Hello SP Buddies!

We hope you’re enjoying your holidays! Here’re some movies you can catch with your friends this month, when you’re taking a break from studying.

Read the rest of this page »

I went to watch two movies within these two weeks. One thing that is similar between both films is that both are animated. I’m referring to Evangelion 2:0 you can (not) advance and Fantastic Mr. Fox.

For anyone who is an anime fan, there is no way one will not know Evangelion as it is one of the most popular anime in the 90s. Now the anime has produced into films and Evangelion 2:0 you can (not) advance is the sequel to the first movie.

As someone who has not watched the first movie, it took some research in Wikipedia and Evangelion fans to know the universe of Evangelion. The movie is based on the anime series but had some minor changes.

For Fantastic Mr. Fox, it is an adaptation of a children’s novel of the same title by renowned author, Roald Dahl, who wrote other famous books like Charlie and the chocolate factory, Matilda and also James and the giant peach.

The story is about a fox, voiced by George Clooney, who decided on attempting a plan to steal chickens, ducks, goose and cider from the meanest farmers of the town, Boggis, Bunce and Bean. Eventually the three farmers came to know of the plan and decided to kill the fox by waiting and destroying Mr. Fox’s home.

The movie is commendable; despite that it is a stop-motion animation and the graphics are incomparable with competitors like Astro Boy or Evangelion , the storyline is very smooth and flowing. The timing of approximately 90 minutes has enough time for the whole story to develop. But there is one thing that left me puzzling: why can the fox, rat, hamster talk but the chickens can’t?

Overall I think that Evangelion is more meant for people who has watched the anime series before and Fantastic Mr. Fox is more family oriented. I will rate both films 3/5 for Evangelion’s graphics, and Fantastic’s smooth storyline.

2012 is not just a disaster movie, but THE disaster movie.  It is a disaster movie on the grandest of scale - the destruction of the entire planet. The first minutes of the film are spent explaining the nitty-gritty details of the catastrophe, just to get it out of the way.

So here goes, the details: Neutrinos are bombarding Earth after the biggest solar flare, causing the crust of Earth to heat up rapidly and melt, resulting in massive tectonic movements.

Incomprehensible? It does not matter. Any scientific explanation is soon forgotten when the actual destruction gets underway. The next two hours are spent destroying the Earth in every possible way. Earthquakes obliterate Los Angeles and the Vatican City. Ash clouds cover Las Vegas, the entire city looks like a warzone. Massive volcanic eruptions occur in Yellowstone National Park and Hawaii.  Tsunamis cover the globe.

It is a fact in all disaster movies that landmarks are the first to go, akin to the beautiful girl in a horror show. The Washington Monument crumbles onto people; the aircraft carrier John F. Kennedy crushes the White House; a monastery in China on the top of a mountain is swept away in a wall of water.

It is no surprise that the Roland Emmerich is able to create such a movie of stunning proportion. He is also the director of Independence Day, Godzilla and The Day After Tomorrow. All his previous movies are just practice, the warm-ups to this film.

Then, just as implausibly, we find out that world leaders have collaborated to construct giant arks in China. It is supposed to be a democratic mean to save some of humanity, but seats are a billion Euros a piece.

Yet somehow, all the major characters that are destined to survive are on board it. Among them are Jackson Curtis (John Cusack) and his wife (Amanda Peet), the President Thomas Wilson (Danny Glover) and his science adviser, Adrian Helmsley (Chiwetel Ejiofor).

If you feel that I am spoiling too much of the story, these are all shown in the trailer of the movie. Indeed, it is evident that story doesn’t matter much in this movie. Character development is not strong, there are no inspiring moral lessons to be learnt, and the acting is not outstanding.

However, it is impossible to be disappointed by this movie, since no one who buys a ticket should expect anything but utter destruction. In this aspect, the movie promises a lot, and delivers it too. The special effects are marvelous. You haven’t seen special effects until you watched this show.

2012 is not the most amazing movie, nor is it a must-watch show. But it is the most satisfying show if you do catch it.

City of life and death is just another war film. What can one expect but hordes of troops, downpours of bullets and piles of dead bodies?

The movie comes from the director Lu Chuan of Kekexili: Mountain Patrol, which won the Golden Horse Award in Taiwan’s Golden Horse Film Festival, in 2004. Similarly, City of life and death won the top prize at the 2009 San Sebastian Film Festival as well.

Anyone watching the movie will certainly gain an insight about the Nanking Massacre, an extremely brutal event during the Second Sino Japanese War, whereby the Japanese massacred and raped thousands of innocents after occupying the then capital of the Republic of China, Nanking. Some scenes of nudity and gore can be expected. After all, it is a M18 film. The film tells the stories of various individuals, with elements of fictional and historical characters, including John Rabe, a German Nazi Businessman who saved many Chinese by housing them in the safety zone.

The visuals are entirely in black and white, sepia toned. I feel that more colours should be added so that the movie would not be too boring. The music blends well into the film, bringing the sadness and suffering of the various characters. Duration of the movie is a bit too long but it would also mean that it is value for money.

The film brought out the objectivity of the Nanking Massacre, which received much controversy in China when the Japanese soldier, Kudokawa was portrayed sympathetically in the film. The director received several death threats from that.

The film brought me to realized one thing: Even though there are different cultures and nationalities, is there a need to create sophisticated weapons to wipe out our own kind? We are all categorized as humans, aren’t we?

It reminds me of a quote by the communist leader Joseph Stalin: “One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic”.

Maybe there is one lesson we can learn from this: humanity.

500 Days of Summer is believable. That is the reason it is so appealing. The guy is not a hunk who lures women like light to moths. The girl is not an Aphrodite beauty. It is, as the movie itself says, a story about love, not a typical love story.

500 Days of Summer is directed by Marc Webb and stars Joseph Gordon-Levitt as the Tom Hanson and Zooey Deschanel as Summer Finn. It started screening in Singapore on 8 October.

Tom, a greeting card writer (”I love us!”), meets Summer as an assistant to his boss. After realising they have similar music preferences, he slowly falls for her. However, it is only after a company Karaoke night that Summer knows of his feelings. Subsequently, they develop a relationship even after Summer reveals that she does not believe in true love. Eventually, she does not, and they break up.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt shows how versatile his acting can be. He works as a greeting card writer who writes simplistic phrases, but also studied as an architect. He first plays a bookish guy that portrays his shyness and innocence. Later on, he is a confident man, a person who has what he wants. Even later, he becomes a totally transformed person, depressed, jaded and lifeless.

Some people dislike the how nonlinear the story is. It does not start from Day 1, instead jumping around the 500 days Tom is with Summer. While this is an odd choice for a romantic comedy, it works.

Tom remembers mostly the good times spent with her. Frolicking in a crowded Ikea and playing Chicken on a picnic are just some of the fun times they had together. It is only when he is utterly broken and depressed that he remembers the bad times. Isn’t this how life works too?

The show is as playful as the couple is. There is a musical number, a comic-like scene and a climax that will leave you cross-eyed. The antics of the couple are both heartwarming and funny, sometimes due to how outrageous they are.

Ultimately, this film does not bore you simply because it is atypical. There is no happy fairytale ending and the break up is not the climax of the movie. It seems more like a commentary on life sometimes, allowing us to reflect on ourselves. 500 Days of Summer should be watched even if you dislike romance.