Reviews

When I first heard that Pattinson portrayed Salvador Dalí in Little Ashes (Paul Morrison, 2008) it made me cringe. Robert really isn't an obvious choice to play the surrealistic painter and no one in their right mind would defend it. Worse than that, Pattinson is very English and playing such an emblematic historical figure doesn't seem to be in his elm of expertise (to be honest, sometimes acting doesn't seem to be his forte… just saying). To top it up, for me personally, it was even more absurd since Dalí is - alongside Andy Warhol - my favorite artist of all time (I have a Dalí painting tattooed on me, just so you can understand the extent of the favoritism). So, it seemed very disrespectful to Dalí's memory to choose an English boy, whose acting is often questionable, to portray him (and yet I have a funny feeling that Dalí would absolutely love it).

If that wasn't enough reason to make me and every other sane person very skeptical to watch Little Ashes, the film is in English. Yeah, that's right: a film about Frederico García Lorca, Salvador Dalí and Luis Buñuel, set in Spain, during their youth, with mostly a Spanish cast, is in English…..

But, anyway, despite all the reasons telling me I shouldn't watch Little Ashes, I decided I had to give it a try. If for nothing else, I had to watch it to be able to criticize it with substance.

So I watched it.

The first 20 or 30 minutes were painful. It took me a while to get pass all my prejudices, but Paul Morrison's direction and Adam Suschitzky's cinematography broke me little by little. And then, when Lorca and Dalí are in Cadaqués at night, on a boat, rowing and jump in the water, I was won over. The scene is beautiful and it looks very much like a surrealistic painting.

Also, to my complete and utter surprise, at some point in the middle of the film, Robert Pattinson as Salvador Dalí stopped repulsing me and I actually caught myself thinking (shockingly) that Pattinson can, in fact, act. I'm not saying it is an award winning performance – let's not get carried away. Actually, I'm pretty sure that there are plenty of Spanish speaking actors who would be far better suited for this role (Gael Garcia Bernal being the most obvious example). However, it would be unfair of me to say anything other than that Pattinson does a good job and – brace yourselves – does not ruin Salvador Dalí's persona.

So, all in all, I do recommend Little Ashes. It is a good glimpse on the passionate and turbulent friendship between these three incredible artists and it portrays a time before Dalí was Dalí, which is always interesting to see or read about.

-- All of that said, I feel it is my duty to warn any Robert Pattinson teenage fans, who might eventually run into this review on their Google searches, that he is most definitely not Edward Cullen in Little Ashes and that your hopes and dreams about the ridiculously handsome Pattinson might be shattered by the scenes where he passionately kisses another man. So think deeply before you run to the DVD or iTunes store to buy/rent it.

I've been sitting here in front of the computer with a blank page open trying to find a way to write about London River that will convey everything it made me feel while watching it.

It is funny to confirm once again that I have no problem in writing about the things I don't like, about what things aren't and all the other negative aspects about any given subject, but once I have to write about the reasons why I like something, why it is great, etc; I blank.

I think a good way to start writing about London River is to say that A) it is the best film (fiction) I have watched at the Festival so far and B) it will be really hard not to spoil anything about the story (so, if you want to be truly surprise you should stop reading now).

London River is the story about a woman and a man whose children go missing after the attacks in London in 2005. The film follows their efforts to find out what happened to them and their struggle to accept the obvious.

The brilliance about London River is that what could have been an over melodramatic film is, instead, very emotionally repressed.

I know that for Brazilians and other Latin-American people, telling such a dramatic story this way might seem odd and, even worse, cold. But it truly isn't. It turns out quite the opposite, in fact.

The very contained direction and script from Rachid Bouchareb ends up making you feel even more for these parents and what they are going through. Their despair is subtle and yet palpable. It involves you and moves you. It is heartbreaking.

Another reason for being the perfect way to tell this story is that the fear and prejudice that permeates British society is a touchy issue. How could it not be? No one likes to admit their faults, but facing it this way without accusations or making it a spectacle (like Michael Moore in Bowling for Columbine or Fahrenheit 9/11) is more powerful; it makes you think. It is also a very respectful and honorable way of tackling a very real and present aspect of British life.

If the technical aspects of London River weren't enough to make it a great film, then you can delight and be amazed with Brenda Blethyn and Sotigui Kouyaté performances. They are very honest and beautiful. They will bring tears to your eyes, I guarantee.

On a personal note, I rarely watch a film and am taken aback by the actors to the point that I think they deserve awards, but this time I did. I really hope they get nominated for the major awards. It will be shocking and unfair if they don't.

So I finally watched Inglourious Basterds. I was a little skeptical about watching it. I hadn't seen the trailer nor read anything about the film. I also didn't watch the interviews the cast and crew gave while promoting the film. Mostly I didn't because I felt uneasy about it.

For the first time ever I wasn't looking forward and craving a Tarantino movie. I don't know why. It really made no sense.

I am a HUGE Tarantino fan. For a long, long time, I wanted to write my final paper about him, it would be almost a love letter to him I admit and that is one of the reasons I didn't.

Quentin Tarantino is one of the reasons I decided I wanted to work in cinema in the first place. I remember clearly the day I watched Pulp Fiction (1994) for the first time. It had just been released on video; I was about 11 and tricked my mum into letting me rent it. I watched it during the afternoon, after I came back from school. I thought the film was pretty cool and I couldn't believe I had pulled it off and made my mum let me watch it. There I was just being smug when, suddenly, I was hit by the adrenaline-shot-in-the-heart scene. At that moment I thought "I want to do this. I don't know what this is, but I want to make films too".

So, clearly, not wanting to watch Inglourious Basterds kind of surprised me too. But yesterday when my dad invited me to go to the cinema with him, I felt obliged to. I thought "this is Tarantino; he is one of your very few idols, so get over yourself!" And I am really glad I did, especially because Inglourious should be watched on a big screen with surround sound.

Anyway, this is a true "Tarantino". All his trademarks are there: blood baths, western references, recurring actors, beautiful long shots, the chapters, the dark sense of humour, the feet fetish… everything. So if you like him, you are bound to love it. If you don't, then I guess you should consider watching it anyway.

It is a wonderful piece of fiction. I don't think I can stress enough how wonderful it is without being completely politically incorrect. So, to sum it up and try and be politically correct, Tarantino rewrites history as never before and it is I N C R E D I B L E. Visually it is a feast for the eyes and when it comes to the narrative it is even more astonishing. Plus he lets his imagination run wild and do to Hitler and his army what - I guess - anyone in their right mind would have wanted to do. It is a fantastic (in every sense of the word) imaginary revenge and it is fun, lots of fun.

Then, there is the performance and the perfect casting - and here I have to insert another ode to Tarantino: He is a great actor's director. Every actor who has been in one of his films has given unforgettable and amazing performances and in Inglourious Basterds it is no different. Not only that, but the casting for his films are always perfect. Every single actor in his films is great. They are so expressive and intense, fitted perfectly to their characters. There are no small and unimportant roles. Every character seems to deserve the best actor for it and every actor delivers the best portrayal for their character.

And no, I'm not referring here especially to Brad Pitt as Aldo Rainer. I don't think anyone is surprised any more that Pitt is an amazing actor and, to be completely honest, I don't expect anything less than incredible from him. I am talking about everyone else and particularly about Christophe Waltz as Hans Landa. Waltz truly takes over and Inglourious becomes his film. His performance is theatrical in a way without being over the top or fake. It is so astounding that once again I'm thinking about awards...

There are so many great things to say about Inglourious Basterds that I could go on for at least another 672 words. It would be easy to pick it apart and use every adjective I know for great over and over again, but I guess it is suffice to quote what a friend of mine said: "Tarantino is a genius clown and not in a bad way. What is important is the cinematographic chaos. Talk about artistic expression!" I really couldn't have put it better in so few words.