Rebecca (1940)

Director: Alfred Hitchcock

Screenplay: Robert Sherwood, Joan Harrison (based on the novel by Daphne du Maurier)

Cast: Laurence Olivier, Joan Fontaine

Music: Franz Waxman

Time: 130 minutes

Bottom-line: Not as thrilling as expected, but a beautiful and faithful adaptation of the book

Hitchcock’s first American film – and his only film to win the Academy Award for Best Picture – Rebecca is based on Daphne du Maurier’s classic novel of the same name. Starring Laurence Olivier and Joan Fontaine in the lead roles, with Judith Anderson and George Sanders in the supporting roles, the film is one of Hitchcock’s most acclaimed films, also being nominated for 11 Oscars (winning two).

Last night, I dreamt I went to Manderley again.

Monte Carlo: An unnamed, simplistic, naïve woman (Fontaine) is charmed by the wealthy aristocratic widower, Maximillian “Maxim” de Winter (Olivier). As they spend time together, he proposes to her, and soon they are married. The woman – henceforth referred to only as “the second Mrs. de Winter” – moves in along with Maxim to his enormous country mansion, “Manderley”. While Mrs. de Winter is awed by the opulent lifestyle, she is also unnerved by the spooky atmosphere in the house: everything around her seems to indirectly or directly point to Maxim’s dead wife: Rebecca. The housekeeper, Mrs. Danvers (Anderson) also constantly talks about Rebecca’s beauty, intelligence and even preserves her room as a shrine. As events progress, Maxim’s new wife becomes more and more intimidated by Rebecca’s “presence”, and one day, she discovers a shocking truth about the past, that changes everything.

 

Olivier as Maxim, and Fontaine as the
second Mrs. de Winter

The film is a faithful adaptation of the novel that came in 1938: everything from the famous opening line to the burning mansion in the climax. Like most of Hitchcock’s early films, it takes a while for us to get to the crux of the plot. A lot of time is given to developing the characters, and emphasising the romance between Maxim and his new wife. The main feature of the film is the atmosphere in and around Manderley: the mind-boggling expanse of the mansion, the people in it, the sinister-looking hut by the shore, and of course, the way in which Rebecca is “represented” through anything and everything in the house.

Mrs. Danvers is considered the antagonist of the story. From the start, her tacit hatred towards Maxim’s new wife is imminent, bit by bit strengthening the presence of Rebecca in the mansion, and it all comes out when she diabolically convinces Mrs. de Winter to commit suicide. Judith Anderson in this role is brilliant. Joan Fontaine’s performance is highly commendable, especially the way her character is first subdued and cowed by the exorbitance and influence of de Winter and Rebecca, and later when she asserts her power.

 

Fontaine as Maxim's wife, and Anderson as
Mrs. Danvers (one of the most famous
scenes in the film)

The sets and costumes are not usually a noticeable feature in Hitchcock films, but in Rebecca, they are certainly prominent. The plot twists appear at the right moments, but I wasn’t completely satisfied when the true plan of Rebecca is revealed. The last scene (not present in the original story) that shows the embroidered “R” being burnt to flames – as a symbol that the influence of Rebecca will no longer trouble the married couple – was a nice touch. So, while Rebecca isn’t exactly a thriller, as expected from Hitchcock, the film is certainly worth watching for any Hitchcock fan and an admirer of the novel.

My Rating: 3.5/5

Rotten Tomatoes rating: 100%

Mudhalvan (1999)

English translation: The Chief Minister

Director: S. Shankar

Story: S. Shankar, Sujatha

Cast: Arjun Sarja, Manisha Koirala, Manivannan, Raghuvaran

Music: A.R. Rahman

Time: 171 minutes

Bottom-line: A highly inspirational political drama

One of Shankar’s most influential films, and my second favourite (after Anniyan), Mudhalvan shows us a glimpse of a leader we all need. Starring Arjun Sarja, Manisha Koirala and Raghuvaran in the lead roles, with Manivannan, Cochin Haneefa and Vadivel in the supporting cast, the film is one of the best political dramas that the Tamil film industry has produced.

Pugazhendi aka Pugazh (Arjun) is a cameraman working for QTV. One day, violence and riots erupt all over the city following a communal clash. As Pugazh captures these events on camera, he also hears the Chief Minister’s message to the police asking them not to involve in controlling the public or he would lose his supporters. Impressed by Pugazh’s heroics of carrying a dying man to the hospital, he is promoted to the on-air talent. His first task in his new position is to interview the CM himself: Aranganathan (Raghuvaran). In an unexpected turn of events, the interview exposes the corruption of the CM, and in his anger, he challenges Pugazh to take up the post of the CM for one day, just to know how difficult it is. Pugazh accepts, and much to Aranganathan’s woes, wins the admiration of the entire state in his one-day duty. Following this, the public wants Pugazh to contest in the next election formally. How Aranganathan and other corrupt parties obstruct his path, and whether or not Pugazh succeeds is what the film is about.

 

Raghuvaran as Aranganathan (left) and
Arjun as Pugazh (the interview) 

The best part of the film is the fact that the deviations from the main plot are kept to a minimum. The comedy track blends in perfectly, and only the romance part deviates the main track, but only to a minimum extent. To get a feel for the film, watch only the interview between Pugazh and the CM – that’s enough motivation to watch the rest of the movie. I can watch the interview followed by Pugazh’s one-day rule n number of times on a loop (except that one nonsensical fistfight). The climax is also smartly written, and is totally unexpected.

Of course, while the “one-day CM” is not a scenario that is likely to take place with the current state of politics in Tamil Nadu, watching the film does inspire you to “be the change you want to see”. It shows how it is very much possible to clean the cesspit that is politics, but we just don’t want to, because invariably, somewhere down the path of becoming a leader, we become corrupt. As Pugazh says, “In one day, I didn’t pull off anything extraordinary; I only did the duties of a CM, which if the CM had done right in the first place, the state would have been so much better off”.

 

Koirala as Thenmozhi

This is also probably Arjun’s best film; from being the cheeky reporter, to a romantic, to a CM, he executes his role to perfection. Manivannan and Raghuvaran have pulled off brilliant performances, the former being Pugazh’s right-hand man, and turning out to be the inspiration for Pugazh (and the viewers) to enter politics, and the latter playing the main antagonist. Manivannan, Haneefa and Vadivel also chip in with comic relief now and then. I blame Mani Ratnam for being responsible for making Koirala enter the film industry. Her performances in Indian and now Mudhalvan, where she plays a village girl and Pugazh’s love interest, are both horrible (What’s with giving the actress a name, Thenmozhi, which even she can’t pronounce!).  

Mudhalvan, barring the few needless fistfights and a bad lead actress, is one hell of a ride – entertaining and influential at the same time. A must-watch!

My Rating: 3.5/5

Sin City (2005)

Director: Frank Miller

Screenplay: Frank Miller and Robert Rodriguez (based on the comic books by Miller)

Cast: Bruce Willis, Jessica Alba, Clive Owen, Mickey Rourke

Music: James Debney, Robert Rodriguez and Graeme Revell

Time: 124 minutes

Bottom-line: Would interest comic book fans; I’m not one of them

The film first came to my attention when I saw a YouTube video praising the film’s visuals. Having seen it, I would suggest just watching the trailer to get an idea of the visual effects used, and stay far away from the film. The anthology film features an ensemble cast consisting of Bruce Willis, Jessica Alba, Clive Owen, Benicio del Toro, Mickey Rourke, Carla Gugino, Elijah Wood and several others in smaller roles. Filled with all the violence and action of the comic books, the film is a more-than-vivid portrayal of those.

 

Willis as Hartigan, and Alba as Nancy

The Yellow Bastard is the tale of the ageing cop, John Hartigan (Willis), who tries to stop the serial killer Roark Jr. from killing his 4^th victim: eleven-year-old Nancy Callahan. Hartigan horribly disfigures Roark Jr, but is also shot fatally. Much later, he finds himself in the hospital, where he is charged with all the crimes Roark Jr. has committed. In jail, he receives letters from the adult Nancy (Alba) for eight years. When he goes after her following his release, he realises he’s put her life in jeopardy again.

The Hard Goodbye follows Marv (Rourke), who goes in search of the murderer of a woman he slept with. He zeroes in on the Roark family, but is subdued by a silent assassin (Wood), who has also captured Marv’s parole officer, Lucille (Gugino). That only means that Marv now has one more person to kill.

The Big Fat Kill is about Shellie’s abusive ex-boyfriend, Jackie Boy (del Toro), who goes to Old City with his friends. When he stalks a prostitute, Jackie and his friends are killed by a martial arts expert. Shellie’s current lover is Dwight (Owen), who has an on-and-off relationship with the prostitute leader, Gail. They realise that they have killed a police detective. Dwight helps them to dispose of the body, but things go awry.

Rourke as Marv 

The 124-minute screen time is divided into 3-4 parts for the three sub-stories mentioned above. At the end of each, closing credits roll, and the next story starts. All three plots (and another small story called The Customer is Always Right) have nothing in common with each other except that they all happen in Sin City, and some minor overlap of characters. The other common aspect is the intense violence and gore, and I don’t mean stylised action like say, The Terminator, I mean Game of Thrones level savagery! Everything from severed heads, severed limbs, humans eating humans, dogs eating humans, humans talking to corpses that have “come back alive” … Sin City has them all.

 

Wood as the assassin

But, ultimately, it is based on a comic book, so these aspects will certainly impress many. I, for one, liked the visual style of portrayal (not the visuals themselves!), especially the use of colour. Almost every scene is black and white, barring one colour: the red blood of Hartigan, the yellow disfigured man, the yellow pills that Marv takes, the full-white glasses of the assassin, the blue car that Jackie Boy drives and so on. This use of colour is really effective to see, and it’s the only takeaway from the film for me, apart from the masterfully created neo-noir atmosphere in all the stories. There is a lot of gory violence shown on screen, whose horror is partly diluted because they’re shown in black and white.

There’s hardly any scope for acting in the film, but I did like the performances of Bruce Willis and Clive Owen. The former once again plays the role of a protector/hero, and Clive Owen showcases a stylish performance too. Elijah Wood does pretty much nothing: his character is a mechanical, emotionless assassin, but boy, does he scare you!   

 

Owen as Dwight (left) and del Toro as Jackie

So, if you are into action comics, Sin City will surely be a satisfying entertainer. If not, like I said, just watch the trailer, and turn to some other film.

My Rating: 1.5/5

Rotten Tomatoes rating: 78%

Sigappu Rojakkal (1978)

English translation: Red Roses

Director: P. Bharathiraja

Story: P. Bharathiraja

Cast: Kamal Hassan, Sridevi

Music: Ilayaraaja

Time: 135 minutes

Bottom-line: An intense psychological thriller

Bharathiraja’s third film, Sigappu Rojakkal, is in many ways, a landmark in Tamil cinema history. Starring Kamal Hassan and Sridevi in the lead roles, the film is often hailed as a welcome break from the masala dramas of the 70s, as well as establishing Bharathiraja as a director of thrillers – since his first two films revolved only around village settings and people. The plot is Loosely based on a real-life serial killer in the 60s.

 

Kamal Hassan as Dileep

Dileep (Hassan) is a successful industrialist, running a minerals company. He lives in a large mansion, all alone, with a gardener, watchman and a helper boy. We get to know that Dileep is a womaniser, and he takes a liking to a sales girl in a garment shop: Sharada (Sridevi). As he starts to express his feelings and makes advances towards her, she, being a conservative woman, insists that they marry if he wants to have his ways. They get married, and she moves in with him. Meanwhile, a co-worker in Sharada’s shop goes missing, without a trace. The audience then gets to know the truth: Dileep has murdered the woman after having sex with her. As Sharada explores the house by herself, she stumbles upon Dileep’s heinous past as a serial killer of women. How does she escape?

This is also a movie that showed how versatile Kamal Hassan was. Imagining him as a serial killer is something unimaginable today, but this film proves his capabilities. His character development is masterfully done: first, we get to know that he’s lonely, then that he is a womaniser, and flashes from his past life give us a hint of his nature, and then we get a powerful jolt when his true intentions are exposed. Hassan skilfully plays a charmer and a creep, with his big glasses, his shady compliments and veneer of kindness. He later won the Filmfare award for Best Actor, and there’s no doubt he deserved it. Sridevi has also done an outstanding job, in one of her best performances early in her career - believe it or not, she was only 15 years old when the film came out! From the innocent woman oblivious to Dileep’s activities, to the desperate “prisoner” in his mansion, this is a simply wonderful display of acting.

 

Sridevi as Sharada

The story is slow to start with, but Bharathiraja constantly piques our interest with flashes from Dileep’s past. Many aspects of the second half of the film were similar to the 1999 film, Kaun, taking place entirely inside one house. The cinematography – hats off to the editing as well – and the score build up the suspense very effectively. The colour red is also put to good use on screen. The one song in the film, is also in the form of a dream sequence of Sharada since Kamal wasn’t happy with the idea of a serial killer engaging in romantic duets.

(Spoiler) The ending is another thing I loved. The irony when Dileep says, earlier in the film, that he will come to the prison on his next birthday to make a donation, but in reality, on his next birthday he is a prisoner, receiving apples from Sharada, who still remains as his wife. Yet another twist is when we see the inside of his cell, where all over the wall he has written her name: the only thing he remembers from the past. It is such an emotionally powerful climax. 

So, while Sigappu Rojakkal is highly unconventional, it is precisely the type of film I look forward to, and I was given a top-notch movie. It is not a pleasant watch, but you will be rewarded seeing Kamal and Sridevi in sublime form, in this gripping thriller.

My Rating: 4/5

Cape Fear (1991)

Director: Martin Scorsese
Screenplay: Wesley Strick (based on the book by John D. MacDonald and James R. Webb’s screenplay of the 1962 film
Cast: Robert de Niro, Nick Nolte, Jessica Lange, Juliette Lewis
Music:  Elmer Bernstein 
Time: 127 minutes
Bottom-line: Suspenseful and haunting

Counselor! Come out, come out, wherever you are!
Robert De Niro’s menacing voice still echoes in your ears for a long time after you have finished watching Martin Scorsese’s Cape Fear. Based on the original 1962 film starring Gregory Peck and Robert Mitchum, the 1991 film is the better of the two, in my view, with a far more menacing villain, and with the violence and tension at screaming point.

de Niro as Max Cady

Sam Bowden (Nolte) is a lawyer living with his wife Leigh (Lange) and teenage daughter Danielle (Lewis) in New Essex. Max Cady (de Niro) is a former client of Bowden, who was accused of rape, fourteen years ago. Seeing the brutality of the crime, Bowden himself had buried some critical evidence, which would have eased Cady’s sentence. In his sentence, Cady managed to learn the law on his own and eventually got released. Now he’s in search of the one man who ruined his life. It is Cady’s time to take revenge...

Nolte as Sam (middle), Lewis as Danielle
(right) and Lange as Leigh

The storyline is basically about how Cady repeatedly torments Sam and his family. First, he stalks them in the theatre and then assaults Sam’s friend, and even goes as far as kissing Danielle. The first half introduces the characters and shows how Cady systematically starts to execute his revenge, and the second half is about how Sam tries to protect his family when his “past” tries to haunt them. The highlight of the film is the way Sam and Cady play out each other; just as Sam comes up with better security to protect his loved ones, Cady pulls out an even more cunning trick!

From the beginning, it’s de Niro who has all your attention. With his chilling entry – thanks to the gory images of the tattoos, along with Bernard Herrmann’s original 1962 Max Cady theme – he has his iron grip on you ever since. His seemingly jolly behaviour followed by his merciless barbarity makes him one of the most terrifying villains of all time (of course, credit also goes to the original 1962 villain, played by Mitchum). In my view, I think de Niro deserved the Oscar more than Anthony Hopkins (who won for The Silence of the Lambs). Nick Nolte, Lange and Lewis’ performances are almost completely overshadowed by de Niro, but towards the climax, all of them have done exceptionally well, especially Lewis.

Compared to the 1962 film, as I said earlier, de Niro plays a much more ferocious and violent Max Cady than Robert Mitchum. This film has 25 minutes of additional screen time as well, mainly devoted to the other ways Cady stalks and scares the family, not shown in the original (for example, in the earlier film, Cady never talks directly to Sam's daughter ). Although  Mitchum set the base to portray such a villain, de Niro undoubtedly put on the better show, and Scorsese, the better film.

The original 1962 film poster

Cape Fear isn’t the typical Scorsese, except for the fact that it stars de Niro, in his seventh collaboration with Scorsese. But, in terms of entertainment, the film provides everything, starting from a suspenseful build-up to the thrilling finale at Cape Fear. Look out for the scenes where Cady indirectly accuses Sam of betraying his client, the scene where he stalks Danielle at school and the one where he beats up his own attackers and taunts Sam. The best part is when Cady finally enters Sam’s house and, not to forget, the finale in the houseboat, where Cady truly reveals his power. Remember, “There is nothing in the dark that isn't there in the light. Except fear.” 


My Rating: 3.5/5
Rotten Tomatoes rating: 76%

Newton (2017)

Director: Amit V. Masurkar

Story: Amit V. Masurkar

Cast: Rajkummar Rao, Pankaj Tripathi, Anjali Patil

Music: Naren Chandavarkar, Benedict Taylor

Time: 104 minutes

Bottom-line: A well-made political satire addressing a key issue of the country

India’s submission to the 90^th Academy Awards for the category of Best Foreign Film, Masurkar’s Newton is a satire about the voting system in India, in particular, the state of Chhattisgarh.

Newton (Rao) is a government clerk, who is sent to Chhattisgarh on election duty, to collect votes from 76 voters in an area amidst the Naxal-controlled forests of the state. He is assisted by a local officer, Malko Netam (Patil) and Loknath (Raghubhir Yadav). Despite his utmost sincerity in conducting a free and fair election, nothing else goes his way. The armed forces – led by Asst. Commandant Aatma Singh (Tripathi) – warn him of the imminent guerrilla attacks and other dangers in the forest, but Newton is persistent. Initially, no voters show up. However, the moment they receive information that a foreign reporter is covering the incident, the army forces the villagers to cast votes. Newton realises that the villagers are clueless about what the election is; no villager has ever seen a voting machine before. With barely any support from the others, does Newton do his duty? Or does he succumb?

 

Rajkummar Rao as Newton

In a country that is the world’s largest democracy, the number of people who do not cast their vote – despite it being the duty of a citizen – is shockingly high. For various reasons, from laziness, to ignorance, to the “what’s-the-point-nothing-is-going-to-change-anyway” attitude, the voting system has its flaws. In Newton, that is the issue dealt with, against the backdrop of Naxal warfare. We see that the villagers do have voter cards, but are scared and ignorant about the whole process. They show up only when forced, and they have no idea why they vote. The security tells Newton to clear up much earlier than the stipulated time, since no one is willing to vote anyway. Newton desperately tries to teach the villagers the fundamentals, but Aatma Singh, realising that this won’t work, manipulates the villagers by telling them the machine is a toy, and they can press the button for whichever symbol they like.

 

Anjali Patil as Malko

The film is more of a documentary than a feature film, except for the wisely scripted dry humour that appeals to your funny bone as well. Newton’s character is one of those extremely honest officers, surrounded by people who are anything but sincere. Most people in Newton’s position would take the hint in the first go and run for their own safety. That is what happens when you’re the only guy doing his job. One can argue how a mere 76 votes matter anyway in a nation of 1.3 billion people; but if 76 officers in 76 areas with 76 people each, all think the same way, then a problem starts to grow. Educating people about the election is the first step that should be taken.

 

Pankaj Tripathi as Aatma Singh

Rajkummar Rao’s performance is highly commendable. Newton’s tenacity and discipline are very inspiring. The characters of Malko and Loknath bring a blend of humour and other viewpoints on the election. On the other end of the spectrum is Aatma Singh, whose excuse is that nothing useful happens anyway; in one scene he complains how the army hasn’t received night vision goggles even two years after their request. Using just four characters, there is a wide range of opinions and views open to discussion.   

A wake-up call to many Indians, Newton is one of the most well-made films addressing social issues. The pace might slacken now and then, but the movie is worth your time.

My Rating: 3.5/5

Raising Arizona (1987)

Director: Joel Coen

Story: Joel and Ethan Coen

Cast: Nicholas Cage, Holly Hunter

Music: Carter Burwell

Time: 94 minutes

Bottom-line: A crazily hilarious script; full-on entertainment

The Coen brothers’ first comedy film – and their second feature film – Raising Arizona is unlike any other Coen brothers film! Starring Nicholas Cage and Holly Hunter in the lead roles, with Trey Wilson, John Goodman and William Forsythe in the supporting roles, the crime-comedy film is a laugh riot.

H. I. “Hi” McDunnough (Cage) is a convenience store robber, who gets arrested. The officer who takes his mugshots is a woman named Edwina “Ed” (Hunter). When it’s love at first sight for Hi, he starts getting arrested deliberately just to see her. Soon enough, he finds out that her fiancé has left her. Following his latest release, Hi proposes to Ed and they get married. Though Hi comes clean of his old lifestyle, the couple faces another problem when they find out that Ed is infertile, and they cannot adopt any kids because of Hi’s criminal record. Luck turns their way when a local furniture magnate, Nathan Arizona (Wilson), and his wife have quintuplets. Hi and Ed kidnap one of the babies, Nathan Jr. When two of His old inmates come to visit and stay in their house for a night, and when news about the kidnapped baby becomes public, Hi’s family life hits the rocks.

 

Cage as Hi, Hunter as Ed, and the baby

Not only is the storyline egregiously different from the neo-noir Blood Simple (and also their future films), but pretty much everything about the film is! I guess this was an experiment the Coens wanted to try out, as they admitted to purposely making the story as different as possible. The polar opposite characteristics of Hi and Ed, and the nature of Hi’s prison mates: Gale and Evelle Snoats (Goodman and Forsythe) are hilariously portrayed. The comic plot twists and the slapstick humour are similar to the style usually seen in Wes Anderson films.

 

Goodman and Forsythe as Gale and Evelle

The plot revolves around how Hi tries to change himself to be a family man, while nothing around him supports him from doing so. His boss proposes a “wife-swapping” program, his jail-mates try to drag him back to shoplifting, and also find out about the baby, and Hi also has a psychotic murderer on his tail, also looking for the baby. Ed is the only person who is fixated on living a family life, while Hi struggles to overcome his impulses. Hi’s attempt to please his own self and his wife is the source of humour.

Nicholas Cage has always intrigued me as to what role he likes playing (never mind if he is good at it). Every character he takes on seems to be quirky and unstable, and Hi McDunnough is the best example. With his accent, hairstyle and overall comic appearance, his performance is quite impressive. It may not be his most elegant show, but it sure gets you laughing. The Coens wrote the story for Holly Hunter playing Ed, and she fits right in. I am surprised the Coens didn’t continue making a few more “mainstream” comedies after this (except The Big Lebowski); this is not their best film, but an amazing first attempt at a comedy. While the story takes a lot of liberty in terms of being realistic, the important thing is that it’s a comedy – and it will make you laugh.

My Rating: 3.5/5

Rotten Tomatoes rating: 91%

Blood Simple (1984)

Director: Joel Coen

Story: Joel and Ethan Coen

Cast: John Getz, Frances McDormand, M. Emmet Walsh, Dan Hedaya 

Music: Carter Burwell

Time: 97 minutes

Bottom-line: An intense, violent, blood-curdling neo-noir

Blood Simple is the start of the long and dazzling journey of two of the most prominent filmmakers of today: the Coen brothers. With a cast of four main members, the film is the story involving double-crossing, revenge, and the interplay of fate, and contains several other technical aspects that would later become trademarks of Coen brothers’ films.

Getz as Ray

In Russia, everyone pulls for everyone else. Down here in Texas, you are on your own.

Texas: Abby (McDormand) is the wife of Marty (Hedaya), a bar owner. However, their marriage is on the rocks, and Abby is having an affair with Ray (Getz), who works in Marty’s bar. Suspecting his wife, Marty hires a (unnamed) private detective (Walsh) to follow her, and send photographs. When Ray goes to collect his pay, Marty confronts him about the affair and warns him, but Ray does not budge. Marty then hires the detective to kill the couple. Soon enough, the detective reports back to Marty with a picture of the couple shot dead, but he has his own scheme. When blood is involved, everyone suddenly finds themselves in extreme danger, in one grizzly tale.

McDormand as Abby

Something about Blood Simple makes it very Hitchcockian: the ambience, the score, and the extended dialogue-less scenes reminded me of sequences from films like Psycho and Dial M for Murder. From the first scene on the headlamp-lit highway to the final scene where light enters the room through bullet holes on the wall, the lighting is an aspect that enhances the eerie atmosphere so effectively. The other thing I liked is, as I mentioned, the extended “silent” scenes – a feature also used in later Coen brothers’ films.

Walsh as the detective

The camerawork, score, and the acting are enough to take us through the progress of events, and dialogues are kept to a minimum, and suspense, on the other hand, is at screaming point. The scenes where the detective trails the couple, the encounter between the detective and Marty, followed by Ray’s arrival, and the climax are some pieces of brilliant filmmaking. The simplicity and the dark humour of the entire story – especially the way fate gives poetic justice to all – also make it stand out. The Coens often intensify violence in their films, and they do an exceptionally good job of giving a solid impact with every plot twist.

Hedaya as Marty

In every Coen brothers’ movie, there is always one “white” character: the clean guy (in this case, Abby), there’s an all-out evil guy (the detective), and a “grey” character (Ray), and it’s always the grey character who’s the most important one. The character development is excellent, and by the end of every film, you ask yourself if everyone got the justice they deserved. Frances McDormand has done a brilliant job in her debut film, especially in the climax. Getz and Walsh have their moments of glory as well, and the way the detective’s character has been created – with his double-crossing schemes – will make you gasp in shock.

Blood Simple has a strong impact on its viewers, with its relatively simplistic story and effective plot twists. The film lays the foundation for several techniques used by the Coens in their later films, but their debut film is equally impressive.

My Rating: 4/5

Rotten Tomatoes rating: 94%

Signs (2002)

Director: M. Night Shyamalan

Story: M. Night Shyamalan

Cast: Mel Gibson, Joaquin Phoenix

Music: James Newton Howard

Time: 106 minutes

Bottom-line: One of the worst alien invasion films ever

M. Night Shyamalan’s science fiction drama, Signs, turns out to be one of the most upsetting films I have ever seen. After being awed by his magnum opus, The Sixth Sense, I expected a lot from this film, but with a sloppy script – with too much sentiment and no story – and hardly any science, this film is one you can certainly skip watching (but don’t skip reading!). Here’s why.

The story revolves around Graham Hess (Gibson), who is a former priest. He lives with his asthmatic son, Morgan (Rory Culkin), daughter Bo (Abagail Breslin) and younger brother, Merrill (Phoenix) – a failed minor league baseball player. His wife has died in a car accident, caused by another town local, Ray Reddy (Shyamalan). Things get creepy when Graham finds a large crop circle in his field. He also learns that animals across the town are getting violent for no reason, and in fact, Morgan is forced to kill one of their dogs that attacks Bo. When they watch the news, they see that similar crop circles are being created all across the globe, and possible signs of alien invasion. With shady figures in their farm, unexpected sounds from the baby monitor and finally, visual footage of aliens, the family starts to prepare for the worst. What will these aliens do?

 

Gibson as Graham

I remember reading about crop circles long ago when I had to write an article about some common myths that exist in today’s world. My interest in the film increased all the more when I got to know it dealt with the same topic. Of course, later I got to know the film has barely any science in it, nor action. In one way it is like Arrival – the actual aliens are never shown (till the very end, in this case), but their presence is implied through other means. The suspense is initially built up well, but it leads to big expectations. We are shown a worldwide phenomenon of alien “attacks” and then abruptly, we are told they are all gone.

The theme could possibly be how a family deals with an unknown predator, and how they are there for each other in troubled times. Yet, somehow that emotion that we are supposed to feel never bloomed in me – I just sat there waiting there for some action or plot twist, with no avail. There are few effective scares and chills – especially the first sighting of the alien in the birthday party – and bits of humour. The overall pace is extremely slow, and by the time something actually happens, the film is over. I was at least hoping for the film to end on a high note but again, the anti-climax proved to be disappointing.   

 

(From left) Culkin as Morgan, Phoenix as Merrill,
 and Breslin as Bo

Mel Gibson’s acting was decent – playing the responsible father trying to regroup his family after his wife’s death. Rory Culkin’s acting was quite good; he plays the elder brother, and the far more mature sibling. Bo is undoubtedly the most irritating film character I have seen in a long while. I guess Shyamalan wanted children in his story but he could have done well with just Morgan. I have no idea what Bo’s purpose is! Joaquin Phoenix does a good job in the supporting role.   

Signs is a disappointment in every way except for the acting. The film wasted enough of my time, so please do not make that mistake; watch some other film.

My Rating: 1/5

Rotten Tomatoes rating: 74%

The Sixth Sense (1999)

Director: M. Night Shyamalan

Story: M. Night Shyamalan

Cast: Bruce Willis, Haley Joel Osment, Toni Collette

Music: James Newton Howard

Time: 107 minutes

Bottom-line: If you are patient enough for the twist ending, you will like it

Arguably M. Night Shyamalan’s magnum opus, and one of the most celebrated supernatural films of all time, The Sixth Sense stars Bruce Willis and Haley Joel Osment in the lead roles, with Toni Collette and Olivia Williams in the supporting roles. Known for its twist ending and acting, the film’s pace is an issue, but by the end, it is one hell of an experience. The film was nominated for six Academy Awards, but won none.

I see dead people.

Philadelphia: Doctor Malcolm Crowe (Willis) is a child psychologist who has just been honoured by the Mayor for his work. As he spends the night at home with his wife, Anna (Williams), they find a man in their bathroom, who accuses Crowe of failing him. The man, Vincent, shoots Crowe before committing suicide. The timeline shifts several months ahead, when Crowe is on his next case: a 9-year-old named Cole Sear (Osment), very similar to Vincent. Determined to make up for his failure with Vincent, Crowe devotes all his time to the boy, even putting his family second. Cole’s mother, Lynn (Collette) is also worried about her son, especially after seeing signs of physical abuse. As Crowe and Cole spend more time together, Cole finally reveals his secret that he can see ghosts. As Crowe urges Cole to communicate with the ghosts and find out their purpose, it slowly starts to reflect on his own life and troubles as well. 

 

Osment as Cole, and Willis as Crowe 

Though the story is most famous for its twist ending, Shyamalan wanted to make it more than just a horror tale. Infused with the main story are elements of sentiment, especially involving the relationship between Cole and his mother, and between Crowe and his wife. These seemed to throw the plot off-course, but by the end you realise that it is this sentiment that gives meaning to the incidents you see. There are a lot of hints to guess the twist, but all of them ingeniously hidden.

 

Collette as Lynn, and Osment as Cole

The Sixth Sense is often categorised as a horror film, but it’s not. It involves supernatural elements, yes, but apart from a handful of gory imagery involving lynched bodies and bloodied “corpses” – and one particular scene where Cole encounters the ghost of a young girl – there isn’t much horror. Shyamalan creates that jolt in the viewer because of clever camerawork – and background score – such that you don’t expect the person to suddenly appear – a recurring technique in his films. 

Haley Joel Osment’s acting is something you should look out for. Eleven years old when the film was made, the child actor shows incredible maturity and talent in portraying the troubled boy. Toni Collette’s performance – although overshadowed by that of Osment – is equally brilliant. Her character is quite complex: she is in a position to defend her son’s supernatural abilities though she doesn’t believe them herself. She always puts her son first, in contrast to Crowe, who progressively gives lesser and lesser time to his wife. I also liked Collette’s role as a mother in Little Miss Sunshine.

So, The Sixth Sense is widely regarded as a supernatural classic, known for its acting and climax. The story gets slow at times, but there’s always a surprise around every corner. It’s well worth a watch.

My Rating: 3.5/5

Rotten Tomatoes rating: 85%