415. Goldfinger (1964)

Running Time: 112 minutes
Directed By: Guy Hamilton
Written By: Richard Maibaum, Paul Dehn, from novel by Ian Fleming
Main Cast: Sean Connery, Honor Blackman, Gert Frobe, Shirley Eaton, Harold Sakata
Click here to view the trailer

ON MY JOURNEY I MET A MAN NAMED BOND...JAMES BOND

Well, well, well...long time, no see. Yes, it's been about a week or so since I've stepped into the pages of the "1001" book, but I've returned and am ready to immerse myself in so-called classic cinema, yet again. This time around we take a look at the one and only 007 movie from THE BOOK, "Goldfinger" - a movie that I highly underestimated the first time I saw it, years ago.

The appeal of the 007 movies really isn't in the plot, but I'll relay it to you nonetheless. James Bond (Connery) is a British MI6 agent (code designation: 007) with a license to kill and a tendency to thrill. In this particular film, Bond's latest assignment is to infiltrate and gain information on the nefarious Auric Goldfinger (Frobe). For his entire life, Goldfinger has been entranced by the color gold and in his latter years, has become more infatuated with the type of gold that is worth something. His grand scheme is called "Project Grand Slam", where Goldfinger plans to break into the Ft. Knox, Kentucky gold depository and set off a radioactive bomb, thus rendering the gold useless for a period of 58 years and making Goldfinger's own gold more valuable. As Bond learns more and more of Goldfinger's scheme, his mission becomes more dangerous, but also more personal, when Bond's "girl of the night" - Jill Masterson (Eaton), is killed via skin suffocation, when her entire body is painted gold. Along the way, Bond must also contend with Goldfinger's villainous cohorts: the hat throwing, muscle-man Oddjob (Sakata) and the vivacious Pussy Galore (Blackman).

Before I start reviewing, a story: Many years ago, when I was just starting to become interested in film, I made the decision that James Bond films were essential viewing. At the time, I had never seen a Bond film and so I decided to acquire a list of his movies and watch my way through, one by one, from the beginning. I started with Dr. No and if memory serves me correctly, made it all the way to "GoldenEye" (starring Pierce Brosnan) before I decided to give up, because I simply couldn't take anymore Bond. For years, I would consider the entire Bond film franchise to be nothing but rubbish, and tonight I can finally lay those misconceptions to rest. Tonight I realized that the Bond films (well "Goldfinger" anyway) is almost exactly the opposite of rubbish, it's actually very good and taps into a certain excitement, that subconsciously, we all want with our movies. I mean, this is the ultimate, stereotypical male movie. You have explosions, car chases, car crashes, half naked women, guns, gadgets, cars, heists, bombs, evil villains and one, martini swilling hero that every guy wishes he could be. I mean, you have everything just shy of a straight up shot of testosterone.

In all seriousness, this usually isn't my kind of picture. I'm not big on spy flicks for starters, whether they're directed by Alfred Hitchcock or featuring 007. However, "Goldfinger" packs a punch and it's not an easy film to dislike. It actually has a really good story behind it, which kind of had me surprised at about the halfway point. The plot is followable, though I think for the most part, all you really need to know is that Bond is the super-hero and Goldfinger is the bad guy and you'll be just fine. And hey, if you want to talk about acting performances, I think we all know the credentials of Mr. Connery. Hell, it was that same year (1964) that he starred alongside Tippy Hedren in Hitchcock's "Marnie" and I think we can all agree that Alfred wouldn't cast a slouch. There's also the not so obvious Gert Frobe, who did an absolutely amazing job as Auric Goldfinger, making himself very convincing as someone who would be the mastermind of a gold heist. I'll bring this to a close by emphasizing just how much my watching of THE BOOK has done for my tastes. No longer do I write films off without, at least, giving them a fighting chance. Tonight, I say "sayonara" to my old opinion of the Bond films being rubbish and embrace them (well, at least this one) as a true classic and a really fun movie!

RATING: 8/10 I'm shocked by that rating, I truly am. If memory serves me correctly, "Dr. No" was not a bad movie either. I may just have to re-watch the Bond films...at least the Sean Connery ones.

MOVIES WATCHED: 348
MOVIES LEFT TO WATCH: 653

COMING SOON:
Point Blank (1967 - John Boorman)
My Night at Maud's (1969 - Eric Rohmer)
Come Drink with Me (1966 - King Hu)
The Shawshank Redemption (1994 - Frank Darabont)

November 16, 2011 2:35am

Read More

UPDATE - November 2011

I'm going to be away from the blog from now until probably Sunday night or Monday, so I figured I'd drop in and give you all a little update. I'll be watching some non-BOOK movies over the next few days, including working on a couple of reviews for my DVD review blog. This weekend, I'll be spending my movie watching time with my wife, as she's finally convinced me to check out the Twilight Saga. Keep your eyes on the DVD review blog and as always you can hear my opinions on anything, non-BOOK related, at the end of the month at recap time.

While I'm here, I figured I'd give you guys (and girls) a tentative schedule for the remainder of this 100 films. We're quickly approaching the halfway mark of this current 100 and when we get there, I'll be reviewing "The Shawshank Redemption". I intend for that movie to be watched at exactly the halfway mark of this 100 (or at 350 films watched).

At somewhere on or around 360 films watched, I'll be doing a four film tribute to Robert Wise, which will include: "The Day the Earth Stood Still", "West Side Story", "The Sound of Music" and "The Haunting".

At somewhere on or around 380 films watched, I'll be doing my tribute to Jean-Luc Godard with "Godard Week". That tribute will include all eight of Godard's films that are contained in the BOOK and they are: "Breathless", "My Life to Live", "Contempt", "Alphaville", "Pierrot le Fou", Masculine-Feminine", "Two or Three Things I Know About Her" and "Week End".

Also in the remainder of this set of 100 films, I'll be continuing my effort to make this set rife with films from the 1960s. 27 films have been selected, by yours truly, to round out my 60s project and I plan to stick to this schedule.

There are also 14 "open spots", which means that for the remainder of this 100, I'll have free range when it comes to certain choices - 14 to be exact.

So, to sum everything up, here's how the rest of this 100 will go:

*The Shawshank Redemption
*4 Robert Wise films
*8 Jean-Luc Godard films
*27 random films from the 60s
*14 open spots or totally random choices

Add that all up and you get 54, which is exactly what we need to hit 401 films watched and thus make my 4th TOP 20. I hope you'll join me as I continue my journey. As always, thank you to those who follow me, send me comments or even take a few moments to read something I've written. I'll see you next week folks!

November 10, 2011 12:41am

Read More

707. Once Upon a Time in America (1983)

Running Time: 227 minutes
Directed By: Sergio Leone
Written By: Leonardo Benvenuti, Piero De Bernardi, Enrico Medioli, Franco Arcalli, Franco Ferrini, Sergio Leone, Ernesto Gastaldi, from the novel The Hoods by Harry Grey
Main Cast: Robert De Niro, James Woods, Elizabeth McGovern, James Hayden, William Forsythe
Click here to view the trailer

SERGIO LEONE HAT TRICK: PART THREE OF THREE

From the dusty settings of the old west to the dirty streets of prohibition era Brooklyn, Sergio Leone's hat trick of films comes to a conclusion with "Once Upon a Time in America".

Despite it's epic length, the film's plot is actually fairly simple as we follow a group of Jewish youths on their rise to power in the criminal ranks. Our main character is Noodles (De Niro) and as the film opens we seem him as he nears the end of his criminal run, hiding out in a Chinese theater as detectives interrogate his closest allies. Eventually the cops beat some information out of one of Noodles confidants, Moe, but Noodles gives the detectives the slip and heads for the train station. On the way, Noodles stops to survey three dead bodies and we watch as tags are are fastened to the body bags, reading the names of "Max", "Phillip" and "Patrick". Noodles slips out of the crowd, gathered around the bodies and proceeds to buy a ticket for the first train out of town. He makes a detour into Coney Island and then says "goodbye" to New York City. Suddenly, the film flashes forward and we see a much older Noodles arriving back in the Big Apple, renting a car and going to "Fat Moe's" restaurant, to visit his old friend. Moe offers to put him up and later that night Noodles begins to reminisce over his life.

Well, where do you start with a movie the caliber of "Once Upon a Time in America"? I guess I'll start by saying that I thought it was an absolute masterpiece. There were things about it that I didn't like (which I'll get to), but in the end, these things are easy to overlook when you take into account the entire picture and how ultimately fabulous it all was. "Once Upon a Time in America" is much more than your typical gangster flick. It's about life, but more specifically it's about the loss of youth - at least that's one of the main themes that I took away from it. On top of all that, there's also a very beautiful, sometimes very complicated romance story lying underneath it all. As the icing on the cake, Ennio Morricone returns to accompany Sergio Leone yet again, belting out an absolutely impeccable score. The camerawork, as usual for a Leone picture, is top notch and there are certain scenes and images that I won't soon shake from my mind. The acting is superb, with De Niro proving, once again, why he's the recipient of so many accolades and here he's surrounded by the great performances of James Woods, Elizabeth McGovern, Larry Rapp, Burt Young and William Forsythe.

SPOILER ALERT!

You know, silly me, but I kept expecting Steven Spielberg like moments to crop up as this film progressed. Let me explain... For example, when Noodles reunites with Deborah, near the end of the film, I kept expecting him to apologize to her, for raping her. And maybe she would resist the apology, kicking him out of her dressing room and sending him off to never be forgiven for the vicious sin that he committed. But those moments never came and in retrospect, I just don't think Leone was that kind of filmmaker, to serve up those moments to his viewers on a silver platter. He just let everything loom in the background. Sure, he wanted us to think that Noodles or Deborah was going to mention the rape - I mean, how could they not? It was the most uncomfortable scene in the whole picture and yet, during their reunion, it's never mentioned. In a way, I wish it had been brought up. As far as I'm concerned, Deborah greets Noodles with to warm of a reception, when she should have been terrified of Noodles for turning out to be someone vicious enough to rape her. And as far as the rape scene itself, I thought it was a great scene. It was one of those scenes that really set this movie apart, as other filmmakers wouldn't go the brutal route and I think it only helps to make us ponder the character of Noodles even more. Uncomfortable, YES, but in my opinion it worked.

Apparently there are a lot of theories going around the net as to why Noodles' smiles at the end of the movie. For starters, NO I don't think that everything after he took opium was a dream. I love (sarcasm) how every time a moviegoer can't understand something, it simply gets chalked up as a dream sequence and then we all feel smart for "cracking that mystery". Anyway, throughout the whole movie, there are several scenes where Noodles' eyes seem to be welling up with tears. You can notice it when he returns to Fat Moe's, at the beginning of the movie and takes a peek through his old peephole. As the camera pans in toward his eyes and right before the film flashes back, he seems to be right on the brink of tears. This happens again at the end of the movie, as he lays down on the bed at the Chinese theater. Noodles seems like he could burst into tears at any moment, as he takes the pipe and smokes the opiates. He finishes his toke and there seems to be one final moment of reflection and possible, emotional breakdown before he forms the big smile to end the movie. In my opinion, Noodles smiled as a way of containing himself and not breaking down in tears. This is a man who was brought up on the streets of Brooklyn and someone who would have had the mindset that crying is a sign of weakness and you just don't do it. When Noodles felt the tears about to come, he simply put a big smile on his face as a way of tricking the tears back into his eyes. That's just my opinion, of course.

As much as I loved this movie, I have to say that the ending was a real letdown. Is it just me or does Leone have a slight problem with ending his pictures? I'm not really talking about the very end of the film as the subtle, smiling Noodles ending was a fine one. However, what I'm talking about is the resurrection of Max and how absolutely stupid it was! For starters, if we MUST bring Max back to life, then the first revelation of this should have come when Noodles enters the room. The camera should have been positioned firmly on the back of Max's head (the audience and Noodles still thinking that it's Secretary Bailey) and then he turns around, revealing to us and to Noodles that it's actually Max. Instead, he peeks out the window as Noodles arrives to the party and for a moment, I was as confused as hell! I just wish that Max's resurrection would have been left out. It just seemed like a cheap thrill to throw in there, a moment maker and for me it didn't work at all.

But, it's really hard to deny this movie the praise that it deserves. I loved it and I won't soon forget it and I'm sure it's one that I'll be tossing around in my head for the next few weeks or even months. It was a visual delight and something that really comes off almost flawlessly. It makes an impression on you (if you allow it to) and it sucks you in.

RATING: 10/10 Going lower than a '10' just wouldn't feel right, so I'll give it the full monty and call it a day. I'd say that after a few days of reflection, that both "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" and "Once Upon a Time in the West" were also '10's'. Three absolute MUST SEE pictures.

MOVIES WATCHED: 347
MOVIES LEFT TO WATCH: 654

A WORD ABOUT SERGIO LEONE

Just a quick couple of words about Sergio Leone. In his short career, Leone only managed to direct a handful of films (seven to be exact), but with less than half of his body of work, he's managed to turn me into a much pickier film junkie. As I've made my way through the pages of the "1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die", I've seen a lot of fantastic pieces of cinema history and my tastes are becoming more and more refined. With the "Sergio Leone Hat Trick", I've managed to accentuate my tastes even further and I have no doubt that from here on out I'll be much more fussier when it comes to ingesting films. Leone's films felt like films. When you were in the midst of experiencing them, no matter where you were, you felt like you were sitting in the middle row of an empty theater and being personally entertained. I'll also tip my hat to Ennio Morricone, who has, single-handedly made me much more appreciative of film scores.

November 9, 2011 3:33pm

Read More

COMING SOON

November 8, 2011 6:27pm

Read More

479. C'era una volta il West/Once Upon a Time in the West (1968)

Running Time: 165 minutes
Directed By: Sergio Leone
Written By: Dario Argento, Bernardo Bertolucci, Sergio Donati, Mickey Knox, Sergio Leone
Main Cast: Henry Fonda, Charles Bronson, Claudia Cardinale, Jason Robards, Gabriele Ferzetti
Click here to view the trailer

SERGIO LEONE HAT TRICK: PART TWO OF THREE

Continuing on with my three film salute to Sergio Leone, we come to "Once Upon a Time in the West", a beautiful, intense epic that has played a huge role in recharging my zest for this journey through the "1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die" book.

Like "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly", "Once Upon a Time in the West" focuses on three men, crossing paths and kicking up dust in the old west. Frank (Fonda) is the meanest of the mean and is hired by wealthy railroad tycoon Morton (Ferzetti) to "take care" of anyone who might have reason to stop his railroad from being built. When Brett McBain buys a piece of land that lies right in the path of the railroad track, Frank and his boys pay a visit to Mr. McBain and remove him from the equation. That day Mr. McBain's new wife, Jill (Cardinale), arrives from New Orleans, to meet her new family, but finds them all slaughtered. Wanting to make a go at a new life in Flagstone, she stays put and tries to establish herself. Meanwhile, a man dubbed Harmonica (Bronson) has recently strolled into town and while he keeps his words few, he speaks with his musical mouthpiece and his six-shooter and seems to have a score to settle with the vicious Frank. Also there's Cheyenne (Robards), a mild-mannered guy, who is being framed for the murder of Brett McBain and aims to find out why the McBain family was killed in the first place.

Despite the fact that it's a Western, I honestly believe that if "Once Upon a Time in the West" had been released in 2010, as opposed to 1968, it would still be received very well. It, in my opinion, is a film that was/is way ahead of it's time. The thing I'm already beginning to love about Sergio Leone is that he was a very confident filmmaker. It comes across in the two movies of his that I've watched in the past two days. You can see confidence shining through on the screen. Leone knew for a fact that he had something special with "Once Upon a Time in the West". It oozes through in the music, in the cinematography and in the way Leone treats his characters. The score of Ennio Morricone is an absolute classic and probably one of the best soundtracks that I've ever heard accompany a movie. The camerawork is also absolutely AWESOME, in every sense of the word.

SPOILER ALERT!

To be honest, the plot of "Once Upon a Time in America" leaves something to be desired. I'm big on plot in my movies and maybe as my cinematic tastes mature a little bit more, I'll be able to watch a visually striking, musically enhanced picture, like "Once Upon a Time in the West" and that will be enough to curb my appetite for a good picture. However, I haven't reached that point yet and I'm still someone who likes to have a good storyline accompany all of that other detailed greatness. For a nearly three hour film, not a whole lot is ever really going on and if you take the plot itself, it's one that could have easily been told in half the time that Leone took to tell it. Everything kind of centers around that one important scene where Brett McBain and his family are murdered and from there on, we have these three characters staring holes in one another, until finally we're brought to a major, epic duel at the end of the movie.

And speaking of the end of the movie, what was up with the end of this movie? The ending should have and easily could have been Harmonica and Frank's duel, but instead we carry the film out for another fifteen or so minutes, as Cheyenne and Harmonica ride off into the sunset together, only to discover that apparently Cheyenne has been shot, falling from his horse and dying. It was a very weak ending if you ask me, one that wasn't needed, as they had a perfectly brilliant ending in the Frank/Harmonica duel. That duel, by the way, is one that I rewound three times to rewatch, as it was really a PERFECT scene and one that I won't soon forget.

For all the nitpicking I'm doing, it's really hard to deny that "Once Upon a Time in the West" is really a MUST SEE movie. Even if the plot is a little stale and the ending is all wrong, the film is still absolutely brilliant and sometimes breathtaking. Seeing Henry Fonda play a bad guy is something else that must be seen to be believed. I wondered how they were going to get me to believe that my personal symbol of cinematic justice, Mr. Henry Fonda was an evil outlaw...and then he shoots a young child in the face and I knew he wasn't Mr. Goody-Two-Shoes anymore. Here's another little fun fact: I had never seen a Charles Bronson picture prior to this one. In my mind, he was always kind of lumped into the Steven Segal, Chuck Norris macho club, but I'll be damned if he wasn't a pretty good actor and a suitable successor to Eastwood's "Man with No Name" persona. And yes, Claudia Cardinale is still GORGEOUS!

RATING: 8.5/10 I'm sure this, along with "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" will see a change in their ratings come recap time, but for now an '8.5' seems suitable. Had there been a stronger plot and had they lopped off the Cheyenne dying ending, then it could have been an easy '10' and probably a shoo-in for the #1 spot of my next TOP 20.

MOVIES WATCHED: 346
MOVIES LEFT TO WATCH: 655

November 8, 2011 12:52am

Read More

449. Il buono, il brutto, il cattivo/The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (1966)

Running Time: 177 minutes
Directed By: Sergio Leone
Written By: Luciano Vincenzoni, Sergio Leone, Agenore Incrocci, Furio Scarpelli
Main Cast: Clint Eastwood, Lee Van Cleef, Eli Wallach
Click here to view the trailer

SERGIO LEONE HAT TRICK: PART ONE OF THREE

NOTE: The book cites "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" as a 166 minute feature. However, the version that I took in was the Extended, English dubbed version, which clocked in at 177 minutes. It's the only version that Netflix offers and thus, the only version that I was able to retrieve, so I guess it will have to do. Now then....

I had never seen "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly", prior to this morning. Of course, I had always heard about it, heard excerpts from the score used in multiple places and heard tale of "The Man With No Name". I've seen the IMDB Top 250 Movies (as voted on by it's users) and noticed how "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" has held steadfast at around the #5 position for as long as I've known about that list (it's currently #4). However, I had just never had the urge to see it. So, what follows is a first-timers review of "Il buono, il brutto, il cattivo" or "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly".

The films plot, despite it's length, is actually fairly simple. First, we're introduced to three characters: The Good takes the form of Blondie (Eastwood), the Bad is Angel Eyes (Van Cleef) and the Ugly is Tuco (Wallach) - all three existing somewhere in the United States, during the time of the American Civil War. During the film's opening moments, Angel Eyes is told of $200,000 in gold that was stolen from the confederacy by a man named Jackson, later dubbed Bill Carson. Angel Eyes makes it his mission to track down the gold, but first he must track down the thief. Meanwhile, Blondie and Tuco are running a scam, which involves Blondie turning over the wanted Tuco to the authorities in exchange for the bounty. When they're about to hang Tuco, Blondie shoots him down, the two split the bounty and wait for the bounty to rise, so they can do it all over again. After a while, Blondie double crosses the weasel-esque Tuco and leaves him, hands tied, in the desert to fend for himself, while he makes off with the whole sum of a recently acquired bounty payment. Tuco eventually gets back to town, captures Blondie and tries to drag him across the desert, but is eventually halted by a runaway horse carriage. When Tuco stops the carriage, he finds a group of dying confederate soldiers, one of them being Bill Carson. With his dying breath, Carson tells Tuco that the gold has been buried in Sad Hill Cemetary, in a grave. However, when Tuco goes to get Carson some water, Carson tells Blondie the name on the grave and then dies, before Tuco can return. Now, Tuco and Blondie must try to settle their differences, as they each know one half of a $200,000 secret: Tuco knows the name of the cemetery, Blondie knows the name of the grave. And don't forget about Angel Eyes, who also has his eyes on the prize.

I wasn't TOTALLY BLOWN AWAY, I'll tell you that much right now. Now before all of you die hard Leone fans send me death threats, let me also say that I thought the film was very, very good and I'm really glad I finally got the chance to watch it. Prior to even popping the DVD into my player, I was very excited to finally be watching this iconic film and finally being able to say that, "Yes, I've seen The Good, the Bad and the Ugly". I knew, from the opening shot (a close-up of an extreme outlaw's face and a coyote walking across his/our field of view) that this was going to be something special. It only took me about ten minutes to see where Quentin Tarantino got a lot of influence out of Sergio Leone. I'm a big Tarantino fan, so that went a long way in helping me to feel more comfortable with a spaghetti western, a genre that I'm almost completely unfamiliar with. The score was legendary and it's no wonder that it became so memorable and so often imitated/stolen. The camera shots were also quite unforgettable and did a huge part in branding this film into my mind and I doubt that I'll soon forget this one.

As for the actors, a huge, enthusiastic thumbs up to Mr. Eli Wallach, my favorite character from the whole movie. Sure, Eastwood was bad ass, but not quite as bad ass as I always thought he would be as "The Man With No Name", but a bad ass nonetheless. Lee Van Cleef did a decent job too, but as far as I'm concerned, "Ugly" stole the show. Wallach was just so slimy and weasely, yet also portrayed as a bit of a bad ass himself - I just couldn't help but fall in love with his character. I wasn't necessarily rooting for him, I just very much enjoyed the scenes that he was a part of.

As for "not being totally blown away", I think a lot of it was simple hype. You know, when you hear about a film for so many years and then you finally see it, it's hard for a single movie to live up to so many years of praise, from so many different sources. Also, the film did drag in a couple of parts, not many, but a couple. However, I guess I did watch the "extended" version, so maybe that could account for some of the scenes that seemed to go on forever, like the one where Blondie and Tuco meet up with the drunk Union Captain, right before they blow the bridge. That scene was just slow and dull. I know I seem to say this A LOT, but this is yet another film that could easily transform into a '10' with a little bit of retrospective thinking on it and maybe another viewing. I won't continue blathering on and on, I think I've made my points.

RATING: 8.5/10 Not a '10' yet, but maybe someday. I'm REALLY excited to see "Once Upon a Time in the West" and "Once Upon a Time in America" though. Those will both be reviewed, probably by mid-week.

MOVIES WATCHED: 345
MOVIES LEFT TO WATCH: 656

November 6, 2011 3:18pm

Read More

478. Gaav/The Cow (1968)

Running Time: 100 minutes
Directed By: Dariush Mehrjui
Written By: Dariush Mehrjui
Main Cast: Ezzatolah Entezami, Firouz Behjat-Mohamadi, Mahmoud Dowlatabadi, Parviz Fannizadeh, Jamshid Mashayekhi

BEEF...MORE THAN JUST DINNER

There are currently four movies streaming on Netflix, that I've scheduled myself to watch during this 100 movies, that I'm really dreading. The reasons why I'm dreading them are probably nonsensical, but "The Cow" was one of the four. While it wasn't anything that knocked my socks off, it certainly wasn't worth the dread.

Hassan (Entezami) is the proud owner of the only cow in his small, Iranian village. He loves the cow very much, constantly obsessing over the cow - making sure she always has plenty of water, giving her baths in a nearby stream and being very proud to be her owner. When Hassan is away, in the city, for a few days, the cow dies. It is suspected that marauders from the nearby village of Bolour are to blame for the death of the cow, but nonetheless the villagers know that when Hassan returns he will be devastated. Instead of telling him that his cow has been killed, the villagers band together and decide to go with the story that the cow simply ran away. They figure this will cause less of a blow and at least give Hassan a little hope, for the time being. The villagers dump the dead cow down a well and go so far as to tie up the village idiot, in an abandoned tool shed, so that he won't spill the beans. When Hassan returns home they tell him that the cow ran away, but he refuses to believe it, citing that the cow wouldn't do that. Hassan begins to drift into madness as the heartbreak over the loss of his prized cow washes over him.

Like "Daisies", this is another movie that I'm having a hard time making up my mind about. It wasn't nearly as bad as I was expecting to be and actually did a fine job of keeping me engaged throughout. While it was quite hard for me to imagine such a bond between man and cow, that would drive this story to it's extreme lengths, I soon realized that this was a different kind of story and one that, to my knowledge, has never really been delved into. It's a unique type of story, in that, it's something you couldn't tell without using man and animal. Reality and fiction seem to be playing tug of war in my head, with reality saying that the movie was absolute nonsense because what man loves a cow as much as Hassan and what man would go into madness over the loss of that cow. On the other hand, fiction is fighting back with the facts that Hassan was the only man in the village to own a cow and with the village being a poor one, that fact allowed him to carry a certain pride.

I really think that this is a film that everyone is going to look at differently. I think you'll be on either side of the fence. Either you'll be able to empathize with Hassan and feel his heartbreaking, or you'll just call it all poppycock and wonder how any man could love a cow as much as him. Me, I haven't really decided which side I'm on yet. I'm probably more prone to the side that empathizes with Hassan. I really felt for the guy, up until the point where he went totally crazy and started acting like a cow, having to be pulled on a rope, to the hospital to get checked out. For me, that was just going a little too far and if they'd have kept everything on a more realistic rope, I could've bought into it a little more. Also a sweeter, softer score could have helped to maybe even coax a few tears out of me and maybe even a little empathy from the other characters toward Hassan. The other characters just seemed to be too cold toward Hassan and not really that understanding of his situation, thinking that he could merely snap out of it and be their "old Hassan" again.

On a final note, there was a particular scene that I want to make note of. When Hassan is first informed that his cow ran away. He doesn't quite understand what Eslam (the one who's telling him) is saying at first. He gets the news as he's taking water to the cow and when he realizes that Eslam is saying, he drops the pail and we watch as the water pours out over the dry Earth. For some reason as I watches the patch of water grow and witness the silent emotion that was playing out on the screen, it all hit me as a very powerful scene. I liked certain aspects of the film, a lot, but on the other hand, it didn't work on some levels either.

RATING: 6/10 Not great, not bad and one that I'll need to do some thinking about.

MOVIES WATCHED: 344
MOVIES LEFT TO WATCH: 657

November 4, 2011 1:26am

Read More