of what they want others to credit their critic nature. All I want is honesty, so I'm going to give just that and hope everyone does too.

Moving on to the posters for Shoot 'Em Up, resembling something along the lines of Frank Miller comic-book drawings coming to life, the actual film has more in common with the work of another comic-book great: Garth Ennis, writer of such jaw-dropping hyper-violent heroes, such as Marvel's Punisher. (Although the awful 2004 Punisher movie included some supporting characters and plot points that originated with Ennis, it lacked anything resembling his very dark yet fiercely entertaining style. The guy definitely has a way of making vigilantes and their dangerous toys fascinating.)



DQ: Who are you?
Mr. Smith: I'm a British nanny, and I'm dangerous.

Owen plays Mr. Smith; A guy who is simply waiting for a bus when he gets drawn into one of the wildest, most crazy-violent action opening scenes of all time. By the time the bullets stop flying, Smith is on the run with a complete stranger's targeted-for-death baby and one hell of a lot of questions.
Smith enlists a beautiful Goddess, "Got milk" hooker (Monica Bellucci) to feed the baby. Despite some tough talk, she turns out to be increasingly placid bordering on sensual and maternal; More a kick-ass tomboy, which makes for a nice change in this kind of story.
Meanwhile, a sadistically evil genius mob Boss appropriately named Hertz(Paul Giamatti) dogs their trail with a never-ending army of hired killers and, yes, a couple of dogs. Giamatti scores as this badass with brains, who is shocked and hilariously furious about how Smith & Company keep managing to survive. "Do we suck this bad," he says at one point, "or is this guy really that good?."

Writer/director Michael Davis has loaded the film with one unforgettably imaginative image after another: spent shell casings bouncing off a pregnant woman's stomach, a gun dropping in an unflushed toilet, a hand with bullets between the fingers shoved into a fireplace as an improvised weapon. There are showdowns, standoffs, car chases, airborne gun battles and even a shootout in a firearms factory.
Best of all, the screenplay manages to both glorify in and yet subvert some of the things you'll be expecting. For example, it's a mega-body-count, blizzard-of-bullets barrage that's actually a plea for gun control at heart. Seriously. Also, although it has scenes referencing bits from movies as diverse as Lost Highway, The Transporter and even Raising Arizona. Shoot Em Up overall feels fresh and original.

''Eat your vegetables.''

This was simply an unpretentious and enjoyable film. No big message, just non stop and often ridiculous action. If you can enjoy a James Bond or Die Hard flick, you will find this movie well worth spending (almost) one and half hours of your life.
A proverbial Bugs Bunny, including literally mimicking the wascally wabbit, Clive Owen's Mr. Smith seeps cool, it's apparent that this is his shot at being James Bond (director Michael Davis always wanted to direct a Bond film) and he's thrown every snappy one-liner and unflinching glare that he possibly can muster. Paul Giamatti is the show stealer as the crazed assassin Mr. Hertz, who is ruthlessly vile, wickedly intelligent, and an inept family man. His role is constantly surprising and spontaneous, and his batty bearded grins are laughably priceless. Monica Bellucci seems selected only for her willingness to do nude scenes and her sexy Italian accent. The remainder of the supporting cast are merely targets thrown in front of machine guns and heavy firepower to keep the downtime to a minimum. Even sex scenes are blanketed by violence, gunfire, and a bit of humour. While everything is markedly seedy and gritty, these anti-hero sorts and wickedly evil villains fit perfectly into the underworld locales and environments.



Mr. Smith: [eating carrot] What's up doc?
Mr. Hertz: You wascally wabbit.

Some may consider Shoot 'Em Up's weakest component to be its ridiculous story and the robotic debriefing of plot twists. But then they would have missed the point entirely. Davis' film mocks the overly simplistic and oftentimes nonsensical story lines of humdrum actioners and makes no excuses for its own deliberate transitions and set pieces that roll from one action sequence directly into another. Much like the clever ridicule of stereotypical horror films by Wes Craven's Scream, the characters in Shoot 'Em Up are self aware of their positions in an action vehicle and work to make it as defiantly random as possible. Clive Owen's Mr. Smith constantly spouts off his dislikes of the normalcies regularly witnessed in the genre, and the comforting blend of hyper-violence, twisted humor, and extreme exaggerations never stales throughout the relatively short running time. Nonstop action doesn't always make a film, but it sure does help.

So much action permeates every scene in Shoot 'Em Up that to call it just an action movie would be an understatement. It's unrelenting action bravado of a particularly brutal temperament, masked by loads of dark humour(even the sex scene manages to have a vicious firefight halfway through). Shoot 'Em Up proves that carrots can be deadly weapons, limerick usage makes better bad guys, and no matter the amount of killing done, it can be redeemed by saving the life of a babe(or two!). Plus having a plot isn't always a factor for making an entertaining action movie. This is an action junkie masterpiece...On speed...And even then it doesn't stop!

''Let me give you a piece of advice. Never trust the people who stand to profit, plain and simple. They're the bad guys.''

Becky: I love the sky. It's so limitless.
Gilbert: It is big. It's very big.
Becky: Big doesn't even sum it up, right? That word big is so small.

Gilbert has care for his brother Arnie and his obese mother, which gets in the way when love walks into his life.

Johnny Depp: Gilbert Grape

Leonardo DiCaprio first caught our attention as mentally retarded Arnie Grape, cared for by his brother Gilbert in Endora, Iowa. The movie shows how Gilbert is really in charge of the family, as their mother Bonnie (Darlene Cates) is dangerously overweight, and pretty much everything in their destitute world looks pretty grim. Among other things, there's a mega-store destroying the local place. A bleak movie, but with hope.

Lasse Hallstrom brings to What's Eating Gilbert Grape the same great direction that he brought to My Life as a Dog, The Cider House Rules and Chocolat. It's a look at the whole failed state of things in the world. A truly great movie. Also starring Juliette Lewis and John C. Reilly.

''I'm having a birthday party, but you're not invited, but you can come if you want.''

This is Gilbert Grape's story, and his recollection of what was to be just another ordinary and uneventful moment in the life of him, his family and his, almost sleepy, town. Centred around the Grape family, sisters Ellen and Amy and their two brothers Arnie and Gilbert, who, along with their widowed mother, morbidly obese Bonnie Grape are striving to survive and coexist with the absence of a father figure, low waged work and seventeen-year-old Arnie's severe mental condition.
It is in this awkward and extremely one sided affair that the unfortunate sibling Gilbert has to constantly watch over his younger brother Arnie, played to such depth and conviction by a very young Leonardo DiCaprio, while still holding down a job for Lamson's Groceries and looking after, also, their housebound mother. Gilbert's life, his future, his dreams is thwarted, he know this, but it is in this Guardian Angel that his love and bond for Arnie, and his family, cannot, and will not, be let go.
That is until the free spirited Becky (Juliette Lewis) arrives in town, and stranded with her grandmother for the week while waiting for parts for their vehicle. This realization, this new fresh face unties new feelings, new thoughts and new hope for the put upon Gilbert, something new is eating Gilbert Grape.

Iowa born, Peter Hedges (b. 1962) novel has been turned into a fine work of emotional art, with the reassuring and delicate touch from Swedish director Lasse Hallström (b. 1942). While the dialogue is somewhat nondescript, but at the same time is never wasted on distractive trivialities, it is the inner core of the narrative that projects What's Eating Gilbert Grape as a tender and caring movie of self-sacrifice, devoted love and long full companionship.

''You don't hurt Arnie, you just don't.''

The cast here are all relatively young, a younger than nineteen looking DiCaprio and Lewis, with its much more than capable co-stars. This gifted young cast are individually exceptional and hold their qualities well, to the point that at times we are mistaken for thinking we are seeing more home video than movie. Rita Darlene Guthrie's (1947) first acting role is astounding, her natural instinctive character, as mother Grape, protrudes more than we expect, as the backbone of this family, she holds together a family of highly individual children under one union, and their respect and love. We are also seeing their new and young lives unfold before us, and the inevitable hand of fate that both bad timing and misplaced destiny has dealt them.

This movie ties us in with compassion and enlightenment through it main character Arnie, here we are given an insight into the daily responsibilities of this family toward his special needs. DiCaprio excels himself as the much loved youngster whose unintentional care-free and more than often care-less mind can at times bring domestic harmonies to boiling point and, sadly, beyond breaking point, even for the closest of families. Often surprising, often enduring but always touching.

This is perpetuated by the music of soft acoustic guitar that plays on the musical heartstrings for this gentle love story and with the work of the late Sven Nykvist (1922-2006) as its Swedish cinematographer, illuminating both the beauty of the surroundings and the bleak realities. We are also shown, subconsciously, that there is nothing wrong in being poor and that being from the side where the grass is not so green is not too bad after all, with just the right amount of stable influences that can support anyone through the hardships of life, most thing's can happen. This has been proved by the photograph of the third Grape brother seen on the fridge door, and the families pride in him gaining a University Degree, and ultimately, starting a new life outside of Endora.
The subplot, though minor, is still a harsh reminder that even the best of people can become too isolated, too familiar in their lives. Mary Steenburgen's middle-aged Betty Carver has a nice family, a nice house and a nice middle-aged husband, but is still not happy. Her affair with Gilbert is just a fleeting glimpse into the perspective of human companionship gone sour between old love.

Leonardo DiCaprio lost out to Tommy Lee Jones for his part as Marshal Samuel Gerard in The Fugitive(1993) at the 1994 Academy Awards for Best Actor in a Supporting Role. Losing out to such an uninspiring role did not harm his winning the 1994 Chicago Film Critics Association Awards for Most Promising Actor as well as National Board of Review 1993 Award for Best Supporting Actor. With just three years after Edward Scissorhands(1990) and a year before Ed Wood(1994) this little movie proves that Mr. Depp can still take chances and win, and with Gilbert Grape, he has succeeded in proving versatility, depth and charm.

Momma: You're my knight in shimmering armor. Did you know that?
Gilbert: I think you mean shining.
Momma: No shimmering. You shimmer, and you glow.