GREAT MOVIES: Akira (1988)

"Humans were like monkeys once; and before that, like reptiles and fish; and before that, plankton and amoebas... Even creatures like those have incredible energy inside them. What if there was some mistake in evolution and the progression went wrong, and something like an amoeba was given power like a human's?"

In Tokyo, on 07.16.1988, a huge explosion takes place and destroys the entire city. World War III is in effect and this story takes place 31 years later, in 2019 A.D. Neo Tokyo. The government of Neo Tokyo is in a type of dictatorship but a megapolis manages to thrive, nevertheless. The citizens need their high-rises and 100-foot tall bridges/promenades that connect between buildings. Biker gangs rule the city and the police force, surprisingly cannot handle them. The average citizen is terrorized only slightly because most of them collaborate. And the school system has crumbled beyond repair. The colors of the city are lush and buildings stand taller than needs be. This, among Blade Runner and Dark City is one of the best films of its kind since Fritz Lang’s Metropolis (1926).

Akira is about a teenager named Tetsuo whom has a history of being picked on, and his childhood foster-school friend Kaneda who is always there for him. He always helps Tetsuo in any situation and therefore, becomes like a father-figure to him. Kaneda and Tetsuo are in their late teens and they belong to a popular biker gang.

The film opens with a gang battle between Kaneda’s gang and a gang of youths that somewhat resembles clowns. "The Clowns” lose the fight and the police are on its way; pity that Kaneda’s bike just got warmed up. Soon after, Tetsuo has a motorcycle accident and military troops come to claim him. They perform tests on him while his biker friends are worried about his well being.

All of the youths in Neo Tokyo hate its government, its military, and its police force, and so does a guerrilla troop that attempts to uncover a government conspiracy, one that involves three children that may have telekinetic powers; those kids have gray shriveled skin and Tetsuo is given the same treatment as them. He finds out that he does have telekinetic powers and lets the power go to his head. When Kaneda tries to rescue Tetsuo from the military hospital he is confronted by Tetsuo and is told that he doesn’t need his help anymore, that he can take care of himself now. Tetsuo ties a long red cloth around his neck, like a sort of cape, and flies across the city like a superhero; but he destroys anyone that is in his path. He has single-handedly become Kaneda’s antagonist.

This film carries two major themes: the first theme is of ‘youth gone wild’ in a city that had brought the situation upon itself, and the second theme is of a boy that hates being helpless. Tetsuo hates being helped more than being unable to help himself. The army attempts to destroy him using riot squads and tanks, and even resorts to firing a particle-beam satellite onto him from space. Tetsuo then flies out of the atmosphere and destroys the satellite with his new found powers. The themes collide well: we see bikers roaming the street with blunt metal instruments at hand, and later we see a teenage boy (Tetsuo) destroy an entire bridge using only his mind. The first group rebels against authority and Tetsuo rebels against everyone that stands in his way.

The first act of the film is the bikers and the youths, the most violent part of the film. The second act is of the powers that were vested within a few individuals and of the system being brought down from within. The third act is the most strange and gruesome one, like when Tetsuo loses his right arm to the particle-beam satellite and replaces it with metallic component (wires and such). My favorite act is the first one: it may be the most violent but it feels the most free. It packs a wallop to see such young people terrorizing citizens simply because they have nothing better to do. It reminds me of the first act of Kubrick’s classic A Clockwork Orange (1971): we do not condone what these youth do to for kicks but we can’t look away. It’s fascinating to see what triggers certain people and we almost forget that what is happening on screen is terrible because the filmmaking has so much energy to it.

The ideal behind Akira is that Akira has turned into the form of pure energy. As a child he was unable to control his mysterious powers and the scientists who were in control took measures of securing his powers from overtaking him and destroying the city. Some say that the nuclear bomb was Akira. Tetsuo is on the same path Akira was and cannot control his power because human beings cannot have such power. The tragedy is that even if we have it we simply cannot control it, for it is not designed for us. The power takes over Tetsuo and the three other “special” children team up to revive Akira in order to stop Tetsuo.

Akira premiered in 1988 and became an instant landmark in animation, graphics, and storytelling that was geared for adults. Claiming that the rating for this film is Restricted is an understatement but because it is animated the rating is suitable; we all need suspension of disbelief.

I mentioned that the animation is fantastic but that, too, is an understatement. It is due to the arduous work of animating frame by frame. When viewing the film shot by shot one notices that buildings and walls are present in almost every shot. It gives off the feeling of being closed in, of being a part of an organized machine, and when we see open roads and bikers, the sides of the frames are more empty signifying a feel of freedom.

Akira is, rightly the most famous anime of all time, in North America and probably, also the most popular anime in the world. It is a pinnacle in animation and imagination and is the father of many other popular anime films and series; most distinctly Dragonball Z. Many segments from this film are copied outright; especially what Kaneda does with his awesome motorcycle. This film has received the Blu-ray treatment and is being released on that medium on February 24, 2009. Trust me, buy it at any cost. This one is truly a keeper.

GREAT MOVIES: Hana-Bi (aka Fireworks, 1997)

*Note as of 07/14/12* - Click here to read my updated review for Hana-Bi on Commentary Track.

---

Nishi (played by “Beat” Takeshi Kitano) is a no-nonsense but quiet man, and is the quintessential protagonist found in most of Kitano’s films. He’s a cop whose daughter had suddenly died, a fact mentioned only in gossip by co-workers and whose wife, Miyuki (Kayoko Kishimoto) has developed leukemia; possibly any disease would suffice the screenplay in order to signify that a mental illness can cause a physical one. Nishi wears dark sunglasses and sits around most of the time, smoking and contemplating the quiet brought forth by sudden death. However, he’s never suicidal because of his strong bond with his wife.

The film sees Nishi as a normal person but he can also be seen as a psychopath, due to his tendency to suddenly attack others and decimate them quickly. Be they Yakuza punks or straightforward, undisciplined youths Nishi is quick to anger and he strikes as quick as lightning. But he always wears a blank expression. He’s simply a wall, lacking all emotion yet somehow that we know he means well.

Nishi is indebted to the Yakuza and refuses to pay them back simply because he doesn’t want to, nor does he like to be hurried; the Yakuza apparently don’t frighten him. He’s even audacious enough to ask the block leader’s boss for another 4 million yen (approximately $40,000 USD) so that he could place it towards his wife’s medical bills; nothing is more important to him than the well being of his loved ones, an admirable theme that is present in most of Kitano’s tragedies.

Nishi’s best friend Horibe (Ren Osugi), also a cop, is shot in the line of duty and is crippled and in the process, left wheelchair bound. Horibe’s wife and daughter leave him and he tries to commit suicide, but his friends save him in time. He eventually agrees to see the brighter side of life and does what he can, taking up painting; his paintings depict bizarrely beautiful people and creatures with flowers for heads.

The shooting of Horibe and the later killing of another cop on the police force are showcased, with some realism throughout the film in fragmented flashbacks, adding to the film’s dramatic arc and sense of gratuitous violence. There is a puzzle for the audience to solve and the film unravels it ever so eloquently. There are many layers to the story of the film and the use of a fragmented timeline is very suitable towards making this an art-house project not a Michael Bay movie.

The plot centers on Nishi quitting the police force and eventually having to contemplate robbing a bank in order to pay off the Yakuza once and for all. But because he’s no longer a cop, the Yakuza don’t take his games lightly and pursues him further. But before more graphic violence ensues, Nishi takes Miyuki to the beach and they have a wonderful and, ironically melancholy time.

The robbery is ironic in that it consists of Nishi dressing up a stolen taxi cab as a police cruiser, dressing himself up as a cop, and walking into a bank with a pistol and simply demanding cash without even speaking. I will say nothing further on the matter except that it’s brilliant and is entirely within character.

Does this film sound exciting or depressing? Well, Kitano’s cops and Yakuza epics are filled with philosophical intrigues, the contemplation of death or suicide, murder, brutal beatings, and above all a mysteriously poignant and startling beauty. He uses a minimalist approach in his filmmaking: his characters do not walk or talk much; they barely react to happenings outside of their surroundings. And when all a character must do in a single scene is walk the camera is fixated upon him or her for minutes on end until he or she leaves the frame. Kitano also likes to leave the shot on screen after said character had already walked out of frame for a few seconds more so that the audience can feel the time go by, and also to punctuate the scene with a moment of minimalist serenity. I believe that he’s borrowing from the great Yasujiro Ozu and Andrei Tarkovsky who are, personally the greatest masters of minimalism.

The violence in Kitano’s films, as I’d mentioned earlier is showcased like a flash of lightning; we never see it coming. And when it does, it lingers in our minds for a few seconds while we slowly process what we’d just witnessed. By the time the following scene takes place we understand exactly who had died and who did the killing and why. As an example, early in the film Nishi is seated in a bar and two Yakuza youths approach him. They pester him about overdue payments until he grabs a pair of chopsticks and stabs the Yakuza youth that’s standing behind him in his eyes. In the next shot, we see that the other Yakuza youth had fallen off his stool and as Nishi stands up he kicks the youth in the mouth and walks away; all in one swift movement. The youth on the ground is bewildered and spewing blood. There is a story in the violence that’s on screen and the film’s story is dependent on violence depicted within.

I love Kitano’s cinema. His movies look and feel like they were directed and shot by young, indie filmmakers who know how to tell their stories without having to resort to clichés or unnecessary dialogue. The minimalism approach is used in all of Kitano’s films and while watching any of his films we should embrace it with all our hearts. So what if the film is violent? Through the way it is constructed not a single shot goes to waste and everything means exactly what need it needs to; no punches are pulled. I am reminded of style of the French New Wave, the way that useless actions and pointless dialogue are cut out.

Kitano is a superstar and had made a great impression on me from very early on. I will follow his cinema until he stops breathing and I hope there’s still a long way to go.

GREAT MOVIES: No Country for Old Men (2007)

"There’s this boy I sent to the electric chair at Huntsville here a while back. My arrest and my testimony. He killed a fourteen year old girl. Papers said it was a crime of passion, but he told me there wasn’t any passion to it. Told me he’d planned to kill somebody for as long as he could remember. Said if they turned him out he’d do it again. Said he knew he was going to hell. Be there in about 15 minutes. I don’t know what to make of that. I sure do don’t."

That’s the film’s opening voiceover narration, spoken by the tired sheriff of a Texas-Mexico border town, Sheriff Ed Tom Bell (Tommy Lee Jones). The sheriff believes that in his life of work one must always be prepared to put his life on the line, but he doesn’t want to confront whatever it is he cannot comprehend. That’s his philosophy - a sound lesson - and he can easily be interpreted as the film’s protagonist.

No Country for Old Men tells the tale of a simple man, Llewellyn Moss (Josh Brolin) who stumbles upon a drug deal gone bad. He finds the blood money belonging to the two murdered factions in the middle of desert and decides to keep it for himself.

Enter Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem, who’d won the Oscar for his performance in this film), an assassin hired to retrieve the money. Chigurh sports a mushroom hair-cut and wears black clothes; he is tall and pale, and sometimes lets out a creepy smile. His is a personality that one cannot comprehend, for Chigurh is literally evil incarnate. When he speaks he does so without suggestion, always meaning exactly what he says and he carries with him a very unusual weapon, a makeshift cattle prod: a hose is connected to a canister of compressed air on one end and on the other end is a metal piece that protrudes a 6 inch spike and then retracts it. It is normally used on cattle but Chigurh uses it on fellow human beings.

Chigurh is a murderer who's methodical but his actions are not predetermined, therefore Chigurh is not a psychopath but a compulsive killer. At the start of the film, while choking a cop with his own handcuffs and slitting the cop’s throat in the process, he showcases an emotion like that of sexual gratification; he is wide-eyed and ecstatic. He then walks over to the bathroom and washes his hands and bloodied wrists. It’s brutal in nature and tough to watch but we take note that Chigurh is basically a homicidal fetishist.

Llewellyn, Chigurh, and the sheriff never meet throughout the entirety of the film. Llewellyn comes across Chigurh a couple of times in exquisitely shot, extremely tense, lightning quick shoot-outs but never actually sees him in person because in both instances he’s fleeing for his life; that and the directors never show the attacker. The sheriff wants to find Llewellyn and to protect him from Chigurh and the three are always on a merry chase throughout.

This is the first film in which the Coen Brothers use realism as their filming style. The scenes with the shootings are bloody and somewhat realistically gory and the film has no musical soundtrack at all, which allows us to immerse ourselves in its atmosphere and to insert own subconscious to the atmosphere and situations; in short we feel like we’re there with Llewellyn, Chigurh, and the sheriff. The feeling of hopelessness grows deeper within us because the Coens use constant shots of barren, searing landscapes.

If Llewellyn had been city born and bred and had come across the money in a city like Austin or New York, then this film would be a much more action packed and brainless film. What this film offers is a huge visual metaphor of hopelessness in the face of an unstoppable force and Llewellyn tries to become an immovable object, but he is a mortal man and Chigurh and is the personification of evil.

The moral is simple: know what you’re doing or whom you’re dealing with. If one sees a shotgun around the corner then it’s best to keep one’s distance from the gun and if one sees a rifle then it’s best to stay completely out of site. Llewellyn tries to hide from Chigurh and outrun him but he is never able to kill him. The best advice that Llewellyn should follow would be to avoid a fight or a war altogether; heck, he could simply give up the money. But it’s not in his nature to do so and when Chigurh is metaphorically described to the audience we understand that Llewellyn will grow into a tragic figure. And the sheriff always tries to protect Llewellyn instead of fighting against Chigurh because he’s the wisest of them all.

Josh Brolin and Javier Bardem’s performances are career defining; here, the actors perform their characters with realism. We know that we are watching a film but we feel that we are watching people and not actors. And Tommy Lee Jones can never give a bad performance.

The shot compositions are terrific and the Coens are the types of directors that don’t waste a single shot. Every shot in the film is meaningful and the film can be studied shot by shot to verify my claim. I should know because I have an excellent comprehension of shot compositions and because I’d watched this film several times since its initial theatrical release.

This is a perfect movie in every way. The performances are all excellent, the direction and cinematography are masterful, and the editing and the use of [atmospheric] sound effects raises the hairs at the back of one’s neck. It’s also a great exercise in shooting a film with a moderate budget. Fargo (1996) is also a perfect film but was only the beginning. No Country for Old Men is a longer, bigger, meaner, and deeper philosophical masterpiece and is therefore, easily one of the greatest films of the past decade.

GREAT MOVIES: The Road Warrior (a.k.a. Mad Max 2, 1981)

Mel Gibson drives a turbo-charged Ford Falcon throughout a punk infested, post-apocalyptic desert world in Mad Max 2: the Road Warrior.

The first film, properly titled Mad Max (1979), is about a cop whose job is to “intercept” criminals that are on the run. After a biker gang that's entirely insane runs over his wife and infant child, Max loses his sanity and seeks murderous revenge against the entire gang. When that film premiered in the United States it barely made any money because it was too out there and audiences just didn’t “get it”. And when director George Miller made a sequel, he was afraid that it would receive the same consensus overseas. So he decided to call it The Road Warrior instead of Mad Max 2. It's also a good thing that he did not treat it as a hardcore sequel because it soared in the North American box office and became an instant cult hit.

Fast-forward 28 years and the film continually receives critical praise and has been added to many “1,000 movies you must watch before you die” lists.

It’s quite a praise to be placed on such a list, seeing that there are, probably, over a billion movies out there. And I certainly would place it in my top 200, if I ever decided to not have a life and start such a list.

In The Road Warrior, Max is still driving his turbo-charged Ford Falcon, which most none-Australians had confused for a Pontiac Trans Am for decades, and he still has his trusty dog. Only this time, he's just on the lookout for gasoline and survival because hat's all that's left to do on this planet. Max is leather clad and totes a shotgun and in the film's intro he's chased through a desert highway by punks on motorcycles and ATVs. He outmaneuvers most of them and drives on. Eventually he sees a small colony that's built around an oil pump right smack dab in the middle of the desert, but they're also surrounded by the rest of that desert punk gang. The punks are lead by a hockey-masked wearing, terrifically muscular, homicidal maniac who calls himself Humongous. Max decides to help those being murdered by the desert punk gang but only because they can get him gasoline.

This film features breathtakingly fast car chases that are performed with real cars and real stuntmen, and it final thirteen minutes showcase a car chase that involves a semi truck, dune buggies, a gyro-copter, and various styles of motorcycles. The Road Warrior is brutal, fast-paced, and most importantly, terrifically fun. It’s also, easily one of the best action films ever made.

There’s really not much else to say except that the stunt work will make audiences cringe. In one scene, a man riding a motorcycle while driving 120 km/h smashes into a car and goes flying at an incredible distance. You see the bike get smashed and you see the biker fly through the air toward asphalt. It’s even crazy just thinking about it but this movie was shot entirely on location and outdoors, and every stunt is real. Except, of course I doubt that there were stuntmen during the one-on-one collision between a semi truck and a dune-buggy. I can only hope that dummies replaced the real drivers.

Watch what a 23 year old Mel Gibson can do with a shotgun, a hungry dog, a really fast car, and the determination to stay alive.

Passchendaele (2008)

Paul Gross will forever be remembered as that Mounty who rode on that brown horse in that Canadian television series Due South. But now he comes out of left field with a Canadian war film about the battle of Passchendaele, also known as the Third Battle of Ypres, in Belgium. The British were trying to destroy the German forces there with brute force and were backed by, eventually, up to 600,000 Canadian troops. I wish all of this was in the film; at least a mention of it would have been nice. I had to look that up on Wikipedia.

The first 7 minutes of the film take place in France where Sergeant Michael Dunn (Gross) and a platoon of soldiers, whose number you could count with one hand, are outgunned and outnumbered by German soldiers. They fight back until Dunn is left alone with only one other German boy. When the boy asks for a truce Dunn stuffs his bayonet in the kid’s forehead, because earlier he had asked for a truce and didn’t get it. Dunn is hospitalized and diagnosed with Neurasthenia but pretty much everybody, including the military doctors use it as innuendo, calling him a coward for not wanting to return to battle.

Paul Gross’ grandfather is the owner of the aforementioned story and he died some time later while he was still incarcerated in the hospital. But in film terms, the show must go on.

Dunn falls immediately in love with Sarah Mann (Caroline Dhavernas), the nurse that is treating him, and she plays hard to get for a very long time. Her brother David (Joe Dinicol) is old enough to join the army but cannot, for he is asthmatic. He wants to prove to his girlfriend’s father that he’s a real man but alas, it was not in the cards for him. That is until a doctor (his girlfriend’s father) describes him as medically eligible and he goes off to war in Belgium.

I skipped, roughly 75 percent of the film because between Dunn meeting Sarah and David joining the army, I am sad to say, not much happens. Throughout those ninety minutes we learn that Sarah and David’s father was of German descent and when he joined the army at the start of World War I he joined the Bavarian side. Prejudice ensues through the town and Sarah and David begin to hate their heritage.

Dunn and Sarah develop a great physical and mental relationship and cannot be separated again. That is until David leaves the country and Dunn feels obligated to look over him on the front, entirely for Sarah’s sake, not David’s.

I really wanted to like this film because a) I am a Canadian citizen and have lived in Canada for most of my life, b) I heard that it’s a wonderful or excellent film, and c) I like Paul Gross as an actor. But when I was bored nearly to tears watching grass grow I found myself laughing throughout the last 20 minute battle sequence.

60 Canadian soldiers, containing Dunn and David are dispatched to a German battlefield and the 800 that were situated there think that they are their backup. Dunn asks a random soldier, “Where are you going?” He replies, “We’re leaving. We’re tired and hungry and have been sitting here for 8 hours.” Dunn then says, “But there are 800 of you and only 60 of us.” The soldier shrugs and the entire platoon leaves.

Dunn tells his men to wait for the Germans to come closer and when they’re 10 feet away a brawl takes place. The fight consists of bayonets, shovels, and big rocks to smash heads with. I will say nothing further except that what followed made me laugh and shake my head; just think The Passion of the Christ (I am not kidding).

It’s a well made film. Paul Gross received a 5-million-dollars grant from the Province of Alberta and the overall budget came close to $20,000,000. The war scenes are shot well, with plenty of grit and dirt and high helicopter shots, but the actual battle choreography and cinematography were laughable. Whenever a mortar struck the ground, soldiers spun horizontally in the air as they flew away from the blast. And not once was the word “mortar” actually used, they called them missiles.

The music is effective and is composed by a full orchestra and Paul Gross plays his character well, but everybody around him were complete morons. A love story was necessary but it did not have to hog sixty minutes of our precious time and, personally, Joe Dinicol is a terrible actor. He lacks conviction throughout and embodies a fourteen year old boy.

Even though it's a terrible film, I don't hate it. And I'm surprised that I'd managed to stay awake the entire time. Whenever Dunn speaks to Sarah they are either seated or standing. You can cut to another ten minute scene involving other characters but when you return to them they are still either sitting or standing and simply are having a different conversation. Either make it a wartime film or make it a war film. The advertisements showcase a lot of warfare but that is what’s greatly lacking from this film, and I wish it took place entirely on the battlefield and not behind the scenes because it had great potential.

It’s not a very patriotic film either; I did not see a single Canadian flag anywhere.