Thor Reviews

Cayo: Thor is a movie of uneven proportions. Like what I keep telling my friends after seeing the film, the cast was superb! Hands down. I never could have picked a better cast to do the film. But on the other hand the movie itself lacked the “kick” that you’d come to expect from the God of Thunder. “Kulang sa action, kulang sa madyik madyik, kulang sa dating.”

In any case, I still enjoyed the movie. It was, what I would call, a teaser for the upcoming AVENGERS. The movie could understandably get poor ratings, but it did hype up the expectations for The Avengers (let’s just hope it lives up to all the expectations). Thor was more like a 60-minute trailer for The Avengers, an introduction of the God of thunder; and that’s it. No more.

So, should you watch the movie? Yes, because it still is entertaining, and for those who aren’t familiar with Thor, the movie gives a good enough backgrounder on our superhero. But DON’T watch it in 3D, its not going to be worth it.
And oh, one last thing, wait for the after credits. :D
“That’s very interesting…”

PS
Natalie Portman and Jamie Alexander are also enough of a reason to see the film :p

- - - - - - -

PAM: This is an anticipated movie because it introduces one of the key characters in the much-awaited The Avengers.

As this is a popular comic book story made into a TV cartoon, and now a movie, most are familiar with the plot. What we wanted to see was how it was translated into a full feature film and how the director and actors breathed life into the characters.

Cayo posted on his Facebook page (http://on.fb.me/jv4YQn) that the casting was good because the physical attributes of the actors chosen for each character – from Odin (Anthony Hopkins), Frigga (Rene Russo), Loki (Tom Hiddleston), Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), Sif (Jaimie Alexander), Erik Selvig (Stellan Skarsgard) to Thor himself (Chris Hemsworth) – closely resembled those in the Marvel comic illustrations. I agree, especially with the casting of Hemsworth as Thor: buff body, the right amount of blond-blue eyes-beard combo, and the voice!

However, the high production values were not able to compensate for the lack of oomph in the telling of the story.  There were a lot of themes to go around with: good vs evil (of course), power and greed, revenge, war and peace (how to keep peace given that two races will never really be friends), identity, legends, myths and science (or magic as science we do not yet understand, and science as magic we use to subdue others); but all of these were not explored with much complexity. Hiddleston’s portrayal of Loki had more depth than Hemsworth’s  Thor.

It’s ok for an introductory movie, I guess that’s what Thor was for, to introduce The Avengers.

Don’t watch in 3D, it’s not worth it… oh and don’t leave yet when the credits start to roll.

- - - - - - -

KEI: One of my guilty pleasures--to waste a good sum of money in this Hollywood flick to see Chris Hemsworth's abs. Such a pleasure indeed. Other than that, the film is nothing but a short episode in the long wait for 'The Avengers'. A lot of big names in the film, big stars parading for a short screen time: Natalie Portman, Anthony Hopkins, Rene Russo, Stellan Skarsgard. With little screen time not fit for their big names. So-so performances, save for Sir Anthony Hopkins, who managed to be stellar in that fatherly role even if his character died in the middle of the film. He was the only saving grace of this big-budget Hollywood film. And Thor's abs.

Blindness Reviews

KEI: Adapted from Nobel laureate Jose Saramago’s novel of the same title, the director, Fernando Meirelles (City of God, The Constant Gardener), remained loyal to the original, but transposed the story into a contemporary setting, presenting a dystopia that is the postmodern world (and/or vice-versa).

The film starts with the sudden blindness of a Japanese man in an intersection and ends when he suddenly regained his sight. In between, many people got his ‘blindness virus’--the doctor, his Japanese wife, the whore, the bartender, etc.--until such time that isolating the afflicted in a prison-like compound did not make sense anymore. Everybody was blind except for the doctor’s wife (Julianne Moore), who for unknown reasons has immunity to blindness. She pretended to be blind though so she can take care of her husband (Mark Ruffalo) while in the quarantine compound.

Blindness turns dark and violent towards the middle, when the self-proclaimed King of Ward 3 (Gael Garcia Bernal) decided to take all the food ration from the government and distribute it--a representation of a tyrannical form of government. At first, he demanded jewelry in exchange of food. When the inmates had no more jewelry to give, he demanded women in exchange for food. Then the movie turned darker and more violent when the killings started.

But the film did not end there. It would take 30 minutes or so before it ends, and I wonder, how will this film end? I thought it would end when it rained, and all the blind people went outside to taste and feel the raindrops in their skin. That was how I would like it to end.

A lot of films have already presented versions of our future world, and Blindness presented a scary--because everything is uncertain--dark world, where the evil inside all of us rules because of the need to survive. Like a beast, an animal in the wild. Like what happened in Lord of the Flies when the children got stranded in an island and were left on their own.

It goes to show that we are more inclined to do evil things to each other than good ones. Even the doctor’s wife, who was democratic at first, turned violent and let go of her moral beliefs just to survive. So that even when she did not get the virus, she also turned blind.

- - - - - - -

JICKER: I am a biologist. Exposed in a world where elucidation, cause/effect, reasoning and absolute truth (in my perspective) are the foundations. With these in mind, I was more of a nagger and a non-abiding-suspension-of-disbelief audience while the film was running (or partly pausing). Why? Thoughts, theories and cascades of chemical events regarding human system were outpouring. Queries were popping. What if you are the only key the world has? What if the answer to a global dilemma is running in your system? You are the sole source of relief. You opted to stay, acted to be just like one of them so you can literally look after the one you love instead of being the savior of human race. For me that was apathetic and medically irresponsible. 

However, these were not the focus of the film. It was not science per se. It was far more than any immunological defense mechanisms we humans have. It was not about the tangible human being but the sense obliterated in Blindness – Eyesight. It showcased how humans will act when E (for eyesight) was eliminated; human as less humanE.

It did not have any fancy effects or renowned setting but every plot was convincing enough to hook you and close my blabber-scientific mouth. Acting wise, actors were good (Yes, good is vague, I know) and apologies because I am not really into American stars especially when it comes to remembering their names.

Nevertheless, it was full of realizations on how animalistic we humans can be when faced in a notorious environment and survivability. It was a matter of life and death in a literally dark ecosystem. Morality was ousted and selfish acts ruled over. It was not about the “hardcore” sciences; it centered and exacerbated social sciences (political, psychological, etc.) which in my belief are far more complex.

I want you to be bemused as well so watch it. Literally see Blindness yourself!

Yes. I am a biologist. I am human and as reminded by the film, more importantly humane.
- - - - - - -

PAM: Jicker, welcome! Jicker, the biologist, was having a case of "Clyde Syndrome" while watching the movie, but I'm glad that he eventually got the point that there are plausible stories even without the scientific explanation of the causes of events. And this, dear readers (if you do exist) is part of the fun of watching movies.

("Clyde Syndrome" is named after our good friend Clyde, an agricultural engineer by profession (number 5 in the board exams!) and a movie buff as well. The syndrome is prevalent in individuals (i'm not saying all, and not in all cases of movie-watching episodes) in natural science disciplines because they are grounded in material scientific evidence-based logic system. Though he had the habit of finding scientific bases for cause-effect sequences in movies, I guess he is learning the process of suspended disbelief.)

I skip the plot summary of the film as Kei has already done a good job of providing it. Jicker's take on the film is about being humanE, Kei's about uncertainty, mine's about order and control.
  
So everyone loses eyesight, except for the doctor's wife. It would be interesting to note that at the beginning of the film, she seemed to be some secondary character playing the supportive wife of a successful ophthalmologist who may have the knowledge and skill to at least solve the riddle of blindness that has stricken the population. As the film progresses, she comes to the foreground establishing herself as the film's heroine, savior of the blind.

As blindness afflicted everyone, except the doctor's wife, the notion of control and order became hinged on fear and violence. 

I have a different take on doctor's wife's immunity to blindness : she became an all seeing eye, she did not turn blind, she acted based on the prevailing "justice system" of the wards, because what used to be the justice system was the one that turned blind. She was the light into this very dark film about humanity losing a sense, and the sense of order.

The film also showed that despite chaos, people would always find a way to put things back into order, however different that new order from the way it was. And disorder does not merely change people's positions in the societal hierarchy, it can also change their inner character - the bad can overshadow the good, the good may overcome the bad.

The end of the story was too easy. It would have been interesting, though, to have an ending different from how the director/writer chose to end the film. What if people did not get back their eyesight? What kind of order could have evolved?

Review of Insiang Saing

KEI: A product of UPLB pelikuLAB's short film competition in Aug. 2010, Insiang Saing  is one of the first films made by students of AB Communication Arts program, the only arts-related course in a science-oriented  University. The program has no film courses; despite this, students now find interest in filmmaking and in mounting activities related to it.

Running for only ten minutes or so, the film's narrative is solid. It can be attributed perhaps to Oscar's training in creative writing under the Comarts program. Although he is more inclined to theater, he showed that film is not a difficult medium to work on. His direction is demonstrated best with the brilliant portrayal of his main actress, Ynik Ante, who won Best Actress for pelikuLAB's short film competition and the recently-concluded Pelikultura: The Calabarzon Film Festival held at UPLB. She plays the role of Insiang, an emotionally-disturbed mother to a female teenager and a wife to a philandering husband.

Ynik's intense acting was also memorable for the audience at Cinemarehiyon 3 last Feb.9 in Davao City. The film was selected to represent the Calabarzon region. Some even remarked a semblance to Nora Aunor's kind of acting.

The film has only been screened thrice as of this writing, but it already garnered distinct recognitions. The film also won Best Editing in Pelikultura--thanks to its editor, TJ Monserrat, an Instructor at the Institute of Computer Science, UPLB, who is himself a filmmaker as well. These recognitions prove that Oscar's freshman film is a gem.
- - - - - - -


CAYO: A short film framing the troubled life of a struggling mother.

Insiang is mother juggling different problems in her life. There’s the problem of money needed for the education of her daughter, the problem with her disloyal husband, and having to feeding him and his mistress, among other things.

Juggling all these things can bring people to their tipping point, and when Insiang finds out that her only daughter, her only hope for a better life, gets pregnant, she reaches the point of no return –insanity. She kills her daughter, and her mind tries to cope with everything by bringing her back to her normal routine, making herself believe that her daughter is just sleeping.

Gripping, simple, effective. Kudos to the makers of the film! Tatak UPLB yan!
- - - - - - - 

PAM: A woman's descent into madness, in ten minutes. Insiang Saing is a short film that solidly portrays how compounded, negative circumstances can jar sanity and reality into madness. The wholeness of the story made me feel that this short film is a full length movie. Made in Elbi. Kudos!

Bloggers' Hiatus

Dear Readers (if you do exist),

Please excuse our being absent for a while now. It's just that March and April are the busiest months in an academic bums' life. In the two months that we were not watching and writing about films,

• Kei finally got her MA degree.
• Pam finally finished checking mountains of papers.
• Cayo finally, well, i don't know what he did. But he kept on bugging us to write the reviews.

So now that the academic stuff is out of the way, we'll be resuming our daily break very, very soon. 

Sincerely,

Rat, Monkey, and Dragon