Kazhes pierakstu burtnīca

Par šo filmu pirms pāris nedēļām vecāki man jautāja - ko tā īsti nozīmē. Tagad, kad esmu to noskatījies, varu atbildēt - nav ne mazākās nojautas.

Atkal jau (tas jau sāk šķist mazliet aizdomīgi manas seksuālās orientācijas sakarā) varu veltīt šo ieraksta apskatu Mānim, kas uzskata, ka es pamatā klausos mēslus. Ja Mānis man būtu pateicis, ka "Creed" ir mēsls nevis 2007.gadā, bet, teiksim, 2000.gadā, tad es... nē, es nebūtu Mānim iesitis pa seju, jo nekad neesmu izcēlies ar pārmērīgu atlētismu vai agresivitāti vai drosmi. Bet sašutis gan es noteikti būtu. Kā gan "Creed" var būt mēsls? Viņi taču ir anti-Limp Bizkit, bet Limp Bizkit ir mēsls.

This is a rare thing when at the beginning of a review I`m not sure whether the rating for the film is gonna be good or bad. You see, Napoleon Dynamite is a weird film. It`s a comedy for teenies and partly about teenies, of course, but it`s not what you`d usually expect from a film like this. For example - there`s like a hundred situations in this film when you`re sure a stupid thing is gonna happen - for example that someone will receive a blow in the face, but then - it doesn`t happen. And another thing - for at least the first half of the movie it`s totally pointless. It just goes nowhere. Probably it`s because everyone in this film is a jerk (dork, freak) of some kind. Napoleon himself is just a weird looking and stupid acting flegmatic dude, his brother Kip (who`s 32 by the way) sits all day long in the chat on the web, Pedro is a weird mexican fellow with close to no emotions, and Deb - the girl, she`s like totally shy and flegmatic as well. It`s not too easy to describe the scene, for pretty much nothing happens most of the time - just like in real life. Well, probably, the film is good at doing what it tries to do. Probably not. I`m not really so sure.

This film is considered a masterpiece in goth film-making, and it`s no wonder since Tim Burton himself is the father of all goths. "Edward Scissorhands", "Corpse Bride", "Sleepy Hollow" and other films prove his perfect sense for the dark arts and dark fairytales. Therefore I expected "Beetle Juice" to be a weird kind of comedy. Yet it proved to be quite a conventional film. That`s if you don`t count the underworld, ghosts reading a book called "A Handbook for the recently deceased" and other typical goth stuff. In terms of story the film was interesting enough but I somehow think there was something done wrong about it - a great idea turned out to be quite a boring film. I don`t really know what I didn`t like about it but in the context of Burton`s better works "Beetle Juice" doesn`t shine at all. The "Betelgeuse" character itself wasn`t particulary great if you ask me. And you should ask me for it`s me who`s talking and it`s you who`s listening. I did like the goth chick though. Goths rule! I would have invited her for my birthday party if I had a chance to do that. It was Winona Ryder playing Lydia, the goth chick. Did I mention the story? I suppose not. Alec Baldwin and Gene Wilder are a perfectly normal couple that somehow dies in a car accident and returns to its house in form of ghosts. They would presumably have lived happily ever after if they hadn`t a family of yuppies moved into their house and tried to change everything around it. So the couple asks the excentric Betelgeuse for help to get rid of the living. I suppose they shouldn`t have done that.

Ja tu esi no tiem cilvēkiem, kas seko manam faktoīdam kopš tā pirmsākumiem, tu varētu būt ievērojis vairākas lietas:

Vai tu zini, cik lieliska grupa ir U2? Droši vien, ka zini. Bet atkārtošana ir zināšanu māte, kā zināms, kā zināms.

I had an argument with my girlfriend over whether I had already watched this film with her or not. First I was pretty sure that I hadn`t but later on I started to doubt whether my memory wasn`t tricking me. The truth happened to lie somewhat in between - while watching the film I came to the conclusion that I had seen nearly a half of it. The latter half by the way, which meant that pretty soon I knew what the film would end with. That didn`t really bother me much for "Don Juan DeMarco" isn`t one of those films that struck you like lightning with an unexpected ending. Johnny Depp plays a fellow who`s either Don Juan, the great lover, or just an insecure kid from Queens, NY. Marlon Brando is either a famous psychiatrist named Dr. Mickler or a Spanish fellow named Don Octavio. Basically it`s up to the viewer to believe in Depp`s story of his life or not. It`s about believing in perfect imaginary worlds or not. I may be a romantic but I would say "Why not?" just like Mickler does in the end.

Nu jau esam noskatījušies trešo Lost sezonu un šī bija pirmā, kuru nācās skatīties "kā visiem" - proti, vienu sēriju nedēļā. Kā izrādījās, arī šādā formātā sekot seriālam īpašas problēmas nerada, lai gan, protams, atmiņas par to, kas noticis agrākās epizodēs, tik svaigas vairs nav.

Pēdējās piecas minūtes man pagāja, meklējot kādu pietiekami indīgu sākumu šīs filmas izsmiešanai. Tā kā nekas labāks prātā neienāca, teikšu vienkārši - Edija Mērfija jaunā filma nav labāka par vairumu viņa veco filmu.

From David Bowie to the Beatles. A few months ago, I don`t really know when, I saw "Help!" which strangely is not reviewed below. Anyway that was a totally dull movie showcasing bad screenplay, terrible acting and very little on the positive side. This film here is actually less tight in the plot department - basically it consists of sketches, so to say, in the most typical British tradition. What the film pretends to do is to show a typical day in the life of the Beatles. They travel on a train, lose Paul`s perverse and a bit crazy granddad, break up, run away from gazillions of crazed girls - that`s the kind of stuff that you see here. Of course, it`s not the real Beatles we see - they just keep to their public manufactured image, but what the heck - the film has its share of laughs, absolutely no deeper meaning, and, hell, were those four dudes from Liverpool some fine lads! What I don`t really like is the lipsynching - I would certainly prefer some live performances on the film but as far as I understand, it wasn`t a popular thing to do on films at the time. By the way - is it now? I`m not so sure `bout that.