Skip to main content

Classic Review: "Slumdog Millionaire", 2009 (Brett)


"Slumdog Millionaire", 2009

*Originally posted by Brett*

Alright.

So I know I said the next movie I would write about is "Taken." But,
damn it, it wasn't playing anywhere I was willing to walk to on a wet
Sunday afternoon. So, I figured, might was well go see THE BEST
PICTURE of 2008 as voted upon by the illustrious(?) Academy.

Now, I read the book that this film was based on about four years ago
or so. Title of the book is "Q & A" by Vikas Swarup. The book was
average, at best - mostly forgettable. There seemed to be a negative
view of gays in the narrative undercurrent (the majority of heels in
the book had homosexual tendencies) so I was kind of put off by that.
There wasn't much emotional impact nor any reader connection to the
characters. Maybe because they are Indian and I'm an ignorant American?

As for the movie? Well, they pretty much took the structure and
concept from the book, but completely reworked the narrative, which
was a good thing. They did re-use some of the more interesting setups
and scenarios, but largely, the character motivations and stories were
modified to put a stronger theme on romantic relationships and
troubled family bonds.

Real quick synopsis - Game show scenario of "Who Wants to be a
Millionaire" is used as a device to narrate a biography for a young
man from the shanty town life. Coming from an uneducated background,
the protagonist is accused of cheating and must explain how he knew
the answers to the questions. Each question directly relates to a
pivotal moment of his life-so-far. Oh yea, of course, the reason why
he's on the show is to gain the attention of a woman. Damn woman -
always gotta go to crazy lengths for their attention.

Unfortunately, both book and film still share a lack of emotional
impact or viewer/character connection. For instance, I'm the biggest
pansy for a film. I break down and start weeping pretty easily during
a movie. But none of the emotional climaxes for "Slumdog Millionaire"
broke my eye levies. This film didn't leave an emotional impression
on me, it didn't haunt me. With that said, the film is still engaging
and entertaining. Danny Boyle still has the eye for style and
visual/audio excitement that worked so well for him with one of my
favorite films, "Trainspotting." For "Slumdog Millionaire", he took
to the cinema verite style of filmmaking, that the revolutionary
Cubans loved so much. Boyle and company shot pretty much guerrilla
style with real life destitutes in their environments. I give much
props for this move and appreciated this way more than the narrative
or acting.

So yea, the film is good, but best picture? Hmm, I have doubts. I
think this was another politically motivated Oscar win. Better films
have won the Oscar, and better films will win in the future. Worth
seeing though.

Beverage consumed while watching: small, black, decaf coffee

This film has:
-shit covered kid, and I mean *covered*
-real-life street urchins
-child eyeball burning
-Edinburgh/Scottish references (Boyle couldn't resist, now, could he?)
-MIA's "Paper Planes" (ugh, I'm sick of this song. Do Joe Strummer a
favor and listen to "Straight to Hell")
-stupid Americans who are used to using money to fix everything
-Bollywood style dance number

Next film.....THE WATCHMEN!




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Classic Review: "Naked", 1993/ "After Hours", 1988 (Vince)

Naked", 1993/ "After Hours" 1988 *Originally posted by Vince* I already know no one will watch "Koko: A Talking Gorilla" so I tried to think of a film that someone would actually watch. I recommend 2 films, both of which take place deep into the night & add a certain grimyness to the proceedings. 1) Naked (1993) by Mike Leigh & 2) After Hours (1985) by Martin Scorsese. Both of them are episodic. Both could seem to lack a meaning while watching (or after for that matter). Both deal with sad lonely people. Out of the two, NAKED is the one that will make you feel shitty afterward. I will quote the All Movie Guide as I can't write anything better: "Both hailed and criticized for its bleakness and its basically brutal treatment of women, Naked is an intensely powerful and disturbing motion picture experience. Director Mike Leigh is making a pull-no-punches statement about late 20th century Britain, specifically about the manner in which social syste...

"Ace in the Hole", 1951 (Mike)

"Ace in the Hole", 1951 No, my first film is not gay porn starring some guy named Ace. Billy Wilder. Kurt Douglas plays an ego-maniacal newspaper reporter that "discovers" a human-interest story with some guy who is stuck in a collapsed mine. Good ol' Kurt decides to keep the guy in the hole so he can create more hype around the story. Off the wall and a great comment on even today's media-crazed world. Try it out and let me know. Film was watched consuming the wonderful El Toro Golden Ale. Originally written March 14th, 2009

Classic Review: "Watchmen", 2009 (Brett)

" Watchmen", 2009 *Originally posted by Brett* Yep, so I watched The Watchmen. HAHA! Get it! Damn, I'm witty. My initial reaction was that the movie is good, but not amazing. Let's use a baseball analogy! The movie was a solid line drive for a double, no RBIs and definitely not a home run. Some scenes worked, and worked really well! ex: Jon's visit to Mars, Antartic Confrontation(s), and anything with Rorschach in it. The film had a good flow - keeping close to the structure of the book. Furthermore, the detail or the care put to the mise-en-scene was awesome! Some scenes didn't work, in fact they were down right awful/awkward. ex: Janey Slater cancer reveal, and Archie sex scene. Furthermore, the choices of popular music used in the film was really bad - too distracting and self-referential. I found myself taken out of the movie whenever they played some awkwardly place song in the soundtrack. Should have just kept to a modest original score, perhaps? Over al...