The Fault in Our Stars

Ratings: 7.8/10

Film Class: B

Genre: Romantic Drama

Both the leads' performances were commendable. But it was Shailene Woodley who really shined in this romantic drama about a teenage girl stricken with cancer but struck by love. It's the love story of Hazel and Augustus, a boy she met at a cancer support group who's overly optimistic about life. Their chemistry was undeniable, and while the plot wasn't exactly "Imba", that one pre-eulogy scene about little infinities was, with a lack of a better description, mind blowing. 

*major spoilers ahead* I have heard of Zeno's Paradoxes (though I only found the exact term of it by googling just) from a series of youtube videos by Numberphile (and possibly Vsauce), especially the Achilles and the Tortoise Paradox, and I'm no stranger to romantic movies loaded with unfamiliar "aww" touching lines, but I have to say this movie packs one of the best. It was so sweet and uncliched-like that instead of experiencing goosebumps, I felt euphoric. I know it's untypical, I should be feeling sad, but the "sugar high" I experienced was a feeling like no other. "Wow" was the word that had eluded me for a long long time... but it finally came back at that one scene. 

Quite frankly, I didn't like the movie that much. Aggravated by the lack of explanation of the title (Yes, I'm extremely anal about this), however it was salvaged by great acting and great scripting. Though credit has to go to the author who actually wrote the novel on which it is based on. From a layman's point of view, I had thought "the fault in our stars" refers to how unfair life was for Hazel and Augustus, individuals who cherished life and were happy to be alive despite being diagnosed with cancer. Cos there was a particular scene when Hazel made such a remark. 

However, it was thanks to my wife who had read the novel beforehand, who told me that it was made in reference to a quote in one of Shakespeare's works. "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, But in ourselves, that we are underlings." In the book, it was brought up in an email correspondence between Augustus and an author by the name of Van Houten, whom Hazel adores. As to the meaning of its references, I guess you'll have to check it out yourself it you really want to know the answer because I'm not too sure myself to even comment on it. 

I'm going out on a limb here to say that there's an "infinite" number of movies out there to be watched, and there can only be a "finite" number on your to-watch list - The Fault in Our Stars, should be one of them.

Edge of Tomorrow

Ratings: 8.4/10

Film Class: A+

Genre: Sci-Fi Action Thriller

Through the film, we get to witness Tom Cruise's transformation from a cowardly Major officer into a heroic one, when he unknowing gains the ability to relive the day after death. Set in a post apocalyptic world where an invincible alien race has taken over part of the world, it is up to him to utilise his new-found gift to change the fate of mankind. 

As with any time travelling Sci Fi films, it's inevitable that logical flaws would emerge eventually. Edge of tomorrow does succeed in covering its tracks well, by spending minimal time on explanation and directing the attention towards the battle of wits between humans and aliens. Before the logical side hits me, I was already awe-struck by the super alien's abilities and how Tom Cruise even came about to "gain" such an ability himself. I especially liked the nomenclature of the aliens chiefs, 'Alpha' and 'Omega' - straight to the point, simple and intuitive. The aliens species are called Mimics, the 'Alpha' is the leader of the pack, with just a few of them around to take the lead, and the 'Omega' is the brain, the "Mothership". 

I shan't disclose too much here, because I thought the day-looping ability explanation was extremely cool and novel. There was no lack of deadpan, almost dark humour when Emily Blunt, an elite military sergeant, keeps killing Tom Cruise over and over again to reset the day. But it gives a clue as to how she became such an elite fighter herself. 

*major spoilers ahead* The only thing I didn't like about the movie was the happy ending. It's not that I'm a grumpy old man who detests happy endings because they're always never an accurate portrayal of the realities of life, but because this happy ending felt too indulging. It was as if the director chose a "happy" and "clean" ending so that his audience could all go home happy and chose to close an eye on the illogicalities of it. Perhaps, there's a deeper meaning behind that last scene, as explained on screenrant.com (I thought Ben Kendrick's post on the explanation of the ending was rather impressive), but taking into account how straightforward the plot is, I doubt that's the case. 

Even so, the damage is minimal, because the state-of-the-art CG easily wins over any grievances I have over it. It was so realistic, especially on the battlefields that I could almost imagine myself being there with Tom Cruise. Some of the scenes were pretty dark though, so the CG didn't impress as much there, but its that "grandeur" and impressiveness of the film as a whole that really blew me away... not ever since Starship Troopers or District 9 have there been an alien Sci-Fi film this good. 

A Walk Among The Tombstones

Ratings: 6.0/10

Film Class: C

Genre: Thriller

I didn't think it would be that literal. Liam Neeson, did indeed in the movie, walk among the tombstones in a cemetery. But there's probably a double meaning to that, referring to his so called boy sidekick who hung around Liam Neeson and his clients, drug traffickers. A whole bunch of them. Liam Neeson, a retired cop turned private investigator met the homeless boy in a library while trying to dig up more info for his new client, a drug trafficker whose kidnapped wife was chopped up into pieces despite having paid the ransom. And that was when the homeless boy gradually became his sidekick, and had "a walk among the tombstones (soon-to-be-killed company/dead man walking)".

The selling factor was no doubt Liam Neeson, and while I eagerly waited to see him in action in his stereotyped kick-ass solemn role, it failed this time. Even the so-called villains weren't that fearful. The pace of the plot was slow and draggy. Lack of action, and there was just too much unnecessary dialogue. There were too little "powerful" villains, it was simply a hunt for 2 psychopaths who goes around abducting unsuspecting girls and women, and slicing them up despite having receiving their ransoms. The way they chose their victims were also rather slip-shod.

*spoilers ahead* I mean they targeted drug traffickers cos they had money, and how the psychopaths even got hold of that info was because they killed an undercover DEA (drug enforcement administration) agent. The plan was rather random, motivation superficially disconnected. It was first disclosed that they were "not human", which kinda set the expectations for Hannibal-like killers. Then there was cutting off of boobs (sick, I know), and wrapped up body parts (double gross) despite having been paid. It would seem obvious from the description but when it came to that last victim, money seemed to be their main motivation. That's what I don't get. Are they psychopaths or just greedy sickos? I mean do psychopaths actually want money? Shouldn't they go around killing others for no good reason whatsoever? 

There's where I feel there's a disconnect. Perhaps my definition of psychopaths have been warped by the countless thrillers I've caught, but if the 2 abductors were indeed in it for the money, then they really suck at covering their tracks. Their modus operandi was too shallow, driving around in a conspicuous van under a company that's not registered in that area and abducting victims in broad daylight (mostly). Furthermore there was totally no mention as to how they spent those random money.

I sure hope the novel that it's based on doesn't fare that badly on the "holey" part. I do get the main idea, redemption. But everything else was like a pile of swaying jenga - full of holes stacked up with wooden blocks (brainless)... Oh wait, oh wait... perhaps there's a 3rd interpretation to the movie title - The audience are the ones supposed to make that walk, that walk among the tombstones, with brainless zombies...

If I Stay

Ratings: 7.1/10

Film Class: B

Genre: Romantic Drama

Mia Hall (Chloe Grace Moretz) is a talented cellist who has a bright future ahead of her, a happy and loving family, as well as a rising musician boyfriend. Basically her life was almost perfect, until a car accident threatened to take all that away from her. She has a choice, either to stay, or to leave the world. You would think it's an easy one to make, but circumstances made it to be a much harder choice for her.

There's some narrative from Mia, on-off back stories on her relationship with her passion (cello), her family and friends, and more importantly her boyfriend. 

If I Stay has an interesting plot, though cliché and rather predictable, it tells the love story of a seemingly mis-matched pair. Mia interest lies in classical music, whereas her boyfriend's in rock music. In fact, Mia's parents were once rock musicians. So I guess "rock" runs in her blood, and somehow she's attracted to "it". 

I recall a friend telling me once about how rock and classical music has many subtle similarities. I'm not a student of music history, but am sure it's no coincidence that there's such a genre of classical rock music. Not sure if it was the author's intention, (oh yeah, the movie is based on a novel if you don't already know that) but choosing to overthink it, classical and rock music might deceptively seem to be world's apart, paying homage to the saying that opposites attract, but in a way they're similar on many levels. 

It's a touching movie, proven by 4 weeping ladies (out of a possible 10) who shared the same cinema with us (and yes my wife was one of them) but I thought it lacked acting prowess which proved to be a detrimental deal breaker in this. It was one that could reach great potential, I was so ready to break down like a dramatic crybaby, hoping for that one scene to open that floodgate of tears that has been experiencing drought ever since I was the age of 10. *spoilers ahead* And that last scene could have done it, but because the male lead wasn't able to pull it off with the last song of his, doubled rummy-ied with the all too sudden awakening of Mia and the switching on of the theatre's lights, it felt anti climaxal. 

*warning, major spoilers ahead* Imagine that if he had been teary-eyed while singing the song which he had composed for Mia, with a husky voice, at the same time keeping his composure, it would certainly and definitely have made the guys cry too.

There were however 2 touching scenes which did sour my tear glands a little, one on the rooftop with her boyfriend reminiscing the day he first laid eyes on her, and the one where Mia's grandfather was beside her hospital bed telling her it was ok to let it. Personally, her grandfather, acted by Stacy Keach was the icing on the cake. The rest of the cast, unfortunately wasn't able to bring out the full potential of their roles. 

Chloe Grace Moretz is absolutely lovely to look at, but her stoic expressions were more fitting of a masked vigilante or a child vampiress. The male lead lacked a charisma that audience could cheer for and their on-screen chemistry fell short. 

Still it was a heart wrenching film, and audience could immerse themselves in the mood thanks to the melo-sounding cello (always works, worked then in the Japanese movie Departures, worked now in If I Stay).

I didn't like a couple of transition scenes,  you know how those scenes that are dark then suddenly turns bright the next scene which somewhat kinda hurts your eyes temporarily? Well, be prepared for 2 of these. And to make matters worst, there was something wrong with the sound towards the end of the movie, which I believe to be a fault of the theatre's and not the film itself. There was static in the background, which kinda hindered me from hurling my emotions forward. 

However, based on some scenes and spoken lines, it hinted as to how much better the novel might be. But since I'm not a reader, I'll have to say you should give this movie a go. Your tears would not be of regret, but of justified empathy. 

Belle

Ratings: 7.6/10

Film Class: C+

Genre: Drama

Growing up in a white dominated era, the illegitimate mixed race daughter of a Royal Navy Captain is raised by her aristocratic great-uncle, Lord Mansfield. Inspired by a true story, Belle had to endure the prevalent social prejudice, but in the process found true love.

Belle isn’t your “ordinary” half-black young woman. Head-strong and vocally cultured, she isn’t afraid to speak up and to question any injustices. The pace accelerated when a case about a mass killing of black slaves on board a ship was brought to the attention of Lord Mansfield, who was also the Lord Chief Justice, aka a highly influential person.

It’s a case of whether killing the slaves was intentional, or was it not. It’s a simple plot, with the entire movie telling the story from Belle and her beau's point of views, and gradually focusing on that pivotal case which would forever change the course on slavery, bringing an end to it in 18^th century England.

The trailer kinda sums up the first quarter of the movie, showing important snippets here and there. What was bad wasn't watching the same scenes again, but that they felt like an extended version of the trailer. The scenes cut off rather abruptly, scripts were disjointed, and there was a total lack of character empathy.

Thankfully things took a turn for the better. Even though the dialogue were not well connected, each scene packed a powerful, thought provoking line or two which sounded impressive to both the listening audience, and the spaced-out ones.

I did go “wow” a couple of times and was rather impressed by the substance of the scripting. Belle was less of a love story, and more of a battle of words. Intellectually stimulating and emotionally provocative, this period drama will... will... for once... I'm at a loss for words...

The Book Thief

Ratings: 6.8/10

Film Class: C+

Genre: Drama

Sent to a small town foster home in Germany during World War II, 9-year-old Liesel Meminger must learn to live a new life with her step parents, where she would eventually learn to read and gain a forbidden affection for books. It’s the infamous Nazi days when books were burnt to curb the spread of ideas and where Jews were the enemies of the state.

What makes this movie interesting is that the story is narrated by Death. The narration was literature-like, almost poetic, humorous at times. However, the story doesn’t do the movie title “justice”, if there’s even such a thing as justice at all.

I mean though we do see young Liesel stealing books from an affluent family at some point in the movie, it’s only for that short while. And there’s no justice, commentary or even much mention about it. It felt like a touch and go subplot, with the main plot lingering on this Jewish man Max, who was hiding out in their basement home because Liesel’s stepdad was indebted to Max’s dad.

I can’t help but assume that “books”, ideas was to be the major plot in this, but came to the realisation it was about Death and human relationships. Considering it’s a 2hr+ long movie, it could be quite draggy at times, without much of an ending climax. The Book Thief didn’t make my cut of heart-warming, soul searching movies, the only thing it stole, was my time.

The Hundred-Foot Journey

Ratings: 7.6/10
Film Class: C+
Genre: Comedy Drama 

A well-to-do Indian family living in Mumbai is forced to start life anew in another country after a merciless riot took their house and mother away. Once owning a chain of restaurants, the family (of 6) is now left with only one another, a rundown vehicle, and some spare cash. After the brakes of their SUV failed them along a French countryside, they are rescued by a local lady who helps them back to her town, treating them with great hospitality. There, their father chances upon a place for sale, just opposite a Michelin star restaurant which he took interest in. Despite the opposing views from his children, he obstinately buys the place and hence begins, the so-called “Hundred-Foot Journey”. What follows is a comic rivalry between the 2 houses, an unlikely friendship, an unlikely romance, and a young man’s goal of chasing the stars, the Michelin stars. 

*spoilers ahead* Despite the lack of a direct explanation or reference to the title, I believe it implicitly refers to the long journey taken by not the family, but by this young man, a son, a brother and an extremely talented chef towards his dream of creating dishes filled with soul, and memories. As he inches closer to culinary perfection, he finds himself lost among the stars. 

Well, that’s the back part, for the first 3/4s of the movie, it mostly revolves around the strong-willed father, the sharp-tongued Michelin star chef (Helen Mirren), the ambitious young man, and the good natured French girl. A more all-rounded built up, more engaging, and more suspenseful. Even though I kinda knew what to expect, it wasn’t a matter of “how”, it was a matter of “when”. And the “when” feels like a seduction of taste buds. Speaking of which, there was a particular scene which really whet my appetite, and I could, no kidding here… almost… almost smell curry (I did skip dinner for this movie though…). 

A beautiful story about East meets West, foodie-style, a fusion of culinary ideas, cultures, and more importantly, it deceptively “mocks” the Michelin stars. Either that, or it’s the director’s way of saying that one can’t have the best of everything; To chase perfection, sacrifices have to be made. It depends on one's priorities, just like taste, subjective.

It may sound like a typical food film, but I don't think I've ever seen one about Michelin stars. The story was credible, easily digestible and is guaranteed to tickle your senses one way or another. While it’s not perfect, with the rather hasty plot progression towards the end which did snap a few reeled-in “fishing” lines (I was hooked alright), I find this movie to be a “journey” well travelled. Definitely a sleeper hit (a low profile film which didn’t start out well, but would eventually be a huge success) since it’s the first time in a long while that the cinema I watched it at was only 25% filled despite opening merely a week ago. 

I’m hoping it won't take this Michelin-star movie the same “Hundred-Foot Journey” the young man had to take before the masses uncovers the secret ingredients of a great movie – the evocation of the five senses served on a simple plate of ideas.