belladonna2054 Blog

Under discussion:

The Year My Parents Went on Vacation  (2007)

Mauro (played by Michel Joelsas) is like all ten-year-olds.  He loves his parents, his friends, but most of all soccer.  However innocence is only granted to children in Brazil 1970.  Unbeknownst to Mauro, his parents are in trouble.  They all quickly pack their things and take Mauro to his grandfather’s place.  His parents continue to say that they are only ‘going on vacation’ and they should return soon.  When Mauro asks when they would return, they say they will return by the World Cup.  This sets the stage for Cao Hamburger’s The Year My Parents Went on Vacation (1996).  

1970 is a tumultuous year in Brazil.  The political climate is changing as a dictatorship takes over which creates a militant state for those who are opposed to the new regime.  Mauro is left in care of his grandfather, Motel (Paulo Autran), who lives in a Jewish town of Sao Paulo or so they thought.  He waits for hours until Motel’s neighbor, Shlomo (Germano Haiut) comes home and finds Mauro on Motel’s doorstep.  What Mauro doesn’t know is Motel died earlier that day.  Shlomo takes him in and when Mauro tells him that his parents are on vacation, Shlomo doesn’t believe it.  Seeking advice on what to do with the boy, Shlomo goes to his Rabbi and the community elders.  They tell him to take care of the boy and wait for his parents to return by the World Cup. 

Shlomo follows this advice, but Mauro and he have a difficult time adjusting to each other as Mauro was not raised Jewish as his father was.  But both learn to adapt to each other.  Meanwhile, Mauro discovers the other children that live in the neighborhood and quickly becomes friends with Hannah (Daniela Piepszyk).  At first Hannah tries to get Mauro to come out and play, but he is hesitant on leaving the apartment in case his parents call.  Eventually he becomes brave enough to do so and joins Hannah and other boys as they play soccer and pay Hannah admission to her mother’s clothing shop to see the young women undress.

Hamburger’s portrayal of innocence in a chaotic world is priceless.  He essentially asks the question: ‘When should a child know the full truth?’  But this question is left up to the viewer to decide as it is never fully answered in the film.  In the end innocence never ends, it continues on in a dualistic life outside reality.  The only unifying aspect of this world is the World Cup where everyone bands together and hopes that Brazil wins.  Everyone from the children to the Rabbi gather in groups in the diner, in their own homes, etc. to cheer on the team to victory.  Michel Joelsas does a excellent portrayal of Mauro, though it comes naturally as he is a child, but when the subject of his character’s parents’ ‘vacation’ comes up he handles the denial that the possibility that he was abandoned wonderfully.  In response to any discussion, he delves back into the one thing he loves: soccer.  Soccer is a refuge for him to cope with life without his parents.  Germano Haiut also does well portraying Shlomo.  He is a man who never really handled children before and at first he is hesistant, but sympathic to Mauro’s situation.  As time passes by he grows fond of Mauro.

The movie is a great independent foreign film that deals with a child’s point-of-view of a chaotic world.  Usually this is not my type of film, but on occasion a film does change my perspective.  This film is those that want to see innocence in today’s overtly immature world.

Under discussion:

Wondrous Oblivion  (2003)

Wondrous Oblivion is about a young boy named David Weisman (played by  Sam Smith), in 1960 London, who dreams of one day of being a cricket star, however there is one problem: he has no talent.  This does not stop David’s passion for the sport, much to the chagrin of his classmates and family. 

One day new neighbors, the Samuels, move onto David’s block which causes a stir within the community.  The new neighbors are from Jamaica.  This causes racial tensions to rise further for David’s family, who are already subtly persecuted by their neighbors because they are Jewish.  It is further raised as David sees Dennis Samuel (played by Delroy Lindo) build a cricket fence in his backyard.  Seeing this as his opportunity to build his cricket skills, he breaks his mother’s (played by Emily Woof), rules by going over and being coached by Dennis. 

The other neighbors quickly take notice to David’s time spent with the Samuels and trouble begins for Mrs. Weisman in the form of two busybodies, Mrs. Dudley (Mary Cunningham) and Mrs. Wilson (Carol MacReady).  At first to try to coax her into talking to their landlord into getting rid of the Samuels, when Mrs. Weisman does not go through with it, she continuously receives taunts and harassment from the neighborhood.  But this does not stop her from allowing David to spend time with the Samuels.  As time passes, Mrs. Weisman’s own relationship with Dennis begins to grow.   Meanwhile David’s cricket skills improve and his dreams of being a part of his school’s cricket team come to pass. 

Delroy Lindo does a great job as Dennis Samuel, the big hearted patriarch of the Samuel family.  Sam Smith also does well as the young David Weisman, the innocent young boy who faced a lot of challenges because of his inability to play cricket and because of his religion.  Emily Woof was impressive in role as Anna Weisman, a woman who married young who is struggling in her role as a mother and handling the neighborhood busybodies.  Director Paul Morrison did a good job on this film for the small special effects on the trading card scenarios and for the story over all, which he wrote.  He chose well in having Delroy Lindo and Emily Woof, they are both great actors who played their parts very well.      

This was a great film to watch.  It’s great for family and adolescents who are learning history of the 1960s.  But for the average viewer, the story is the average boy coming-of-age set in the 1960s.  I personally enjoyed it because it is relatively cute.  However there are scenes in the film that are never really explained why they are there.

One is where David collects and plays with cricket player cards which come to life for him.  It would have been interesting to find out what type of role those scenes played in the film, but you never know.  You are left to the assumption that it is all in David’s imagination.  There are also scenes in which go on for more time than what they should.  An example is when David obtains his dream of getting on the cricket team at school.  There are scenes in which he continuously excels at games, but how long do they have to go on until you have to say enough? 

I recommend this film for families who want to see a good coming-of-age story.  Kids would like it for the ‘hero’.  Parents would like it because it doesn’t have much violence or have any foul language.  This story is good because it is not taking place in the United States (which are the typical settings) and different time, 1960.  I wouldn’t recommend it for the typical movie viewer because it is a repetitive story.  But overall it is a great story.              

13 Tzameti (2007) meets Hostel with little gore, but a lot of sophistication.  Directed by Gela Babluani, the story revolves around Sebastian (Georges Babluani), the main supporter of his immigrant family, who struggle to survive in a small French town.  He works as a handyman of a gentleman named Jean-Francois Godon (Philippe Passon).  While fixing the roof, Sebastian overhears a conversation between Jean-Francois and his wife, Madame Godon (Olga Legrand), that he is expecting a package that holds promise to obtain a lot of money.  While Jean-Francois leaves to take a bath, Madame Godon takes a look at the letter and sees a paid hotel bill and a ticket for a train to Paris.  Realizing that he was not joking, she is startled as she sees water coming out of the bathroom.  Unable to open the door, she calls on Sebastian for help.

Sebastian runs quickly to the bathroom and breaks the door down finding Jean-Francois dead of an overdose.  With Jean-Francois dead, leaving no one to pay him for his labor, Sebastian eventually leaves, but as luck would have it, he discovers the letter had been blown outside.  Seizing the opportunity that he could obtain a fortune, he takes it and follows the instructions.  They lead him to Paris locker room where he finds another package containing more instructions and a small card with a number thirteen printed on it. 

Another set of instructions tells Sebastian to take a taxi to a wooded area and to get out and wait.  Soon a black car pulls up with a bearded figure driving who holds up another card bearing the number thirteen.  Sebastian reveals his card and waved over to the car.  He gets inside the car and is taken to a building deep inside the woods. 

Once inside, Sebastian is introduced to a world that few people see or survive.  The building is filled with one group of men that are dressed in suits and another group of men who are dressed in pants and grey shirts with large numbers printed on their backs.  Sebastian is quickly taken to a room where an older gentleman comes in and looks suspiciously at him.  He asks who he is and where is Jean-Francois.  Sebastian quickly informs the man of Jean-Francois' recent demise.  Reluctantly, the man accepts him as his “player” and Sebastian quickly finds out what it all means to value your life in a Russian Roulette-style game where only one man can survive to win it all.

Filmed in black and white, 13 Tzameti is a gritty, hold-on-to-the-edge-of-your-seat thriller.  It is tense from beginning to end.  Babluani was very smart by filming it in black and white because you can see the intensity building within the actors more clearly than you would in color.  Hostel was the same way, but with 13 Tzameti you do not have the gore.  You have the sophistication of seeing the workings of an underground group of gamblers who take bets on different “players” to see who will win each round.  Whereas in Hostel you see their group “purchase” their man or woman and they can do whatever their perverted desires' wants. 

The only down points of the film is you get lost in the beginning of the film in trying to figure out what is going on in the main plot.  It can be slow at times, from trying to put point A and point B together.  There are characters that have small roles you have a hard time seeing how they fit into the plot if they do have a role. 

The story is not what it seems though.  I personally was expecting something else entirely by the middle of the film, but was taken aback by the twists.  They let you see a darker side of humanity within the “game” which leads to a very ironic and twisted ending.  Unlike Hostel, it is not a happy ending. 

I would recommend this film if you definitely have a love for international thrillers and twists and turns.        

Under discussion:

The Legend of Boggy Creek  (1972)

The Legend of Boggy Creek is a campy movie that was originally released as a drive-in theater in 1972.  The story begins around the narrator, who as a young boy was rushing to get a doctor for his sick mother, came into contact with a creature that scared him to death.  When he reported what he saw to the doctor and other members of the town, they were in disbelief until other reports of incidents of the creature ranging from sightings to down-right frightening begin to occur. 

Fouke is a real town located near the border of Arkansas and Texas.  The movie consists of reenactments of incidences with the creature that were reported to have occurred for nearly a decade.  Though the music itself is a bit rough around the edges and the acting is not the greatest, it is an enjoyable movie to watch at night to get a little bit of the willies.  I first saw this film when I was little and it did scare me at first.  Now I see it as more of a documentary-type of film with the reenactments of the reports.  My personnal favorite is the story about the two couples who just moved into the same house when strange things begin to occur late at night when both of the wives' husbands go to work at night.

If you can find the DVD to rent or to buy, I do recommend it if you're interested in some campy fun.

Under discussion:

Audition  (1999)

There is a movie that does exist that actually scares me.  It's none other than Takashi Miike's Audition.  

I first heard about the film while watching the Bravo channel's miniseries: "The Top One Hundred Scariest Movie Moments of All Time" and Miike's masterpiece was placed at a high ranking.  For good reason: even watching that one scene they displayed, probably the only scene they could legally play, was creepy enough for me to try to rent or buy it.  It was difficult trying to find a rental store that had an available copy of this film because it is that and still is, popular.  But I managed to obtain a copy and I loved every minute of it.

To get back to the topic: Audition is about a widowed father whose son wants him to get back on the dating scene several years after his mother's passing.  When mentioning this in passing to his best friend, it is his friend who comes up with the idea of holding a fake audition to choose the best girl to go out on a date with.  After many auditions, we see a girl-next-door looking girl audition and the widower is quite smitten. 

They go out a couple of times but we quickly see that something is not quite right with her.  As former ballerina who has mysterious scars all over her body, she keeps a severly deformed man in a bag in her living room.  The deforming was of her own doing.  The widower soon picks up on the fact that something is a bit off with the girl, he breaks off the relationship, but he soon learns that this is not the type of girl whom you want to reject.   

Under discussion:

An American Haunting  (2006)

Being from Virginia, the legend of the Bell Witch is not unknown to me.  Her story is interesting for the simple fact that not only is she the only supernatural being to have murdered a human, but that the president of that time actually visited the site, after hearing the stories of what happened, and was frightened. 

When the film came out I was a bit skeptical because when films are made based on real life events, they don't always picture it correctly.  Unfortunately this was the case here.

The film is set going back and forth between two different settings, the present and the early 1800s.  The present finds a young girl in her teens alone in house in which her mother bought after her parents had seperated.  Unfortunately for the girl, the house was built on the former Bell family land. 

The movie then goes back and forth between times and quickly gather that the Bell Witch is now tormenting the present day girl.  However the reason given as to why the Bell Witch has been tormenting both girls is troublesome: that both girls' fathers are sexually abusing them.

The reason does not make sense nor does it make a connection between the time jumps.  It was poorly done and was done at the waste of great talented actors Donald Sutherland and Sissy Spacek.

Under discussion:

Alien vs. Predator  (2004)

Alien Vs Predator is based on two of the most popular sci-fi/horror franchases in the history of film.  Fans of both series, in both film, book and comic book culture, were very much looking forward to a film being made involving these legendary characters.  Finally Paul W. S. Anderson made such one.

 And it sucked.

Background on the film: The movie takes place in Antartica in the present day.  A heat source has been discovered by Weyland Industries (which is commonly referred to as 'The Company' in the Alien films) which ends up being an ancient.  In a race against other companies looking to discover what this is, Bishop Weyland compiles a team of explorers, researchers and cave divers. 

When they begin exploring the pyramid they discovered several cultures developed it (Egyptian, Incan, etc).  Suddenlly one of the team members inadvertanly sets off the pyramid to begin the process that has been done every few hundred years: the breeding of Aliens so the Predators can fight them and therefore, prove themselves to be true warriors.  From there it all goes downhill.

It wasn't so much so that script or story sucked.  It was the fact that this movie was degraded down to a PG-13 rating.  When both franchises have always been rated R.  Because of this degrading it has affected the plot and much of the action sequences of the film in order to advertise it to younger audiences. 

What also affected this film is that Anderson even went out of his way to mess with the design of the reputed adversaries themselves.  The Predators looked like oversized, steroid-laced things.  Which in watching the film, you can obviously tell that the actors that wore these costumes had a hard time walking, much less running and fighting.    The Aliens, which were based on the artwork of H. R. Giger, were made too bulky.  They were supposed to be fluid in their movement as they have in previous films.  But like their Predator counterparts, they can hardly move. 

The ending is an obvious hint that a sequel will be made - and was - and thankfully was done in a much better fashion than what Anderson did.    

Under discussion:

Are You in the House Alone?  (1978)

Are You Alone In The House?  Is a late 1970s film about a girl who has a secret admirer turned stalker.  The acting is pretty good for a tv movie.  In reality it does feel like one of ABC's After School Specials. 

It delves into an interesting topic that was not really discussed nor studied (outside a horror movie aspect) with teenagers at that time: stalking and date rape.  You can see how society viewed it at the time if a female student should make complaints.

Kathleen Beller does a good job protraying the student that is a victim of this and Dennis Quaid, in one of his starting roles, as the rich student/psycho that is actually believable. 

If you want to see how early stalker thrillers started out.  Then I would recommend this film.